Trump’s speech on Iran deal is an orgy for Israel and its US friends

US Politics
on 40 Comments

Trump’s decertification of the Iran deal is sad news of course, though there are some silver linings. Nothing may come of it. The Congress might woof a lot but leave it alone. Germany, France, and Britain have already slapped the president down– they “stand committed” to the deal. Though look who was quick to “congratulate” the president:

“Israel embraces this opportunity,” Netanyahu says. And so should every leader responsible for “the security of the world.”

So it is clear as ever who is against the deal. Israel and its lobby. That’s all, folks. The other night on NBC, Andrea Mitchell said that Trump would gladden “his base” by decertifying the deal, but this is simply a lie. Trump’s base of disaffected white voters in red states don’t care about Iran. The pro-Israel wing does. Trump’s “billionaire donors”– three rightwing Israel supporters– care. The media’s evasion of this central question is more transparent than ever.

The leading Israel lobby group AIPAC was quick to adore the president on his speech. “POTUS policy objectives: Confront Iran’s regional aggression and fix dangerous flaws in the nuclear deal.”

Too bad that Susan Rice didn’t openly confront AIPAC when she had power, as national security adviser to Obama, and ambassador to the U.N. Though Obama tried to call out Israel, in his great, I’d be abrogating my constitutional duties speech, when he said he couldn’t defer to Netanyahu.

Israel runs through all arguments on the deal. Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which is funded by Paul Singer, Sheldon Adelson and Bernard Marcus and is all about Israel, stole Netanyahu’s line on PBS last night–“Fix it or nix it”– without crediting the Israeli p.m. The Republican Jewish Coalition promptly declared that Trump has bolstered Israel’s security. The Israel Project at least tells us what the real problem with Iran is: It helps Hamas and Hezbollah, Israel’s pesky enemies. That’s an existential threat to the west?

While supporters of the deal also have to salute Israel in order to seem plausible. Rob Malley cited “Prime Minister Netanyahu” approvingly last night on the News Hour– Netanyahu described Iran’s “existential threat” back in 2014 and we have addressed it. Fred Kaplan invokes “the vast majority of Israeli military and intelligence officers.”  Trudy Rubin cites Ami Ayalon and other Israeli “security experts.” So does J Street: “Killing the JCPOA would also increase the threat to Israel – which is why the majority of the Israeli security establishment believes the agreement should be maintained.”

So Israel’s security interest is what matters– the establishment agrees. South Korea and Japan should have it so good when it comes to North Korea. But they don’t.

The lobby’s friends in the Senate are very happy. Tom Cotton wants regime change.  While Marco Rubio says the deal is “Munich” for the 21st century. Iran is going to take over Europe, cracks Ben Rhodes. We really are going nuts.

Thanks to Max Blumenthal and James North. 

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

40 Responses

  1. Antidote
    October 14, 2017, 12:51 pm

    If nothing comes of it, as is likely, I still don’t see a “silver lining” anywhere. This is bad, really bad, and not just for Iran. Trump, at the UNGA, of all places, has openly threatened to completely destroy NK even though they do have nuclear weapons already. The old argument for nuclear weapons as a means of self-defence against a US attack/regime change operation is thus no longer valid. The US is now apparently ready to attack nuclear powers, and thus for WW3/Armageddon if her interests are threatened. Now what?

    The plan is, clearly, to coerce both Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons program altogether: submit or die. And, apparently, increase the US nuclear arsenal 10fold. If the latter did indeed inspire Tillerson’s “f… moron’ remark, Trump, no doubt, sees this as a stroke of genius. Which is it?

    If Trump wins this deal, without war, he will get the Nobel peace price (he had already been nominated for this year along the lines ‘peace through strength’) You know who actually won.

    If there is war, it will be the end of the US as a global superpower. As in Israel’s Samson option, they will take a big part of the rest of the world, maybe all of us, down with them.America First!

    My guess is that Putin will once again play the role of saving the world from the idiocy of US foreign policy (as in Syria). Or maybe not. Read the letter in which Stalin explains how and why he did not interfere with the US/UN war against North Korea in 1950

    https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/did-stalin-lure-the-united-states-the-korean-war-new-evidence-the-origins-the-korean-war

  2. JosephA
    October 14, 2017, 1:15 pm

    I spent two weeks in Iran – it’s not a scary place!

    • Kay24
      October 15, 2017, 7:37 am

      Israel seems to be scarier, with the possibility that it could attack it’s neighbors at any time, or if they decide to mow the lawn.

      You are however lucky to be able to visit Iran, something I have been interested in doing for a long time. I would like to see the beautiful mosques, and buildings I often see in pictures, and sample their cuisine.

