Iranian President Says Nuclear Deal a ‘Non-Committal Agreement’ August 29th, 2015

Iran has given U.S. Congressmen all the reason they should need  to oppose the nuclear deal : US approval would legally blind the United States to  the stated obligations of the United States without imposing any legal requirement on the Iranians for compliance with any of the “agreed-upon” provisions.  By saying that the Iranian parliament should not make it a legal obligation for the Islamic Republic,  Iranian president Rouhani has made it clear that Iran does not regard compliance with any “agreed-upon” provision as being legally required

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani told a news conference Saturday that the deal is only a political understanding, and he urged parliament not to vote on it so that it does not become a legal obligation.

Iran's official Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) reported Saturday:

President Hassan Rouhani underlined that Joint Comprehensive of Action (JCPOA) does not need the Majlis (Iranian parliament) approval for its implementation.

'Under the Iranian Constitution, a treaty has to be submitted for approval or disapproval to the Parliament if it has been signed by the president or a representative of his,' President Rouhani said, addressing a press conference in Tehran on Saturday.

'That is not the case about the Iran-Group 5+1 nuclear agreement or the JCPOA,' the Iranian president added.

Rouhani emphasized that parliamentary approval of the JCPOA would mean that he has to sign it, "an extra legal commitment that the administration has already avoided," according to IRNA.

The Associated Press added that Rouhani said:

Why should we place an unnecessary legal restriction on the Iranian people?

If the agreement is approved, the United States will be obligated to honor it unless it can catch Iran cheating, a process that could involved months or even a year.

On the other side of the ocean, Rouhani has made it clear that the deal has no legal standing in Iran. 

Pentagon Not Targeting Islamic State Training Camps

BY: Bill Gertz  August 28, 2015 

No airstrikes against 60 camps producing 1,000 fighters monthly UPDATED

Screenshot from MEMRI

The Pentagon has not conducted airstrikes against an estimated 60 Islamic State (IS) training camps that are supplying thousands of fighters each month to the terror group,  According to defense and intelligence officials.

The camps are spread throughout Islamic state controlled areas of Iraq and Syria and are off limits in the U.S.-led international bombing campaign because of concerns about collateral damage, said officials familiar with planning and execution of the yearlong bombing campaign.

Additionally, the IS (also known as ISIS or ISIL) camps have been so successful that Islamic State leaders are considering expanding the camps to Libya and Yemen. Both states have become largely ungoverned areas in recent years.

The failure to target the training camps with U.S. and allied airstrikes is raising questions among some defense and intelligence officials about the commitment of President Obama and his senior aides to the current anti-IS strategy of degrading and ultimately destroying the terror group.

“If we know the location of these camps, and the president wants to destroy ISIS, why are the camps still functioning?” one official critical of the policy asked.

The camps are regarded by U.S. intelligence analysts as a key element in the terror group’s successes in holding and taking new territory. The main benefit of the training camps is that they are providing  a continuous a supply of new fighters.

An additional worry of intelligence analysts is that some of the foreign fighters being trained in the camps will eventually return to their home countries in Europe and North America to carry out terror attacks.

A White House spokesman declined to comment on the failure to bomb the terror camps and referred questions to the Pentagon.

Pentagon spokesman Maj. Roger M. Cabiness declined to say why no training camps have been bombed. “I am not going to be able to go into detail about our targeting process,” he said.

Cabiness said the U.S.-led coalition has “hit ISIL [an alternative abbreviation for the Islamic state with more than 6,000 airstrikes.”

“The coalition has also taken out thousands of fighting positions, tanks, vehicles, bomb factories, and training camps,” he said. “We have also stuck their leadership, including most recently on Aug. 18 when a U.S. military airstrike removed Fadhil Ahmad al-Hayali, also known as Hajji Mutazz, the second in command of the terrorist group, from the battlefield.”

Efforts also are being taken to disrupt IS finances and “make it more difficult for the group to attract new foreign fighters,” Cabiness said in an email.

A Central Command spokesman also declined to provide details of what he said were “operational engagements” against IS training camps.

“Once a target is identified as performing a hostile act, or is part of an obvious hostile force, a training camp for example, we prosecute that target in accordance with the coalition rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict,” the spokesman said.

According to the defense and intelligence officials, one reason the training camps have been off limits is that political leaders in the White House and Pentagon fear hitting them will cause collateral damage. Some of the camps are located near civilian facilities and there are concerns that casualties will inspire more jihadists to join the group.

However, military officials have argued that unless the training camps are knocked out, IS will continue to gain ground and recruit and train more fighters for its operations.

Disclosure that the IS training camps are effectively off limits to the bombing campaign comes as intelligence officials in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and U.S. Central Command, which is in charge of the conflict, have alleged that senior U.S. officials skewed intelligence reports indicating the U.S. strategy against IS is not working or has been less effective than officials have claimed in public.

Thee Islamic state controls large parts of Syria and Iraq and has attracted tens of thousands of jihadists in both countries and from abroad. The exact number of fighters is not known but intelligence estimates have indicated the numbers have increased over the past year.

The military campaign, known as Operation Inherent Resolve, appears to be floundering despite a yearlong campaign of airstrikes and military training programs aimed to bolstering Iraqi military forces.

