Maverick News Media MNM

Germany allowing deals with Iran

I'm not really surprised by this:

The Foreign Ministry will express its concerns and seek clarification from the highest levels of the German government about a decision by Germany's Export Control Office (BAFA) to approve a €100 million deal for building plants to liquefy natural gas in Iran, the ministry said Thursday in a statement. The story was first reported exclusively in Wednesday's Jerusalem Post.

"The ministry has expressed its disappointment at reports that the German government gave its approval to a German company to sign on the deal with the Iranian gas company," the statement said.

"The German government's decision is against the spirit of sanctions that the UN Security Council has placed on Iran," the statement continued.

"It is worrying that precisely Germany, which is a member of the EU 3 - that includes France, Britain and Germany - is presenting a position that harms international attempts for significantly strengthening sanction against Iran's nuclear program."

Government sources said they expected more of Germany because of that country's unique relationship with Israel.

Meanwhile, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, an international Jewish human rights group, has called on German Chancellor Angela Merkel to block the deal between German energy company Steiner (SPG Steiner-Prematechnik-Gastec GmbH) and the Iranian government, wherein Steiner would construct three gas liquefaction plants in Iran.

According to the Wiesenthal Center, Steiner's construction of the plants - which would have a capacity of 10,000 barrels a day - would place an obstacle in front of the sanctions Germany imposed on Iran earlier this month.

"This deal helps Iran in this sensitive sector and makes a mockery of the international community's efforts to isolate a nuclearizing Iranian regime," said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, an associate dean of the center.

"Unless the Chancellor overrules the Export Control Office's decision, Germany will strengthen Teheran and further embolden a regime whose president repeatedly calls for the destruction of the Jewish State."

The German government contends that the deal does not violate the sanctions, as it is a legal agreement as opposed to a political one. The deal passed a twelve-month inspection process by the Export Control Office before being approved.

Cooper added that the government's approval of the deal stood in contrast to Merkel's speech to the Knesset in March, when she said that "Germany will push for further sanctions" on Iran and that "this historic responsibility is part of my country's fundamental policy. It means that for me, as a German chancellor, Israel's security is non-negotiable."

So they're defending the deal so far? Ick. I'm sorry, but this does violate sanctions against Iran, and shows that Germany is no better today than before. This of course is the same country that still criminalizes homeschooling, and are even willing to take away parents' custody of their children if they refuse to obey this foul law. They have not improved at all.

Islamic States and Thought Crimes: The Thug's Ideal

Historian John Lewis gave a talk on March 13 at Georgia Institute of Technology. As he reports, on American campuses today the barbarians are well represented:

I was prepared for opposition to the idea of war with Iran, and I acknowledged up front that those who recognize that religious law is wrong might disagree with my conclusion that a war against the Iranian state is necessary. But I was not prepared for the strident defense of Islamic law and jihad—and for the condemnation of me for even raising the issue of Islamic jihad—that was to come.

The onslaught began with the first “question,” actually a monologue that lasted nearly fifteen minutes. The monologist claimed that: (1) there is a long history of separation of church and state in Islam; (2) Islamic law is good; (3) whenever imposed, Islamic law has brought peace; (4) jihad is a “wonderful idea” and does not mean war; (5) Islamic Totalitarianism poses no threat, since 500 million Muslims reject terrorism; (6) the tax leveled against subjugated peoples is just, because they are protected by Muslims in return; (7) I am “ignorant of history” if I do not acknowledge the “truth” of these claims.

But one “questioner” in particular stands out: After reading a sentence from my article Notes on the Near Eastern Roots of Islam, with no context or explanation for the audience to even understand what it meant, he attacked me by saying that I should remember “logic” and the fact that I was at a “scientific” school before making statements such as those that I had made. But rather than explain to me what was illogical or unscientific about my views—let alone ask a question in the question period—he continued his ad hominem attack by stating that my views were so obviously wrong that only a “criminal mind” (a phrase he repeated) could have come up with them. Again, he never stated what was wrong with my quote, never established any reasons for his conclusion, and never asked me to clarify my reasoning—he took his assertion of the “criminality” of my mind as a self-evident fact.