    • Rob Roy
      October 15, 2017, 8:28 am

      I’ve been there too, and you are right….it’s not only not scary, it’s quite lovely, as are the Iranians (Persians).
      Oh, yes, I’ve been to Israel, too. Very scary. Guns threatening everywhere. West Bank, on the other hand, is not scary at all.

      • hophmi
        October 16, 2017, 8:29 am

        Exactly how radicals used to compare the USSR and the United States. #notcredible #usefulidiots

      • Mooser
        October 16, 2017, 2:09 pm

        “Hophmi”, what’s with the ‘hashtags’. Are you going viral?

      • Misterioso
        October 16, 2017, 3:02 pm

        @hophmi

        Eminent Jewish Israeli journalist Bradley Burston aptly sums up the horrors Israel inflicts on Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem:
        “Occupation is Slavery”
        EXCERPT:
        “In the name of occupation, generation after generation of Palestinians have been treated as property. They can be moved at will, shackled at will, tortured at will, have their families separated at will. They can be denied the right to vote, to own property, to meet or speak to family and friends. They can be hounded or even shot dead by their masters, who claim their position by biblical right, and also use them to build and work on the plantations the toilers cannot themselves ever hope to own. The masters dehumanize them, call them by the names of beasts.” (Haaretz, Feb. 26/13)

        Video: ‘Stone Cold Justice’ on Israel’s torture of Palestinian children

        A film produced by a group of Australian journalists has sparked an international outcry against Israel after it explicitly detailed Tel Aviv’s use of torture against Palestinian children.

        Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uDPeeD_RPk
        Precarious Childhood: Arrests of Jerusalemite Children
        This film addresses the process of arrest, interrogation, and the policy of house arrest and their effects on children. The film provides accounts of children who were arrested in order to highlight a larger policy of persecution and targeting of Palestinian children in Jerusalem.

        “Former Foreign Ministry director-general invokes South Africa comparisons. ‘Joint Israel-West Bank’ reality is an apartheid state”
        EXCERPT: “Similarities between the ‘original apartheid’ as it was practiced in South Africa and the situation in ISRAEL [my emphasis] and the West Bank today ‘scream to the heavens,’ added [Alon] Liel, who was Israel’s ambassador in Pretoria from 1992 to 1994. There can be little doubt that the suffering of Palestinians is not less intense than that of blacks during apartheid-era South Africa, he asserted.” (Times of Israel, February 21, 2013)

        Video: Israeli TV Host Implores Israelis: Wake Up and Smell the Apartheid
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyyUvxHLYr4

        In its 2015 Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, the U.S. Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor acknowledges the “institutional and societal discrimination against Arab citizens of Israel.” (U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor)

      • DavidDaoud
        October 17, 2017, 3:55 am

        @ Rob Roy: I thank you for your testimony.
        I know what you say is true about the West Bank, as I lived in Nablus for well over 2 years early in the 2nd Intifada.
        I know that I would have a similar experience in Iran…and I surely do want to go!

  3. Antidote
    October 14, 2017, 1:36 pm

    one more thing: as usual, the focus is on Israel as dog-wagging tail, ignoring the other long-time ally of the US next door, an ally who gets away with running a medieval dictatorship, being the major sponsor of terrorism in the ME, both threatening and launching genocidal attacks on Shiites etc etc, all with full US military and diplomatic support. The Saudis want Damascus, the Israelis the Golan Heights, that’s one main reason why Assad is the dictator and butcher who has to go. Ditto for Iran

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-13/saudi-arabia-wastes-no-time-in-backing-trump-s-iran-strategy

    • Citizen
      October 14, 2017, 4:34 pm

      Agreed.

    • SamT
      October 16, 2017, 9:00 am

      Maybe I misunderstand…but the metaphor is “the tail is wagging the dog”….

      • Rashers2
        October 16, 2017, 10:02 am

        Exactly so. A dog-wagging tail (Israel) is a tail that wags a dog (USA). Clear now?

  4. Citizen
    October 14, 2017, 2:41 pm

    “The lobby’s friends in the Senate are very happy. Tom Cotton wants regime change.”

    I think Cotton was the last person Trump consulted before the day he announced his decision on the Iran Deal. It’s a common theme in the main media news pundit arena that Trump always goes with the last person he consulted on any issue. I’m sure they didn’t chat about the Nakba.

  5. Bandolero
    October 14, 2017, 3:03 pm

    It’s hard to see how Bibi and his Congress could win their battle to nix the Iran deal.

    The point is that the JCPOA is not only a P5+1 deal with Iran, but also binding international law codified in UN security council resolution 2231.

    So, to nix the Iran deal in a lawful way, Bibi and his Congress basically need a new UN security council resolution nixing it. It means Bibi and his Congress need not only support from Trump for doing this, but also from the veto powers Russia, China, Britain and France. It’s hard to see that Bibi and his Congress could be successful in lobbying Russia to agree to nix UN security council resolution 2231.