A review of Central Command reports on airstrikes since last year reveals that no attacks were carried out against training camps.

Targets instead included Islamic State vehicles, buildings, tactical units, arms caches, fighting positions, snipers, excavators, mortar and machine gun positions, bunkers, and bomb factories.

The risk-averse nature of the airstrike campaign was highlighted last month by Brig. Gen. Thomas Weidley, chief of staff for what the military calls Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve.

“The coalition continues to use air power responsibly,” Weidley said July 1. “Highly precise deliveries, detailed weaponeering, in-depth target development, collateral damage mitigation, and maximized effects on Daesh, are characteristics of coalition airstrike operation in Iraq and Syria.”

Daesh is another name for the Islamic State.

“The coalition targeting process minimizes collateral damage and maximizes precise effects on Daesh,” Weidley said earlier. “Air crews are making smart decisions and applying tactical patience every day.”

Other coalition spokesman have indicated that targeting has been limited to reaction strikes against operational groups of IS fighters. “When Daesh terrorists expose themselves and their equipment, we will strike them,” Col. Wayne Marotto said May 27.

The military website Long War Journal published a map showing 52 IS training camps and noted that some may no longer be operating because of the U.S.-led bombing campaign.

Bill Roggio, Long War Journal managing editor, said the Islamic State’s training camps are a direct threat to the region and U.S. national security.

“While the vast majority of trainees have been used to fight in local insurgencies, which should be viewed as a threat. Historically jihadist groups have selected a small number of fighters going through their camps to conduct attacks against the West. The Islamic state is most certainly following this model,” he said.

According the map, among the locations in Iraq and Syria where IS is operating training camps are Mosul, Raqqah, Nenewa, Kobane, Aleppo, Fallujah, and Baiji.

The group MEMRI obtained a video of an IS training camp in Nenewa Province, Iraq, dated Oct. 1, 2014.

The video shows a desert outpost with tan tents and around 100 fighters who take part in hand-to-hand combat exercises, weapons training, and religious indoctrination.

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi, an analyst with the Middle East Forum, in June translated details of IS training purportedly obtained from a manual produced by a pro-IS operative in Mosul named Omar Fawaz.

Among those involved in ideological training for IS jihadists in Iraq is Bahraini cleric Turki Binali, who wrote an unofficial biography of IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Al-Tamimi stated in a blog post June 24.

According to a document thought to be written by Fawaz, training differs for native Iraqis and Syrians as opposed to foreign fighters, who generally are less experienced militarily than the regional trainees.

The document also reveals IS plans to export military manpower abroad, including Libya.

“Sessions for the muhajireen [foreign fighters] brothers last 90 days or more, and at the highest level deal with organization, determination, and intelligence operation, including training on heavy weaponry in addition to comprehensive Sharia sessions and multiple tests,” according to a translation of the document. “Sessions for the Ansar from the people of Iraq and al-Sham range between 30 to 50 days.”

The process begins with an application form and questionnaire regarding education, skills, viewpoints, and whether their backgrounds can be verified.

The training then includes physical fitness, martial arts practice, weapons training, and ideological indoctrination.

After a week of training, jihadists with special abilities are selected and placed in units. The units include special forces, air defense, sniper units, a “caliphate army,” an “army of adversity,” and administrative units for those capable of using electronic devices and accounting.

“The rest are distributed in fronts and camps after the end of the military camp training according to where they are needed,” the report said, noting that all graduates are tested in Sharia at the conclusion of their training.

The New York Times reported Tuesday that the Pentagon inspector general is investigating allegations that military officials doctored intelligence reports in an attempt to present more optimistic accounts of the U.S. military’s efforts in the conflict.

The probe was triggered by a DIA analyst who stated that Central Command officials were improperly rewriting intelligence assessments prepared for policy makers, including President Obama.

The Daily Beast reported Wednesday that senior military and intelligence officials inappropriately pressured U.S. terrorism analysts to alter estimates of the strength of the Islamic stete to portray the group as weaker.

Central Command, on its website, stated that in the year since the Iraq operation began on Aug. 7, 2014, a total of 6,419 air strikes were carried out.

Targets damaged or destroyed include 119 tanks, 340 Humvees, 510 staging areas, 3,262 buildings, 2,577 fighting positions, 196 oil infrastructure targets, and 3,680 “other” targets not further identified.

Speaking of the mullahs in Iran

by Gina Nahai

Posted on Aug. 26, 2015 

http://www.jewishjournal.com/gina_nahai/article/speaking_of_the_mullahs_in_iran

Before she started to fight mullahs, Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian human rights lawyer of Nobel fame, spent a good deal of time advocating for them. This was in 1978. Only three years earlier, in 1975, she had become the first female judge in Iran, and the first woman president of the Tehran city court. No doubt, she had earned the position because of her outstanding intellectual abilities. But those abilities were only REWARDED, and her ascension to the post only possible, because of an unprecedented series of reforms instituted by the very monarch — the shah — that Ebadi was hoping to overthrow. 

She, of course, wasn’t the mullahs’ only female supporter. An estimated million women are believed to have actively participated in the effort to establish the mullahs as the ruling power in Iran. Many of these women were, like Ebadi, highly intelligent, educated and professional — beneficiaries, all, of the attempts by the shah and his father to free Iranian women of the thousand-year oppression to which they had been subjected by Islam. 