Fortunately, not all of the students present at Lewis's talk were harbingers of a new Dark Age:

There were, however, two bright spots to the evening. The first was a man who described himself as a thirty-year emigré from Turkey. He noted with pride that his homeland had a thoroughly secular government and he praised Kemal Ataturk for bringing Turkey into the modern age, for instance, by banning the headscarf. But today Turkey’s secular government is being undercut—by Americans who describe its government as “moderate Islamic” and thereby blur the line between theocracy and secularism. This opens the door to the establishment of Islamic law. The man’s message was this: There can be no compromise between theocracy and secular government; it is either–or. To accept "moderate Islam" into government is, in principle, to establish theocracy. I wonder if he realized that, by the standards of the brownshirt in my audience, he was a criminal for holding such a view.

One also has to wonder about what the brownshirts are "learning" in their classrooms.

Crossposted at The Dougout

Jeopardy Answer is : Because they aren't and REALLY expect to guided to a victory by god

Jeopardy : "World Affairs for $50" :  Why is Iran seemingly so STOOOOOPID as to provoke the american fleet?

THE BLOTTER:The standoff between three U.S. Navy ships and five Iranian speedboats in the Strait of Hormuz Sunday was one step away from turning violent.

"They were a heartbeat from being blown up," a Pentagon official, speaking of the Iranians, told ABC News.

According to the Navy intelligence report on the incident, the Iranians radioed, "I am coming at you. You will blow up in a couple of minutes."

The Navy ships radioed back, presumably transmitting a warning. All three ships also engaged in "evasive action," and according to senior Pentagon officials, the "prepare-to-fire" order had been given and the gun stations manned.

Pentagon officials today expressed surprise the Navy ships allowed at least one of the Iranian speedboats to get so close -- just 200 yards away -- without firing.

They say at least one of those speedboats boasted a machine gun, and all were behaving as if they were packed with explosives.

A Navy official told ABC News that while there have been similar incidents in the Gulf, Sunday's differed because of the "aggressive actions" taken by the Iranians.

"I've never seen a provocation like this is in international waters," another military official who has served for more than 25 years said.

Abbasi, in a speech in Iran’s Khaje Nasser University, said a “martyr deals directly with god and sells his soul only to god.” He added “Only certain people deserve to participate in the suicide operations.” Abassi noted that “The members of Lebanon’s Hezbollah are dear, because they only sell their soul to the god.”

Folks, that these 'speedboats' are not now toothpicks and fiberglass insulation is a strategic mistake. Restraint towards the Iranians will be taken for granted by our friends, and get knowing nods from our enemies. AND WE HAVE THEM. Restraint is the precursor of DEAD SERVICEMEN AND WOMEN.

There should nothing left of them, and the fleet should simply have sailed on......"WHAT IRANIAN SPEEDBOATS?"

Iranian Intelligence Supporting a Coup in Azerbaijan?

The radical Khomeinist theocracy - which has been at war with the US since 1979 - has been the single most destabilizing force in the Middle East since its inception. As Sec of Defense Gates said recently:

Everywhere you turn, it is the policy of Iran to foment instability and chaos, no matter the strategic value or cost in the blood of innocents - Christians, Jews and Muslims alike. . . . There can be little doubt that their destabilizing foreign policies are a threat to the interests of the United States, to the interests of every country in the Middle East, and to the interests of all countries within the range of the ballistic missiles Iran is developing.

More proof of that today from this report at Fox News:

A court in Azerbaijan on Monday convicted 15 people accused of ties with Iranian intelligence of crimes including treason and plotting to seize power, and handed down lengthy prison sentences.

The convictions, which a lawyer for the alleged ringleader said were unfounded, highlighted concern in the secular ex-Soviet republic over the influence of neighboring Iran.