    To “slap back” globally binding UN sanctions, Bibi and his Congress could also use the mechanism defined in the JCPOA to do so. The procedere here would be that the US officially complains that Iran is acting in violation of the JCPOA. Then there would be a several weeks long court like process in listening to both sides complaints, and at the end there will be a vote among the 8 signatory powers of the JCPOA, ie the US, the EU, Germany, France, UK, China, Russia and Iran. If the majority of these 8 signatory powers votes that Iran has violated the deal and sanctions should be slapped back, UN sanctions are slapped back. It means, if Iran, Russia and China vote against and the Western block unanimously votes for reinstating UN sanctions, UN sanctions will be slapped back. Of the western signatory powers the toughest nut to crack for Bibi and his Congress is likely the EU. The EU commission is very immune to media campaigns or threats of not being reelected.

    As per Reuters EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said on Friday in reaction to President Donald Trump’s decision not to certify the accord: “We cannot afford as the international community to dismantle a nuclear agreement that is working … This deal is not a bilateral agreement … The international community, and the European Union with it, has clearly indicated that the deal is, and will, continue to be in place.”

    The key power Bibi and his Congress has to get to make the EU change it’s stance is the EU’s economic powerhouse Germany. If Germany would fold, it may have enough influence to change the stance of the EU. However, the situation in Germany is that the government, all opposition parties and a big majoriry of the people are strong supporters of the deal. One may consider the stance of Merkel – which reflects her CDU party:

    Merkel reiterates Iran deal should be model for solving North Korea crisis

    Foreign minister Gabriel from the SPD party is even more explicit. As per German state run DW:

    “It’s imperative that Europe sticks together on this issue,” Gabriel told Germany’s RND newspaper group. “We also have to tell the Americans that their behavior on the Iran issue will drive us Europeans into a common position with Russia and China against the USA.”

    It may be the end of the close transatlantic partnership, NATO included.

    So, there is no way, Trump, Bibi or the US Congress can terminate the Iran deal. What Trump and Bibi’s Congress can do, is violating the Iran deal and international law by reneging on the US obligation to lift nuclear related sanctions. If these sanctions would only affect US individuals and companies, nobody would care much about it. It would mean, Iran would need to buy more Airbus planes instead of buying Airbus and Boeing planes, and that’s it.

    But what Trump and Bibi’s Congress could do again, would be to re-impose secondary nuclear-related sanctions, meaning giving foreign companies a binary choice of either doing business with the US or with Iran.

    That would be a clear US violation of international law and WTO rules, though the WTO has little teeth to defend it’s rules against US breaks. But as a huge trade power, the EU has some muscles it can flex when it comes to trade and sanctions. As per HuffPo:

    If the U.S. pulls out of the nuclear agreement ― known as the JCPOA ― and reapplies sanctions that target not only Iran, but other countries who do business with Iran, the European Union could take advantage of a statute dating back to the mid-1990s that would protect European companies from being penalized under the sanctions, EU ambassador to the United States David O’Sullivan said Monday.

    So, it would be completely nuts if Bibi’s Congress would slap nuclear-related sanctions on Iran, thereby breaking international law and likely starting a US-EU trade war, while the very same Congress could slap the same sanctions on Iran on a non-nuclear pretext legally.

    Anyway, as the US has already put in place a myriad of non-nuclear-related secondary sanctions against Iran, Iran has learned to live with them, by doing more business with Chinese and Russian companies who choose the Iranian over the US market. These secondary sanctions hurt Iran, but unlike UN security council sanctions, they don’t really strangle Iran.

    So, what Bibi and his Congress need to be successful in strangling Iran are UN security council sanctions on Iran, but there’s no way to get them. That Trump speech yesterday doesn’t help them, just the opposite. More people will suspect that when Trump and Bibi’s Congress slap non-nuclear-related sanctions on Iran they are doing this out of frustration that they can’t destroy the nuclear deal.

    And: Trump is very unpopular in Germany, and being associated with Trump does Bibi no good for his image in Germany.

    • Antidote
      October 14, 2017, 6:48 pm

      “The key power Bibi and his Congress has to get to make the EU change it’s stance is the EU’s economic powerhouse Germany. ”

      So tired of this misrepresentation of Germany as the powerhouse of Europe who calls the shots.

      Germany is the “powerhouse” of Europe primarily because it has the largest population of all European countries. Hence it gets more votes in the European parliament than less populous countries. That’s perfectly normal in any democratic system. Germany gets no more vote than any other member state in the European Commission (1 rep/vote) where foreign policy issues are decided by simple majority or unanimity, depending on the case.

      The voting structure is not influenced by economic clout. Germany did not want the Euro in the first place, but it was the price extracted by the French for agreeing to German reunification. Le Figaro called it “Versailles without the war”, and, contrary to popular belief, Germany has no influence on the EZB regarding the exchange rate.