Pre-Islamic, Zoroastrian Persia was a place where women engaged in male professions, received pay equal to what men receive, and were elevated to military and political leadership.  Some even became ruling monarchs. Then came the Arab invasion in the seventh century, and with it the claim by Muslim clergy that women’s brains were incapable of retaining knowledge, that allowing women into society (as opposed to keeping them cloistered at home) was a threat to the entire community, and that schooling women was tantamount to leading them to prostitution. Some 1,400 years later, when the shah’s father decreed that women should no longer be wrapped up in veils and confined to the house, the mullahs charged him with blasphemy. Three decades after that, when the shah introduced a series of laws designed to give women equal status with men, the mullahs — Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, among them — declared that the shah was evil incarnate. 

You can say a lot of things about the shah, many of them unflattering, but his record in promoting women’s and minority rights, at least as compared to that of the mullahs, is unassailable. So is the mullahs’ record in denying those rights. And yet there they were, Ebadi and a million other women, waving clenched fists and black banners as they marched through the streets of Tehran and other large Iranian cities, chanting, “Independence, freedom and Islamic Republic,” as if unschooled in the meaning of the words or unaware that, for women at least, freedom and Islamic Republic would be an oxymoron.

It’s safe to say that most of the mullahs’ female supporters were believing, practicing Muslims who championed the Shia clergy’s foundational claim to a divine mandate to rule all of humankind in all aspects of life. Ebadi, for example, comes from a middle-class, traditional Muslim family that had more in common, she has said, with the mullahs and their turban-wearing, neck-tie-eschewing supporters than with the officials of the shah who “cavorted with American starlets at parties soaked in expensive French champagne.” That honeymoon was over the minute the mullahs, who had always held that women do not have the ability to judge, relieved Ebadi of her judgeship. 

To overlook 1,000 years of discourse and action, disregard any politician’s tendency to tell a few lies for the sake of expediency, purposely remain blind to yet another mullah’s proven capacity for mendacity?

When attempting to explain why she had “willingly and enthusiastically participated in my own demise,” Ebadi has offered that she was naive: She simply believed Khomeini when he said, in the period immediately before returning from Iraqi and French exile to Iran, that in his Islamic Republic, women would have “complete freedom in everything they do.” Never mind a quarter-century’s worth or writings, statements and teachings to the contrary; his vocal opposition to the shah’s giving Iranian women the vote; or allowing them to “put on makeup and go into the street showing off their necks, their hair.” Never mind that any half-wit with a decade’s experience living in Iran would know that women’s rights “within an Islamic framework” began and ended at home. Never mind, even, that what Khomeini had said, in fact, was that women would have a role in society and be free to do whatever they wished “within an Islamic framework.” Here she was, the first female judge in Iran, having hailed from a background well immersed in Islamic laws, suddenly inured to a millennium and a half of speech and practice. 

Does this remind you of anything more recent?  

Because we’ve been at it again, out here in the West, telling ourselves and each other a  fatuous little fairy tale about another mullah — Iran’s current president, the “reformist” Hassan Rouhani, the “diplomat sheikh” of “centrist” views who will, at last, bring Iran back into the community of nations. 

The myth surrounding Rouhani in the West is that he is a moderate and a reformist, a thorn in the side of the likes of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei — who holds the real power in Iran; that he is in favor of women’s rights and freedom of information, an outsider whom Iran’s military and clergy tolerate because they have to. 

 

Well, here are a few facts that any 7-year-old with access to the Internet can look up in under 10 seconds: As evidenced by his dress and facial hair, Rouhani is a hojatoleslam —  a midlevel Shia Muslim cleric — educated and trained in a seminary in Qom, the same city that gave the world the late Ayatollah Khomeini and the living Ayatollah Khamenei. 

Hojatoleslam Rouhani spent his youth as a follower and close confidant of Khomeini and his Iranian Islamic movement. Rouhani is widely credited for having been the first to refer to Khomeini as “imam,” which, for Shia Muslims, is a leader with holy attributes, chosen by God to lead all mankind in every aspect of life. 

After the 1979 revolution, Rouhani held a number of top government posts in the Islamic Republic, mostly in areas of national security. He has been a member of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Expediency Council and Assembly of Experts. Between 2003 and 2005, he was Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, tasked with and publicly bragging about enabling Iran to secretly CONTINUE work on uranium conversion while negotiating with Europeans and casting doubts about Iran’s nuclear intentions. 

In the 2013 presidential elections, Rouhani was one of only eight candidates — out of more than 600 applicants — of whom Khamenei approved and permitted to run. 

His avowed respect for human rights notwithstanding, the number of executions in Iran is higher under Rouhani than it was during the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. An average of three people are executed every day, usually without a fair trial or credible evidence, mostly for heresy, homosexuality, rape, murder and armed struggle. Journalists, women, students, and human rights activists are routinely rounded up and imprisoned. As for freedom of information, the Center for International Media Assistance reports that Internet censorship has become worse, not better, since Rouhani took office. 