Continue reading at Wolf Howling

A Deeply Flawed NIE Changed Nothing & Everything (updated)

If your initial reaction to the recently released National Intelligence Estimate on Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities (NIE) was surprise at not finding the words "and they all lived happily ever after" in its concluding paragraph, you should be forgiven. If you suspected the authors might be Nancy Pelosi and Joe Wilson, it is understandable. After all, this NIE is more a policy document than an intelligence estimate. And several of this document’s critical conclusions are deliberately obfuscating.

The critical findings of this NIE are:

- Iran had an ongoing nuclear weapons program through 2003;

- Iran ended the overt nuclear weapons program (i.e., the military program to create HEU spheres for nuclear warheads and to place those warheads on an ICBM) in 2003;

- The Khomeinist theocracy is rational and uses a cost benefit analysis to reach its decisions;

- The decisive issues that caused the Khomeinist theocracy to end its nuclear weapons program in 2003 were the threats of IAEA inspections and sanctions;

- Iran’s ongoing nuclear program can be characterized as civilian in nature; and

- The intelligence community is moderately confident that Iran has not resumed a nuclear weapons program.

This NIE was written in such a manner as to minimze the threat posed by Iran and to portray the Khomeinist theocracy as a rational entity that can be dealt with without threat of – or resort to – use of force. Indeed, outside the U.S., some, such as Arab author Raghida Dergham, see the NIE as constituting an "internal coup." But for all it changes in our ability to meet the threat posed by Iran, the NIE does not change the actual threat posed to the world by that country’s Khomeinist theocracy. Our prior intelligence estimate completed in 2005 stated a belief that Iran was actively seeking the ability to create a nuclear weapon. Iran has not spent the intervening years turning its swords into ploughshares.

Continue reading at Wolf Howling

"How can we rely on the Americans if they publish this report that emasculates what the world explicitly knows regarding Iran?"

         

Indeed. Only SLIGHTLY over the top. FDR, btw, chose to end the Holocaust ONCE HE BELIEVED IT, by moving to end the war asap. Our govt made no conscious effort to destroy the death camps, or the railroads supplying the victims or the supplies. The sources for this are munificent, and unchallenged. It was a conscious decision and remains arguable to this day. I believe that was probably the best choice of lousy choices. But more to the point, most in the government discounted the reality for years despite the words, and deeds of Germany before and during the war.

The world should consider carefully, by what means a cut off Israel might ensure that Iran POSITIVELY will not obtain nuclear weapons, and wonder if isolating Israel when this world has seen the majority of jewish people already exterminated once, is the best course to a stable middle east

Shas minister: Americans' attitude to (NIE) report reminiscent of Auschwitz             

Yitzhak Cohen says during cabinet meeting 'US intelligence report was ordered by someone who wants dialogue with Tehran. Minister Eli Yishai: 'We must not play dumb in the face of the report's findings'

        

      Roni Sofer      

Published:

12.09.07, 14:30 / Israel News

      

 

                

 

"The manner in which the Americans relate to the intelligence report on Iran is similar to the way in which they viewed those reports they received during the Holocaust on railways transporting hundreds of thousands of Jews to their death at Auschwitz," Minister Yitzhak Cohen of Shas said during a security cabinet meeting Sunday morning on the Iranian nuclear issue.

 

 

"It can not be that (US President George W.) Bush is committed to peace as was declared at Annapolis, and then the Americans propagate such an intelligence report which contradicts the information we have proving Iran intends to obtain nuclear weapons," Cohen said. "How can we rely on the Americans if they publish this report that emasculates what the world explicitly knows regarding Iran, and renders impotent the entire struggle against the Iranians?"

         

            

             Continue reading "How can we rely on the Americans if they publish this report that emasculates what the world explicitly knows regarding Iran?".         

      

And then the Iranian Apologists and Truth Benders come out

       

Apparently waiting for the moment we have 2 exemplars of what hideous spin is in this post NIE, reality. This is going to be a bruising battle, and make the partisan divide bitter beyond reclaim just in time for Iowa and New Hampshire

WaPo has published a comical op-ed by Vali Nasr, a professor at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy of Tufts University, and the author of "The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future."