      As the biggest economy, Germany also is the biggest net payer to the EU, a fact much resented by German voters who feel their financial contributions do not match their political influence /voting power. From their perspective, Germany carries far too little, rather than too much power. One reason for the recent electoral triumph of the AfD which started as an anti-EU party morphed into an anti-immigration party.

      The entire Fourth Reich hysteria is nothing but a manipulative guilt trip to coerce Germans to bail out dysfunctional polities and economies, tax evaders and xenophobes, like Greece or Poland.

      Immigration is generally seen as the answer to Germany’s low birth rates. However, they are just as low in Poland, the most ethnically homogenous country in Europe, and with a considerably lower population density than the Netherlands, Germany, or Britain. Poland’s biggest export is people, yet they are completely opposed to immigration, trying to fix the resulting economic problems by asking reparations from Germany for WW II. The Greeks already tried that one, and the Polish demand is even more outrageous.

      You are correct that Netanyahu has no chance with winning over the EU, much less Germany, for his anti-Iran plotting. And yes, associating with Trump is not going to help at all. Basically, the EU/US alliance is over. Most people don’t seem to realize that the basic idea of the EU was not, or not only, to ensure peace and prosperity in Europe. It was to counter US (or Anglo-American) influence over Europe. And we are getting there.

      As for German, and French, domination of Europe (due to population and economic output): It could only be terminated by making the largest country in Europe part of the EU. That would be Russia. And it should and probably would have been if the Americans, flanked by their vassal Kohl, had not betrayed and destroyed Gorbachev with their NATO expansion.

  6. Citizen
    October 14, 2017, 4:45 pm

    The Secretary of State is being interviewed tomorrow on prime time cable news TV. Will be interesting what he has to say? Trump talks about the existential danger of not only Iran but Hezbollah and Hamas–to an American public who mostly has no clue about those entities–to the average Joe & Jane, it just sounds like gibberish?

  7. JLewisDickerson
    October 14, 2017, 5:50 pm

    RE: “Trump’s decertification of the Iran deal is sad news of course, though there are some silver linings.” ~ Weiss

    [CUE MUZAK]
    It’s morning the crack of dawn in America,
    and President Trump is going to make us GR*R*REAT again. How?
    By eliminating what’s left of the estate tax (i.e., the part Reagan wasn’t able to get rid of),
    so that the 3,000 or so of America’s wealthiest families
    who have estates in excess of $11 million
    will no longer have to pay any estate tax (i.e., “death tax” per Frank Luntz’s playbook).
    which will mean these “moneyed interests” will have
    mo’ money, mo’ money, mo’ money!
    to use for buying our elections
    [JUMP CUT]
    Ditto for the businesses that will no longer be taxed at a 35% rate (minus deductions)
    thanks to Donald Trump’s reducing the maximum corporate rate to 20%

    P.S. President Reagan, as to that “magnificent house” behind you, do you have any idea who actually built such a fine place for our presidents? Coolies, as was the case with the railroads? No, I think they came later. Just wonderin’

    • JLewisDickerson
      October 14, 2017, 6:07 pm

      God Bless The USA | Donald Trump

      • Bumblebye
        October 14, 2017, 8:41 pm

        I have to say I prefer the Parody Project (fb and dotcom) offerings. The Tweeter and ‘Confounds the Science’ are the best so far.

    • JLewisDickerson
      October 14, 2017, 6:15 pm

      Reagan “Tuesday Team” ad 1984

  8. newsens
    October 14, 2017, 7:32 pm

    A picture worth a thousand words.

    http://i.imgur.com/90e2Bvr.jpg

  9. JWalters
    October 14, 2017, 7:45 pm

    How long will Judy Woodruff, Rachel Maddow, etc. be able to continue ignoring the crimes, atrocities, and insanity of the moral monster that is Israel? Are they being threatened with a loss of their paychecks? Or are they being threatened with “unfortunate” bodily harm to loved ones? Keep in mind that terrorism has been Israel’s modus operandi since its beginnings.

    “Terrorism: How the Israeli state was won” by Tom Suarez
    http://mondoweiss.net/2017/01/terrorism-israeli-state

    For the hidden political bribes and threats see “War Profiteers and the Roots of the War on Terror”

  10. US Citizen
    October 14, 2017, 8:53 pm

    Maintaining a straight face, Trump, with an AIPAC controlled government, will almost certainly start calling Iran “the primary state sponsor of terrorism”. This from a country, the US, bombing at least six nations.

    Iran has not invaded another nation in over 200 years. The U.S. has been at war for at least 220 of its 241 year history. Now what country is the primary state sponsor of terrorism again?