From her perch in British exile where she has resided since 2009, when her Nobel was confiscated (as in, physically and forcibly appropriated) by the Iranian regime, Ebadi has remarked that Rouhani’s record hardly qualifies him for a reformist’s medal of distinction. More likely, he’s been chosen by the same extremists who gave the world that other “reformist” president, Seyyed Muhammad Khatami, who believed in democracy as long as it was defined, legislated and administered by mullahs. Like Rouhani, he was handpicked by the Supreme Leader and allowed to agitate for human rights and peaceful relations with the West just enough to let off some of the pressure that had built within and around the country since 1979.  His successor, also handpicked by Khatami, was the Holocaust-denying Ahmadinejad. 

Which begs the question: Why?

Why is the West so eager now to ascribe to Rouhani the kinds of qualities and intentions, not to say abilities and influence, that are contrary to his own past speech and actions? To overlook 1,000 years of discourse and action, disregard any politician’s tendency to tell a few lies for the sake of expediency, purposely remain blind to yet another mullah’s proven capacity for mendacity? 

A Frenchman once said, “Every country deserves the government it gets.” I don’t believe that about the Iranian nation, but I do think it applies to the likes of Ebadi, who, in the case of the mullahs, should have known better — did, in fact, know better. And it applies, as well, to the vacuous heads of the United States government who, in 1978, decided that they could make an ally of Khomeini if they threw their support behind him, ordered the shah to leave Iran and helped usher in the age of Islamic terrorism. Someday, I fear, it’s going to apply to President Barack Obama and his so-called foreign policy, his inane insistence that he knows “the right side of history” from the wrong, even when he vacillates, or flip-flops, or says one thing and does another. 

 

I’m a lifelong Democrat. When Hillary Clinton lost the nomination, I voted for Obama. I knew he was inexperienced and without a well-formed worldview, either too arrogant or too naive to know that he, like all humans, is subject to certain limitations. I would still vote for him any day against a McCain/Palin ticket. I credit him for staying consistent in his politics as opposed to moving, like Mitt Romney, in any direction that would make him president. But I’ll also say, my fellow Democrats, that for a man who talks so much about history, Obama seems to know very little of it when it comes to the Middle East, Iran or the mullahs.

Gina Nahai’s new novel is “The Luminous Heart of Jonah S.”

The EU will vote with China, Russia and Iran on the committees.

The EU will vote with China, Russia and Iran on the committees.

The Communist Fingerprints on Iran’s Bomb

Michael Widlanski 8-24-15

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/08/24/the-communist-fingerprints-on-irans-bomb/

A month from today or a year from today, an Iranian scientist or general might defect to the West – and present hard proof that Iran has broken the rules of its nuclear agreement, and is building nuclear bombs.

That’s how the West learned about some of Saddam Hussein’s weapons PROGRAMS – after his two son-in-laws defected – but such an occurrence will have no effect on Iran.

There will be no military action and no sanctions against Iran, because of three Communist figures that support Islamic extremists:

• Vladimir Putin, the ex-KGB official, who PROTECTED Syria’s bio-chemical warfare program and who jumped at the chance to sell anti-aircraft missiles to Iran’s bomb-makers;
• The Chinese Communist regime, which has helped Islamist regimes and organizations (such as the maniacs in southern Sudan);
• And Federica Mogherini, the foreign minister of the European Union, who is a long-time Communist and a NOTED sympathizer of Islamists.

Even if Barack Obama, John Kerry, or Hillary Clinton had an amazing change of heart after seeing new evidence of Iranian bomb-making, they could not overturn the “P5+1” accord, because three of the five – Russia, China, and the EU – are in Iran’s pocket and bound to block action.

The neo-communist Putin and the Communist Party of China are no surprise, but few Western analysts or journalists – let alone Obama Administration officials – have spoken of the strong built-in Communist and pro-Islamist tendencies of EU Minister Mogherini, who was a member of the Italian Communist Youth Federation from 1988 to 1996.

The Italian Communist Party changed its name to the Social Democratic Party, but Mogherini has never disavowed her Communist roots or her sympathies for Islamism.

On the contrary, she has re-asserted them.

“Islam belongs in Europe,” declared Mogherini,  the 43-year-old EU foreign minister, in a conference in Brussels on June 24, 2015.

“The idea of a clash between Islam and ‘the West’,” she said, “has misled our policies and our narratives,” repudiating the ideas of political scientist Samuel Huntington and Islamic scholar Bernard Lewis.

Mogherini, who holds a bachelor’s DEGREE in political science, wrote her senior thesis on Islam, though she apparently does not read or speak any Middle Eastern languages.

“Islam holds a place in our Western societies. Islam belongs in Europe,” declared Mogherini, who served as the EU’s top negotiator with the Islamist regime in Iran.

“It (Islam) holds a place in Europe’s history, in our culture, in our food and – what matters most – in Europe’s present and future. Like it or not, this is the reality,” asserted Mogherini, who has also been criticized inside Europe for her lack of experience and for sympathizing with the actions of Vladimir Putin.

“We need to show some humble respect for diversity. Diversity is the core feature of our European history, and it is our strength. … We need to understand diversity, understand complexity. … For this reason I am not afraid to say that political Islam should be part of the picture.”

When President Obama and Secretary Kerry say “Europe” backs the Iran accord, remember that it is a very small, SPECIALLY selected, and very left-wing part of Europe.