Meet 'The Decider' of Tehran. It's Not the Hothead You Expect.
Sunday, December 9, 2007; Page B01

 

When most Americans think of Iran, they probably think of its incendiary president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Since his election in 2005, Ahmadinejad has gleefully shocked the world with his defiance over Iran's nuclear programs, his ravings about a Shiite messiah, his jeremiads against Israel and his denial that the Holocaust occurred. But while Ahmadinejad is surely the regime's face, he's not its boss. Since Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's death in 1989, the real power in Tehran has belonged to Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Ahmadinejad makes the noise, but Khamenei pulls the strings.

Nasr then goes on to inform us how moderate and temperate and reasonable is the man who REALLY leads Iran.

The supreme leader is an enigma even to most of Iran's 70 million people. In fact, he's far more cautious, conservative and pragmatic than the bellowing Ahmadinejad. Khamenei wants a "Goldilocks" kind of Islamic Republic -- not too hot, not too cold.

Sorry, Mr. Nasr. but, here's a few samples of the words and thoughts of the 'hidden' Khameinei:

The West's publication of the cartoons was an Israeli conspiracy motivated by anger over Hamas's win in the Palestinian elections, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on Tuesday.

The caricatures amounted to a "conspiracy by Zionists who were angry because of the victory of Hamas," he said, referring to the Palestinian movement that won a landslide victory in last month's elections.

Khamenei, who has the final word on all matters in Iran's Islamic system, was speaking at a ceremony to mark the air force's decision to join the Islamic revolution in 1979. His speech was broadcast on state radio.

More from this moderate and even tempered, racist son of a bitch....
       

       

            Continue reading And then the Iranian Apologists and Truth Benders come out .        

   

The Iranian Beat Goes on ... and we invite them in, another footnote to Chapter 1 of the NIE backstory

Gates in Gulf for strategic talks: Iran also invited

GERTZ - ABU DHABI — The United States plans to conduct a strategic dialogue with the Gulf Cooperation Council.

The U.S. delegation are attending the Manama Dialogue, scheduled for Dec. 7-9. Gates was expected to be the most senior official to participate in the forum, organized by Bahrain and the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was said to have been invited to the summit.

Yes, he can help us. Are you kidding me?

Gulf sources said Gates was to discuss security threats to the region. They said the secretary would later meet several GCC leaders.

"In response to a question about Iran's threat to destroy Israel, Gates said,"If Iran obtains nuclear weapons no one can promise it would not use them against Israel," but that he felt Iran was only developing nukes as a `deterent'." Robert Gates, Dec 06.

The Manama Dialogue includes all six GCC states as well as Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Turkey and Yemen. Sessions would address the U.S. military presence, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and energy security.

"(GATES), along with Zbigniew Brzezinski, co-headed a task force at the Council on Foreign Relations on US policy towards Iran.  One of the findings of the task force was that the US begin a dialogue with Iran."

Gates arrived in the region after the GCC summit, scheduled to take place on Dec. 3-4 in the Qatari capital of Doha. The sources said Iran, nuclear energy and the U.S. military presence would top the GCC agenda.

Former Secretary of State George Schultz (for Ronald Reagan), complained that Gates and the CIA had repeatedly tailored intelligence to fit the policy interests they favored."

"The plan to set up a joint nuclear energy plant for the production of power will top the agenda of the talks," GCC secretary-general Abdul Rahman Al Attiyah said.

"Is Bob Gates, Richard Haass (Amb. Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations and former director of policy planning for the Department of State), likely to be more inclusive about who the US talks with.  For example:  on Iran.  Is he not more likely to urge that Iran come into a conversation with the US?

Richar Haass:  Well as.... Yogi Berra once said, Predictions are awfully tough, especially about the future. So I don't know if Bob Gates is going to explicitly say that, but all I can tell you is that

1) he's favored supporting a dialogue with Iran

2)  I believe it's highly likely that the Baker-Hamilton group will propose some sort of regional forum, akin to existed, if you recall, at the time of Afghanistan where the neighboring countries, the US, and Russia had a standing regional forum. 