    Is it the one who is being threatened with ‘regime change’ and has not invaded another country in over 200 years? Or by the US which is now bombing six other countries

    Since logic and common sense tell us that it must be the one doing the bombing -the U.S.- we need to ask another question:why does the U.S. want to convince the world that Iran is exporting terrorism, when it itself is doing so and then turning around and asking – gee, why do Muslims hate us so much? Whatever did we do?

    The answer? The U.S. does not want any country in the Middle East to be powerful except apartheid Israel – all courtesy of israel and the israel lobby in Washington.

    Iran is a power broker in that part of the world, so the U.S. must reduce it to ruins, if it possibly can, as it did with Iraq. However, Iran is not Iraq: it is far bigger, more heavily populated, and more powerful than Iraq ever was.

    An invasion of Iran would be a disaster for the U.S., the Middle East and quite possibly, the entire world.

    The questions ‘journalists’ should be demanding answers to are:
    Israel is the only country in the Middle East that has nuclear weapons and has refused to sign the NNPT and consistently lies about their nuclear arsenal. Everyone knows it.

    When is Israel going to sign the NNPT which Iran has already done?
    When is Israel going to allow IAEA inspections which Iran has already done?

    If the US and Israel want Iranian nuclear transparency, then Israel better be just as transparent.

  11. JLewisDickerson
    October 14, 2017, 9:59 pm

    RE: “So it is clear as ever who is against the [Iran Nuclear] deal. Israel and its lobby. That’s all, folks. . . . Trump’s base of disaffected white voters in red states don’t care about Iran. The pro-Israel wing does. Trump’s “billionaire donors”– three rightwing Israel supporters [the troika of control freaks – J.L.D.]– care.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: Sheldon and Miriam Adelson invested very heavily (at least $15 million) in Donald Trump’s candidacy. Since Trump won the election, to the victor’s financial backers inevitably must go the spoils. First among the spoils is surely Shelly’s pride and joy in the form of Trump deciding to decertify the Iran Nuclear Deal. More mundane among spoils is the latest, showy, overly dramatic exit of the U.S. in the lastest fit of pique from U.N.E.S.C.O. (i.e., skipping out with an arrearage of a cool $500 million). It should not come as a surprise to anyone familiar with the Trump family tastes as typified by their (“goin’ on up; goin’ on up, to the . . .”) deeee-luxe über-gilded apartment in the sky, that the U.S. doesn’t feel comfortable being associated with a cultural agency (or anything else having to do with “culture”). A gun club is much more our style, with a lot of hot babes serving as hostesses wearing their finest Daisy Dukes and and a Boss Hog or two chain smoking cheap cigars for comic relief.

    Notwithstanding the possibility or even likelihood that the Adelsons persuaded Trump to decertify the Iran Nuclear Agreement, I would not want to leave MBS and the Saudi Royals off the list of the usual suspects who might have somehow played at least a supporting role in convincing Trump to decertify the Iran Nuclear Deal.

    It’s quite possible that the Saudis worked their magic on Trump during his stay in Riyadh by giving him the most impressive desk, including him in the sword dance or by giving him some extra time with the glowing orb. Whatever the case, perhaps Trump fell so head over heels for MBS that he just couldn’t resist giving him an advance copy of the letter he will be sending to Congress to decertify the Iran Nuclear Deal.

    Pray tell, when in the thrall of a budding bromance, what else might the President of the U.S. make as an offering (to a Crown Prince who has virtually everything) that would so tickle the fancy of the Crown Prince?

    As to Netanyahu’s obligatory snarkiness in regards to UNESCO, I seriously doubt that he and the missus would know the difference between the The Theatre of the Absurd (French: théâtre de l’absurde) and the Oberammergau Passion Play. In any case, Netanyahu’s accusing UNESCO of distorting history rather than preserving it is almost as lame as Netanyahu’s “fix it, or nix it” campaign in regards to the Iran Nuclear Deal. Far to cute for serious matters of life and death. Surely Frank Luntz can do better than that!

    I might add that the coordinated PR /hasbara campaigns during the last few days by Israel and the U.S. on both UNESCO and the Iran Nuclear Deal are very reminiscent of the U.S. and apartheid South Africa campaigns back during Reagan’s constructive engagement of the 80s.
    Of course, that does not conclusively prove that Israel today is just like apartheid South Africa used to be, but if the shoe fits . . .

    • Misterioso
      October 16, 2017, 10:58 am

      https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.817114?utm_content=%2Fus-news%2F1.817114&utm_medium=email&utm_source=smartfocus&utm_campaign=newsletter-breaking-news

      “EU’s Mogherini: Trump Can’t Unilaterally Cancel Iran Nuclear Deal”

      “France, Britain and Germany warned U.S. against re-imposing sanctions. Iran is under the world’s ‘most robust nuclear verification regime,’ says UN atomic watchdog.”
      Reuters. Oct 13, 2017 – Haaretz

      EXCERPTS:
      “The United States cannot unilaterally cancel the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said on Friday in reaction to President Donald Trump’s decision not to certify the accord. 