When President Obama and Secretary Kerry say the United States will be able to “snap back” sanctions against Iran, there is good reason not to believe them.

Dr. Michael Widlanski is the author of Battle for Our Minds: Western Elites and the Terror Threat, published by Threshold/ Simon and Schuster.  He teaches at Bar-Ilan University, was strategic affairs advisor in Israel ’s Ministry of Public SECURITY, and was the Schusterman visiting professor at University of California, Irvine for 2013-14.

JCPOA IS A DIRECT THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES.

MOST AMERICANS WORRY ONLY WHEN THERE IS AN IMMEDIATE, DIRECT THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES

....JCPOA IS A DIRECT THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES.

Summarzing: "Basically a vote in favor of the JCPOA  is a vote to give Russia dominance over Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania and Georgia and certainly a major position relative to Poland. It  is a vote in favor of increasing the scope and depth of the entire  Iranian global network of terror including  expanding its active penetration of Central & South America. It is also a vote in favor of placing the East coast of the US in jeopardy of a nuclear attack and  the entire US under the jeopardy of an  EMP attack."{{See MIL-ED  http://ltgjcmilopsg3.blogspot.com/2015/08/jcpoa-is-direct-threat-to-united-states.html }

[These points re-addressed, in bullet form:] 

*    Gives Putin and Russia the free hand they have been seeking to dominate Eastern Europe.{See Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/russias-european-neighbors-rattled-putins-expansionism-334616 } 

*     Allows Iran to expand its currently  active terror network in Central and South America.{ http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing/joint-subcommittee-hearing-iran-and-hezbollah-western-hemisphere; http://albertonisman.org/documents/. Here is a summary of Nisman’s 500 page report }

*    Exposes  New York, Washington and Boston to direct threat of nuclear attack and the entire US to EMP attack. {http://www.wsj.com/articles/james-woolsey-and-peter-vincent-pry-the-growing-threat-from-an-emp-attack-1407885281 }

1.     THE IRANIAN THREAT IS DIRECTED PRIMARILY  AGAINST THE UNITED STATES,,THE GREAT SATAN.

To Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, his circle of ruling mullahs and the entire command structure of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, THE UNITED STATES IS THE GREAT SATAN and destroying Israel is, to them , just an added bonus AND a religious obligation.

 This deal , by providing substantial additional income to Iran, materially assures the strength and permanence of the hold of the existing government over the Iranian population: 

a)    by increasing the resources that can be  allocated to the internal security apparatus; 

b)    by allowing for  substantial increases in expenditures for infrastructure, economic development, health etc. {This  will reduce restlessness of the younger generation whose discontent is much more economic than political. The implicit deal has been made that 'we will not crack down upon you for transgressions ( within bounds)that you commit in private as long as your resistance is not public.']

c)     removes an existing  current source of tension concerning financial allocations and national priorities between the ruling clerics and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps by substantially increasing the “terror budget for IRGC's direct operations  in Iraq and through proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Sinai, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain,  Saudi Arabia, etc. 

This will also  enable  Iran to increase it's already extensive terror network  penetration in Central and South America. {See the Joint Subcommittee Hearing: Iran and Hezbollah in the Western Hemisphere; Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere Mar 18, 2015   http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing/joint-subcommittee-hearing-iran-and-hezbollah-western-hemisphere }

 2.   RUSSIA AND PUTIN ARE THE IMMEDIATE AND LONG-RANGE BIG WINNERS FROM THIS DEAL. 

  This deal directly and materially helps Russia's unchecked aggression in its continuing campaign to  dominate Eastern Europe [Ukraine, Poland, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania....See Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/russias-european-neighbors-rattled-putins-expansionism-334616 }

This deal places the East Coast of the US  main land at direct risk  of ICBM. attack and the entire United States at risk of anMP inMP attack. 

  Russia has announced that it will sell Iran ICBM technology. Iran does not need ICBMs to attack Israel. ICBMs in the hands of Iran with a nuclear weapon are a threat to the entire East Coast of the United States. They still shout “death to America" in Iran. Several days ago Pres. Rouhani led a parade through the streets of Tehran whose theme was very vocal: “death to America". 

Russia claims that it plans to upgrade that portion of its own  IBM force, both qualitatively and quantitatively , that is aimed at the United States. Money coming from weapons and other sales to Iran will help finance this enhancement of Russian capability which will improve Russia's  position as they announced in terms of their assaults against Ukraine, and in their announced aggravations against  Poland and Latvia. 

Russia has also announced that they will sell Iran short-range attack missiles which place US naval forces in danger and give Iran a lock control over the essential waterways {Straits of Hormuz;  Bab el- Mandeb} which control  approximately 50% of all of the petroleum that is shipped in the world.

Russia has also announced that they will sell advanced air defense missiles and communications to Iran which would make any nuclear/missile force impregnable to attack. 

 Several days after the deal was announced, Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, the commander of iran's Quds force,  visited Moscow and met with president Vladimir Putin.The  reported purpose of this meeting was for Russia and Iran to discuss the division of the Middle East in a way that would serve their various clients in the region (among  them, Assad ) and check the joint enemies the Islamic state). It was also speculated that they discussed how to marginalize the role of the United States in the region. As a means to both ends will continue to serve as Assad's protector, all the while providing weapons to Iran, to the Syrian regime and also possibly to Hezbollah.