I think we're probably moving towards some version of that for Iraq with a half dozen or so neighboring countries along with the US, Russia, and Europe -- and perhaps others --would have a regular set of consultations about what can be done to prevent either the breakup of the country or the civil war getting even worse.  So I would think this is likely to be US policy and I don't see where people who have not been part of the Administration would have problems, necessarily, with signing on to that."

Sounds like the Congress of Vienna to me ..the outdented material is ALL from

   

Iranian Nativists Start to Emerge

Many believe that the deeply flawed NIE on Iran’s nuclear weapons program amounted to several State Department personnel pushing their own policy agenda and, in the process, neutering the Iranian policies of our elected leaders. The people who did this are Iranian natavists who do not perceive Iran as a threat or who do not believe that force should be an option in dealing with Iran. And now in the wake of the NIE, we begin to see other Iranian natavists emerging to make their beliefs known, as in today's Washington Post.

Professor Vali Nasr of Tufts University writes in WaPo to tell us about Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Guide since 1989. Within the structure of Iran’s government, the Supreme Guide, a position created by Ayatollah Khomeini, is the true seat of power. And while Khamenei may allow President Ahmedinejad to be the public face of Iran, Khamenei has the final word to end or alter any of Ahmedinejad’s policies or to order new ones. And the military and intelligence bodies report directly to Khamenei. Khamenei, in essence, holds the strings of the entire government.

Continue reading at Wolf Howling

The debunking begins...the 2007 NIE Chapter One

Many have charged that American Policy has been warped by jews in favor of Israel, but in reality the institutions of the 'permanent government' have worked against the jewish people since well before the inception of Israel. I have come to the judgment that the NIE of 2007 represents in fact, the victory this year of the Arabists who have worked in the CIA and State dept since WW2 (one locus of the charges that Israel is running American policy via the puppet masters - American jews), and represents part of an attempt to completely isolate Israel, and align the Sunni (oil laden) Arab states with the USA against Iran, OR a solution of Iraq by granting Iran a respite, both not just in jeopardy to the security of the Israel, an ally of the USA at the level of Great Britain, but an existential threat to half of the jewish people on the planet.

This 'permanent government' arrogates to itself day to day policy as their personal ideology fits, whether or not this admits to the will of the people who elect the only national officer we have every four years.

"We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003,
Teheran halted its nuclear weapons program."

Suspicions Arise About Iran's Nuclear Program

In-Depth Coverage

By Jacqueline Shire and Jonathan Karl

Sept. 15, 2004- The U.S. government and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have questions about a military site in Iran with suspected ties to the country's nuclear program, ABC News has learned.

Iran's Parchin complex — covering approximately 15 square miles and located about 19 miles southeast of Tehran — is known as a center for the production of conventional ammunition and explosives. A State Department official has confirmed the United States suspects nuclear activity at some of its facilities. The suspicions focus on possible testing of high explosives.

"Parchin is the center of Iran's munitions industry and home to Iran's oldest ammunitions factory, founded before World War II," said John Pike, directory of GlobalSecurity.org, an organization that seeks to reduce reliance on nuclear weapons. Images of Parchin, obtained exclusively by ABC News, show a building within the facility's high-explosive test area that could permit the testing of especially large explosions, including those relevant to the development of a nuclear weapon.

Davis added that environmental sampling done by IAEA inspectors could detect the presence of byproducts used in the testing of high explosives for a nuclear weapon.

"A surrogate material, such as depleted uranium, for example, could be used in such testing and would be detectable via sampling," he said.

The IAEA, the United Nations' nuclear arm, has been meeting this week at its headquarters in Vienna, Austria, to discuss Iran's nuclear program. The United States has proposed a strongly worded resolution that would call on Iran to provide full disclosure of its nuclear activities to the IAEA, or face action by the U.N. Security Council, which could impose sanctions.