      “‘We cannot afford as the international community to dismantle a nuclear agreement that is working,’ said Mogherini, who chaired the final stages of the landmark talks. 
      “‘This deal is not a bilateral agreement …The international community, and the European Union with it, has clearly indicated that the deal is, and will, continue to be in place,’ Mogherini told reporters.

      “Mogherini said she spoke to U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson immediately after Trump’s speech on Friday. 

      “French President Emmanuel Macron assured Iranian President Hassan Rouhani of France’s commitment to the nuclear deal, Macron’s office said. 

      “Macron told Rouhani that the U.S. decision not to certify the agreement would not end it and that France and its European partners would keep carrying out their commitments in regard to the deal, a statement said.

      “The chief of the UN atomic watchdog reiterated on Friday that Iran was under the world’s ‘most robust nuclear verification regime’ after Trump struck a blow against a 2015 Iran nuclear deal, in defiance of other world powers. 

      “‘The nuclear-related commitments undertaken by Iran under the JCPOA are being implemented,'” Yukiya Amano, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency said.”

    • yonah fredman
      October 15, 2017, 2:25 pm

      Watching Giraldi is “illuminating”. Before getting into it, I have to note my visceral reaction of negativity.

      Clearly Israel has interests and clearly in the case of Iran 2017, it seems that political financial contributions of Israel supporters has slanted trump’s position to this point.

      I do not consider Iran innocent. The Iranian revolution was a coercive affair, the Iranian role in the Buenos Aires anti Jewish bombing and the ahmedijinad years with the photo of Khomeini on the wall. No, these are not proofs regarding what would be the next logical military steps in the eyes of the sunni regimes, but clearly it is not paranoia for sunni regimes or Israel to view Iran’s regime as a threat. This does not imply endorsement of trump’s act, but these are my thoughts after the initial visceral reaction to giraldi and interviewer.

      • Brewer
        October 15, 2017, 3:47 pm

        ” the Iranian role in the Buenos Aires anti Jewish bombing”
        Time this one was put to bed. The whole Hezbollah/Iran thing was blown out of the water years ago.
        “The central piece of evidence cited in Nisman’s original 900-page arrest warrant against seven senior Iranian leaders is an alleged Aug. 14, 1993 meeting of top Iranian leaders, including both Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and then president Hashemi Rafsanjani, at which Nisman claims the official decision was made to go ahead with the planning of the bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA).

        But the document, recently available in English for the first time, shows that his only sources for the claim were representatives of the MEK or People’s Mujahideen of Iran. The MEK has an unsavoury history of terrorist bombings against civilian targets in Iran, as well as of serving as an Iraq-based mercenary army for Saddam Hussein’s forces during the Iran-Iraq War.”
        http://lobelog.com/indictment-of-iran-for-94-terror-bombing-relied-on-mek/

        “In an interview last May James Cheek, Clinton’s Ambassador to Argentina at the time of the bombing, told me, “To my knowledge, there was never any real evidence [of Iranian responsibility]. They never came up with anything.” The hottest lead in the case, he recalled, was an Iranian defector named Manoucher Moatamer, who “supposedly had all this information.” But Moatamer turned out to be only a dissatisfied low-ranking official without the knowledge of government decision-making that he had claimed. “We finally decided that he wasn’t credible,” Cheek recalled. Ron Goddard, then deputy chief of the US Mission in Buenos Aires, confirmed Cheek’s account. He recalled that investigators found nothing linking Iran to the bombing. “The whole Iran thing seemed kind of flimsy,” Goddard said. ”
        https://www.thenation.com/article/bushs-iranargentina-terror-frame/

        “A nine-member Council of Magistrates found Juan Jose Galeano guilty of ethical and legal violations, particularly of paying a defendant in the case $400,000.

        That defendant was expected to implicate several Argentine police officers accused of being the “local connection” in a bombing plot with alleged links to Iran and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah militia. Instead, the case was thrown out last September and all the defendants were freed.”
        http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2005-08-04/news/0508040220_1_juan-jose-galeano-embassy-bombing-embassy-attack

        Lots more if you need it.

      • Mooser
        October 15, 2017, 3:48 pm

        ” but these are my thoughts after the initial visceral reaction”

        Thank you for sharing them with us. Sorry about giving you the vapors.