3.     THE JCPOA COULD  ENABLE IRAN TO GET THE EMP WEAPONRY TO DESTROY AMERICA { The  article below explains EMP RISK.|

James Woolsey and Peter Pry 

Congress must stop President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran. The most important reason - Iran can threaten the existence of the United States by making an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack using a single nuclear weapon.

It may obtain one, relatively easily, by cheating in the use of the nuclear infrastructure permitted them under the agreement.

U.S. intelligence cannot meet the impossibly high standard of assuring that Iran cannot acquire a single nuclear weapon and, given the regime's existing nuclear infrastructure, cannot with absolute certainty guarantee that Iran does not already have one.

Secretary of State John Kerry's assertions on June 16 that the United States has perfect intelligence on Iran's nuclear program are not credible: "We know what they did. We have no doubt. We have absolute knowledge ... ."

No.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden is right to correct Mr. Kerry: "He's pretending we have perfect knowledge about something that was an incredibly tough intelligence target while I was director, and I see nothing that has made it any easier."

Mr. Kerry's disregard of the limits of U.S. intelligence is reason enough to reject the deal - since just one nuclear warhead can threaten the existence of the United States.

A single nuclear weapon detonated at high altitude over the United States would generate an EMP that could black out the electric grid and other life-sustaining, critical infrastructures, such as communications, transportation, banking and finance, food and water. The Congressional EMP Commission estimated a nationwide blackout lasting one year could kill anywhere from two of every three Americans by a low estimate up to nine of 10 Americans by starvation and social disruption.

"Death to America" is more than merely an Iranian chant - Tehran's military is planning to be able to make a nuclear EMP attack.

On July 21 at the annual meeting of the Electric Infrastructure Security Summit in Washington, Rep. Trent Franks quoted from an Iranian military textbook, recently translated by the Defense Intelligence Agency's National Intelligence University. The textbook, ironically titled "Passive Defense" (2010), describes nuclear EMP effects in detail. It advocates in more than 20 passages an EMP attack to defeat decisively an adversary.

The official Iranian military textbook advocates a revolutionary new way of warfare that combines coordinated attacks by nuclear and non-nuclear EMP weapons, physical and cyber-attacks against electric grids to black out and collapse entire nations. Iranian military doctrine makes no distinction between nuclear EMP weapons, non-nuclear radio-frequency weapons and cyber-operations - it regards nuclear EMP attack as the ultimate cyber-weapon. EMP is most effective at blacking-out critical infrastructures, while it also does not directly damage the environment or harm human life, according to Iran's "Passive Defense":

"As a result of not having the other destructive effects that nuclear weapons possess, among them the loss of human life, weapons derived from electromagnetic pulses have attracted attention with regard to their use in future wars ... . The superficiality of secondary damage sustained, as well as the avoidance of human casualties, serves as a motivation to transform this technology into an advanced and useful weapon in modern warfare."

Because EMP destroys electronics directly, but people indirectly, it is regarded by some as Shariah-compliant use of a nuclear weapon. "Passive Defense" and other Iranian military writings are well aware that nuclear EMP attack is the most efficient way of killing people, through secondary effects, over the long run. The rationale appears to be that people starve to death, not because of EMP, but because they live in materialistic societies dependent upon modern technology.

For example, an Iranian article on nuclear EMP attack, "Electronics To Determine Fate Of Future Wars" (1998), concludes hopefully (from the Iranian author's perspective):

"If the world's industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults, then they will disintegrate within a few years ... . American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shot.

Written 17 years ago, Iranian military doctrine has assessed nuclear EMP attack against the United States for now nearly two decades.

The Iranians have done more than just think about EMP attack.

The Congressional EMP Commission found that Iran has practiced launching missiles and fusing warheads for high-altitude EMP attack, including off a freighter. Iran has apparently practiced surprise EMP attacks, orbiting satellites on south polar trajectories to evade U.S. radars and missile defenses, at altitudes consistent with generating an EMP field covering all 48 contiguous United States. Iran launched its fourth satellite on such a trajectory as recently as February 2015.

A single nuclear weapon would complete the list of requirements.

Finally, because a nuclear EMP attack can be conducted by surprise and anonymously - deterrence may not work against EMP.

Deterrence depends upon knowing who attacked and being able to retaliate. Unlike a nuclear weapon used to blast a city, high-altitude EMP leaves no collectible bomb debris for forensic analysis to identify the aggressor.

EMP attack by missile or balloon launched off a freighter could be from many possible actors. Even Yemen's Houthis have Scud missiles and know how to use them, having recently killed the chief of Saudi Arabia's air force with a Scud strike on King Khalid Air Force Base.

Hundreds of satellites are in low earth orbit, unseen when approaching the United States from the south, that could help disguise the origins of an EMP attack. And the EMP could damage the means necessary to identify the attacker and U.S. retaliatory capabilities.

One Iranian nuclear weapon is one too many for an Iran ruled by theocratic totalitarian genocidal imperialists.

No deal.

• R. James Woolsey is a former director of Central Intelligence and is chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Peter Vincent Pry is executive director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security and served in the Congressional EMP Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA.