At today's meeting of IAEA's governing board, both the United States and the European Union sought a commitment from Iran to stop enrichment. But Hossein Mousavian, Iran's chief envoy to the meeting, suggested his country would not yield to threats of Security Council action.

The Iranian government did not respond to ABC News' questions about Parchin.

IAEA and Parchin
VIENNA (AFP) Sep 17, 2004
UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Friday there was no sign of nuclear activity at the Parchin military site in Iran which US officials say should be investigated.

"We do not have any indication that this site has any nuclear-related activities," ElBaradei said.

"We are aware of this new site," he added however at a press conference at an IAEA board of governors meeting.

Iran denied Thursday that it had carried out any nuclear-related work at Parchin, a huge military complex 30 kilometres (19 miles) southeast of Tehran.

A senior US official has told AFP the United States was concerned about high-explosives testing in Parchin that may "amount to (nuclear) weapons intent".

Iranian official Hossein Mousavian said in Vienna that the IAEA had not asked to visit Parchin as part of its investigation of Iran's nuclear program.

He said that "if this is requested by the IAEA, we are fully ready to cooperate."

Mousavian said the IAEA had asked Iran "four weeks ago about reports from open sources of explosive testing but they did not mention Parchin."

Diplomats have told AFP, however, that the IAEA had asked to visit Parchin and that the Iranians have not agreed to the visit.

Iranian Official Hints No Inspections At Suspect Nuclear Site Anytime Soon

Digital Globe file photo of Iran's Parchin military site.

Vienna (AFP) Jun 15, 2005
A senior Iranian negotiator hinted Wednesday that UN nuclear inspectors would not be visiting the Parchin military site in Iran, where the United States says weapons work is going on, anytime soon.

Cyrus Nasseri told AFP that any such inspections of the Parchin and Lavizan military sites would be "transparency" visits, beyond the inspections that are required by the UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Iran is ready "with an open mind to come to an agreement on modalities" for these visits but "first things come first" and "other issues have to be made clear," Nasseri said, referring to safeguards matters such as questions about centrifuges and uranium contamination on imported equipment.

Visits to sites like Parchin are beyond nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) safeguards requirements, which are limited to inspecting sites where there is sure to be nuclear material.

U.N. Says Iran Blocked Investigation of Nuclear Program

   

By RICHARD BERNSTEIN 

Published: March 1, 2005

    

IENNA, March 1 - The United Nations nuclear watchdog listed today several instances where Iran has blocked investigation of its nuclear development program or failed to provide information sought by the agency.

In yet another area, Iran has also refused to allow I.A.E.A. inspectors to return to Parchin, a military base where the United States believes nuclear research may be taking place. The Iranians allowed a limited visit to Parchin by the I.A.E.A. early this year, and inspectors took environmental samples that are still being analyzed, but the inspectors were limited to one of four areas that the agency had identified as of potential interest.

Officials said that Iran did not have any legal obligation to submit to inspections at Parchin, but the I.A.E.A., with American encouragement, urged the Iranians to allow such visits as a confidence-building measure.

But in a note to the I.A.E.A. dated Feb. 27, the agency statement disclosed, Iran said, "The expectation of the Safeguards Department in visiting specified zones and points in Parchin Complex are fulfilled and thus there is no justification for any additional visit."

_______________________________________________________________

Tests from the one area visited showed nothing positive.

I can find no record that Parchin was ever revisited, nor that the sites the UN wanted to visit were EVER analyzed for results consistent with implosion lenses for plutonium weapons, or applicable techniques related to U235 technology

Why not?
I could buy that like Qaddafi in 2003, some mullahs had second thoughts, and ONE PROGRAM was halted, but the idea that they were going to give up development of that which they have said many times could both safeguard the Islamic revolution, and achieve the dream of every leader since the inception of the revolution 1979 (obliterating a major ally and 'battalion' of the USA --- Israel) is a delusional, but attractive fantasy for those RISK AVERSE men who cannot face the long war, and it's compulsory obligations