      • Misterioso
        October 16, 2017, 10:46 am

        http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JA25Ak02.html
        “Crying (Iranian) wolf in Argentina
        By Gareth Porter, Asia Times Online, Jan. 25, 2008.
        EXCERPTS:
        “WASHINGTON – The Iranian defector who was the source of Argentina’s allegation that Iranian officials began planning the July 18, 1994, terror bombing of a Jewish community center at a meeting nearly a year earlier had been dismissed as unreliable by US officials, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)agent who led the US team assisting the investigation in 1997-98.
        “The FBI agent, James Bernazzani, also says Argentine investigators had no real leads on an Iranian link to the bombing when his team was in Argentina. Three top officials in the US Embassy in Buenos Aires at the time – including ambassador James Cheek – have confirmed the absence of evidence linking Iran to the bombing, which killed 85 people and wounded another 300.”
        “The investigation found no evidence, however, to link either Hezbollah or Iran to the bombing, according to Goddard [US deputy chief of mission, in Buenos Aires until late 1997]. ‘The whole Iran thing seemed kind of flimsy,’ he said.”

        Jerusalem Post, 1 July 2013
        “Ex-Argentina Jewish gov’t official to be probed in bombing”
        EXCERPT:
        “The Jewish ex-interior minister of Argentina will be investigated for his ties to the AMIA Jewish center bombing.
        “The Buenos Aires Federal Appeals Court last week ordered the probe of Carlos Vladimir Corach in connection with an illegal payment of $400,000 to Carlos Telleldin, an auto mechanic who was among those charged in the 1994 attack that left 85 dead and hundreds wounded.”

      • Annie Robbins
        October 16, 2017, 2:41 pm

        Carlos Vladimir Corach in connection with an illegal payment of $400,000 to Carlos Telleldin

        was that the payment caught on video? i’ve spent a great deal of time over the years googling the bombing in the argentine press. lots of twists and turns. the other day i ran into an article about the murdered prosecutor (supposedly suicide)– apparently the US embassy kept steering him towards iran (according to the wiki leaks doc) everytime his investigation led him to argentine police perps and officials and the “syrian connection”.

      • Brewer
        October 16, 2017, 2:53 pm

        Annie.
        I did a piece years ago. I think the links are still operating:
        http://brewerstroupe.blogspot.co.nz/2009/08/aima-bombing.html
        If I get time today I will update it.

      • Annie Robbins
        October 16, 2017, 3:25 pm

        oh thank you brewer. i will definitely check it out. and here is the link i was looking at the other day (google translated)

        https://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/1-264325-2015-01-20.html

        The link with the United States Embassy is marked by the cables of US diplomacy revealed by Wikileaks ….. The cables describe how Nisman presented his draft measures to the embassy; projects that officials accepted or rejected. The cables also mention several reports of the embassy in 2008, when the prosecutor came to apologize up to three times because he did not anticipate about the prosecutions he had ordered for former president Carlos Menem, former federal judge Juan José Galeano, the former chief of SIDE Hugo Anzorreguy, former commissar Jorge “Fino” Palacios and the then head of the DAIA, Rubén Beraja. “The officers of our Legal Office have advised the prosecutor Alberto Nisman to focus on the perpetrators of the bombing and not on those who deflected the investigation,” a May 22, 2008 cable said. “Nisman again apologized (for not having informed the embassy beforehand of his decision) and offered to sit down with the ambassador (then Earl Anthony Wayne) to discuss the next steps. “” Details of the criminal charges against Menem and the other suspects were a surprise …) until now had an excellent and fluid relationship with Nisman, “the embassy said. Over the years, the prosecutor did nothing more than leave traces of that kind of alignment. There are dozens of reports of such visits in the cable collection of the American embassy in Buenos Aires. From the embassy they did not agree with the Syrian track, nor with the investigations of the local connection: they only wanted that it did not move away from the investigation on the Iranians and that did not give elements that could question that line. On February 27, 2011, the Americans said: “You should not target the Syrian track or the local connection. Following such clues could weaken the international case against the Iranian defendants. ”

        Nisman himself acknowledged several times how his relationship with Stiuso intervened in that plot.

        O’Donnell said that Nisman went to see him after the publication of his book to talk about “Jaime”. “He tells me that the work is very good, but that all the information he receives is given by Stiuso. He also recognized it elsewhere. He told me that all the information was Stiuso because he was the one who had contact with the secret services of the United States and Israel, “the CIA and the Mossad. He added: “He said that Stiuso brought him the information in raw and he saw what he could corroborate to turn it into evidence.” And, he said, Stiuso was a very powerful agent.

        Carlos Vladimir Corach was the interior minister of Argentina under the carlos menem administration — and very close to menem.

        and about menem and that syrian track, this 2015 article is rather interesting http://www.mendozapost.com/nota/16725-amia-que-es-lo-que-sabe-menem-y-jamas-conto/

        In the last hours, Carlos Menem surprised his own and others by assuring that, if he declares what he knows about the attack on the AMIA, it will affect the interests of the Argentine State and could “provoke the breaking of peaceful coexistence with other nations.”

        He did so in the context of the trial he has on the bench, along with other ex-officials of his own government, of course covering up the explosion that occurred on July 18, 1994.