TALKING POINTS AGAINST IRAN DEAL (external post)

Post one chunk at a time to Rob Eshman's column, any home page column where writer says deal is good. Any place else there are persuadable eyeballs reading on line. ___________________________________________________________________

1) Iran has "self inspection" privileges, Obama caved on his promised anytime/anywhere inspections completely.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/irans-secret-self-inspections-1440026399

8-20-15  Iran's Secret Self Inspections.  IAEA will not have access to the notorious Parchin military site.

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/08/21/iran-iaea-agreement-text/

8-21-15  Full text of Iran-IAEA agreement show how "inspections" part of ObamaDeal is a complete farce.  

2) Iran is already cheating on "deal".

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259854/iran-already-violating-nuke-deal-joseph-klein

8-20-15  Iran is already in violation of nuke deal

3) Khameini writes in his new book he is out to destroy USA. voting for this deal in unpatriotic

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/08/04/khamenei-palestine-book/

8-4-15  Has Obama read Khamenei's new book?  

4)The billions in sanctions relief dollars will be used for terror and every other aspect of regimes nefarious objectives as Khameini describes in his book - including developing missiles that can reach USA. Voting for ObamaDeal is un-American.

HOW AMERICA {JCPOA} COULD EASILY ENABLE IRAN TO GET THE WEAPONRY TO DESTROY THE WEST

James Woolsey and Peter Pry 

Congress must stop President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran. The most important reason - Iran can threaten the existence of the United States by making an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack using a single nuclear weapon.

It may obtain one, relatively easily, by cheating in the use of the nuclear infrastructure permitted them under the agreement.

U.S. intelligence cannot meet the impossibly high standard of assuring that Iran cannot acquire a single nuclear weapon and, given the regime's existing nuclear infrastructure, cannot with absolute certainty guarantee that Iran does not already have one.

Secretary of State John Kerry's assertions on June 16 that the United States has perfect intelligence on Iran's nuclear program are not credible: "We know what they did. We have no doubt. We have absolute knowledge ... ."

No.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden is right to correct Mr. Kerry: "He's pretending we have perfect knowledge about something that was an incredibly tough intelligence target while I was director, and I see nothing that has made it any easier."

Mr. Kerry's disregard of the limits of U.S. intelligence is reason enough to reject the deal - since just one nuclear warhead can threaten the existence of the United States.

A single nuclear weapon detonated at high altitude over the United States would generate an EMP that could black out the electric grid and other life-sustaining, critical infrastructures, such as communications, transportation, banking and finance, food and water. The Congressional EMP Commission estimated a nationwide blackout lasting one year could kill anywhere from two of every three Americans by a low estimate up to nine of 10 Americans by starvation and social disruption.

"Death to America" is more than merely an Iranian chant - Tehran's military is planning to be able to make a nuclear EMP attack.

On July 21 at the annual meeting of the Electric Infrastructure Security Summit in Washington, Rep. Trent Franks quoted from an Iranian military textbook, recently translated by the Defense Intelligence Agency's National Intelligence University. The textbook, ironically titled "Passive Defense" (2010), describes nuclear EMP effects in detail. It advocates in more than 20 passages an EMP attack to defeat decisively an adversary.

The official Iranian military textbook advocates a revolutionary new way of warfare that combines coordinated attacks by nuclear and non-nuclear EMP weapons, physical and cyber-attacks against electric grids to black out and collapse entire nations. Iranian military doctrine makes no distinction between nuclear EMP weapons, non-nuclear radio-frequency weapons and cyber-operations - it regards nuclear EMP attack as the ultimate cyber-weapon. EMP is most effective at blacking-out critical infrastructures, while it also does not directly damage the environment or harm human life, according to Iran's "Passive Defense":

"As a result of not having the other destructive effects that nuclear weapons possess, among them the loss of human life, weapons derived from electromagnetic pulses have attracted attention with regard to their use in future wars ... . The superficiality of secondary damage sustained, as well as the avoidance of human casualties, serves as a motivation to transform this technology into an advanced and useful weapon in modern warfare."

Because EMP destroys electronics directly, but people indirectly, it is regarded by some as Shariah-compliant use of a nuclear weapon. "Passive Defense" and other Iranian military writings are well aware that nuclear EMP attack is the most efficient way of killing people, through secondary effects, over the long run. The rationale appears to be that people starve to death, not because of EMP, but because they live in materialistic societies dependent upon modern technology.

For example, an Iranian article on nuclear EMP attack, "Electronics To Determine Fate Of Future Wars" (1998), concludes hopefully (from the Iranian author's perspective):

"If the world's industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults, then they will disintegrate within a few years ... . American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shot.

Written 17 years ago, Iranian military doctrine has assessed nuclear EMP attack against the United States for now nearly two decades.

The Iranians have done more than just think about EMP attack.

The Congressional EMP Commission found that Iran has practiced launching missiles and fusing warheads for high-altitude EMP attack, including off a freighter. Iran has apparently practiced surprise EMP attacks, orbiting satellites on south polar trajectories to evade U.S. radars and missile defenses, at altitudes consistent with generating an EMP field covering all 48 contiguous United States. Iran launched its fourth satellite on such a trajectory as recently as February 2015.

A single nuclear weapon would complete the list of requirements.

Finally, because a nuclear EMP attack can be conducted by surprise and anonymously - deterrence may not work against EMP.

Deterrence depends upon knowing who attacked and being able to retaliate. Unlike a nuclear weapon used to blast a city, high-altitude EMP leaves no collectible bomb debris for forensic analysis to identify the aggressor.

EMP attack by missile or balloon launched off a freighter could be from many possible actors. Even Yemen's Houthis have Scud missiles and know how to use them, having recently killed the chief of Saudi Arabia's air force with a Scud strike on King Khalid Air Force Base.

Hundreds of satellites are in low earth orbit, unseen when approaching the United States from the south, that could help disguise the origins of an EMP attack. And the EMP could damage the means necessary to identify the attacker and U.S. retaliatory capabilities.

One Iranian nuclear weapon is one too many for an Iran ruled by theocratic totalitarian genocidal imperialists.

No deal.

• R. James Woolsey is a former director of Central Intelligence and is chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Peter Vincent Pry is executive director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security and served in the Congressional EMP Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA.

JCPOA IS A DIRECT THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES.

HERE ARE SOME MAJOR EFFECTS ON  THE SAFETY OF EASTERN EUROPE,CENTRAL & SOUTH AMERICA, AND THE US MAINLAND

Gives Putin and Russia the free hand they have been seeking to dominate Eastern Europe.

Allows Iran to expand its  active terror network in South America.

Exposes  New York, Washington and Boston to direct threat of ICBM/nuclear attack.

  TO TRULY EVALUATE THE JCPOA --FOCUS ON IT'S DANGERS TO THE UNITED STATES  

RUSSIA ( PUTIN ) AND MAJ. GEN. QASEM SOLEIMANI, THE COMMANDER OF IRAN'S QUDS FORCE, ARE THE IMMEDIATE AND LONG-RANGE BIG WINNERS FROM THIS DEAL.

1.     THE IRANIAN THREAT IS DIRECTED PRIMARILY  AGAINST THE UNITED STATES,,THE GREAT SATAN.

To Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, his circle of ruling mullahs and the entire command structure of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, THE UNITED STATES IS THE GREAT SATAN and destroying Israel is, to them , just an added bonus AND a religious obligation.

 This deal , by providing substantial additional income to Iran, materially assures the strength and permanence of the hold of the existing government over the Iranian population: 

a)    by increasing the resources that can be  allocated to the internal security apparatus; 

b)    by allowing for  substantial increases in expenditures for infrastructure, economic development, health etc. {This  will reduce restlessness of the younger generation whose discontent is much more economic than political. The implicit deal has been made that 'we will not crack down upon you for transgressions ( within bounds)that you commit in private as long as your resistance is not public.']

c)     removes an existing  current source of tension concerning financial allocations and national priorities between the ruling clerics and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps by substantially increasing the “terror budget for IRGC's direct operations  in Iraq and through proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Sinai, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain,  Saudi Arabia, etc. 

This will also  enable  Iran to increase it's already extensive terror network  penetration in Central and South America. {See the Joint Subcommittee Hearing: Iran and Hezbollah in the Western Hemisphere; Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere Mar 18, 2015   http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearing/joint-subcommittee-hearing-iran-and-hezbollah-western-hemisphere }

 2.   RUSSIA AND PUTIN ARE THE IMMEDIATE AND LONG-RANGE BIG WINNERS FROM THIS DEAL. 

  This deal directly and materially helps Russia's unchecked aggression in its continuing campaign to  dominate Eastern Europe [Ukraine, Poland, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania....See Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/russias-european-neighbors-rattled-putins-expansionism-334616 }

This deal places the US  main land at direct risk  of ICBM. attack. 

  Russia has announced that it will sell Iran ICBM technology. Iran does not need ICBMs to attack Israel. ICBMs in the hands of Iran with a nuclear weapon are a threat to the entire East Coast of the United States. They still shout “death to America" in Iran. Several days ago Pres. Rouhani led a parade through the streets of Tehran whose theme was very vocal: “death to America". 

Russia claims that it plans to upgrade that portion of its own  IBM force, both qualitatively and quantitatively , that is aimed at the United States. Money coming from weapons and other sales to Iran will help finance this enhancement of Russian capability which will improve Russia's  position as they announced in terms of their assaults against Ukraine, and in their announced aggravations against  Poland and Latvia. 

Russia has also announced that they will sell Iran short-range attack missiles which place US naval forces in danger and give Iran a lock control over the essential waterways {Straits of Hormuz;  Bab el- Mandeb} which control  approximately 50% of all of the petroleum that is shipped in the world.

Russia has also announced that they will sell advanced air defense missiles and communications to Iran which would make any nuclear/missile force impregnable to attack. 

 Several days after the deal was announced, Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, the commander of iran's Quds force,  visited Moscow and met with president Vladimir Putin.The  reported purpose of this meeting was for Russia and Iran to discuss the division of the Middle East in a way that would serve their various clients in the region (among  them, Assad ) and check the joint enemies the Islamic state). It was also speculated that they discussed how to marginalize the role of the United States in the region. As a means to both ends will continue to serve as Assad's protector, all the while providing weapons to Iran, to the Syrian regime and also possibly to Hezbollah.