        In that context, after his sayings, the questions arise as a cataract of doubts: What does Menem know that he has not yet declared? How could that truth affect state interests? What did it mean that peaceful coexistence with other nations could be broken? Why did you never talk about it before?

        First, a digression: what the former president wants to reveal is more explosive than anyone could ever imagine, since he will expose an international pact of impunity to ensure that the true culprits of the AMIA bombing never purge guilt.

        Starting with the last question: Why did not Menem speak before? Basically for fear of reprisals and for having to admit that he appears himself involved – and enchastrado – by the cover-up plot that will be explained later.

        The change of the former president is not entirely novel, but part of a gradual transition that has been showing for some years and that had as a kick-start the change of discourse regarding the death of his son: although for years he insisted on saying that it was treated of an accident, in recent times admitted with insistence that in fact it was an attack, committed in the framework of a sort of message towards his person.

        It is no coincidence the mention: part of what Menem will concatenate the attacks in Buenos Aires with that fact, which cost the life of his own offspring.

        What will the former President of the Nation say? That Arab interests claimed revenge against him for not having complied with a series of agreements endorsed in Damascus in 1988, with then Syrian President Haffez Al Assad.

        In exchange for nearly $ 8 million for the presidential campaign, Menem assured his counterpart that he would sell him a nuclear reactor and help launder Syrian drug money, one of the country’s main sources of income .

        This led to the first of the attacks, which caused the Israeli Embassy to explode on March 17, 1992. The message was clear and its executioner too: in those days, Monzer Al Kassar, a minister without a Syria. The data reached the then Minister of the Interior, José Luis Manzano, but he decided to hide it at the request of Menem.

        On July 18, 1994, the second attack occurred, this time to the Israeli mutual AMIA. Then Menem said a revealing phrase, “This they did to me.” He knew what he was talking about: he immediately demanded that no Syrian citizen be investigated.

        In fact, the exmandatario believed that they would attack one of their children. So, as soon as he heard about the explosion at AMIA, he called Zulemita Menem to ask if he was okay.

        Then came the worst: the death of Carlos Menem Junior, which occurred on March 15, 1995. The message was clear and had been anticipated a month earlier by an intelligence agent who was in prison, Mario Aguilar Rizzi. The then inmate sent a certified letter – number 8804 – to the Interior Minister Carlos Corach warning that they would kill Menem’s son while flying in his helicopter.

        “It is linked to the AMIA issue,” the spy said laconically. Notwithstanding the warning, Menem would say in those days, over and over, that what had happened to Carlitos had been a “lamentable accident.”

        At the same time, Zulema Yoma would start a solitary crusade, claiming that her son had been killed. Those who treated her “crazy” in those days, did not notice in a phrase that used to pronounce and that has become crucial to 20 years of that happened: “The death of Carlitos was the third attack.”

        So … if he knew that his son’s death had not been a fortuitous event, why did Menem publicly decide that it was a “mere accident”? For many reasons, but mainly two: as it was said, in the plot appears himself involved and, if he said the truth, he would blame himself. On the other hand, the former president feared that if he spoke, they would do something to Zulemita.

        An ex-minister of Menem who knew how to enjoy the confidence of Menem as few, he explained to this chronicler as follows: “Carlos shamed the Syrians, the Syrians were charged and left handy. If Carlos raised the bet, he was again in debt and could kill Zulemita. This is how the Mafia operates. ”

        That said, the question arises: How can this truth affect state interests? First, there was a clear cover-up on the part of the State so that the true culprits of the AMIA bombing were not reached. Secondly, because there were incredible complicities when it came to executing and covering up the same fact.

        In this chain of responsibilities are important political figures, intelligence agents, police officers and even reputed judicial officials. If we add that there was a certain pressure from the United States and Israel not to investigate the so-called “Syrian track”, the scandal reaches superlative levels.

        That is the context in which Menem’s phrase must be understood when he said that “peaceful coexistence with other nations could be broken.” What would the restless Syrians say if this truth were revealed? Could anyone believe that they would remain with their arms folded?

        The plot is much more chilling than what is here and, as can be seen, surpasses the best books of fiction….

        (more at the link)

        i can’t verify the reliability of these sources.

      • Brewer
        October 16, 2017, 5:07 pm

        AMIA Argentina attack: Mystery behind public prosecutor Nisman’s death
        https://www.rt.com/op-edge/226263-argentina-attack-prosecutor-death-amia/
        Why Alberto Nisman Is No Hero for Argentina — or the Jews
        http://forward.com/news/216076/why-alberto-nisman-is-no-hero-for-argentina-or-t/
        The Nisman Murder and the AMIA Bombing: A Tangled Thread
        http://lobelog.com/the-nisman-murder-and-the-amia-bombing-a-tangled-thread/

      • Annie Robbins
        October 17, 2017, 2:06 pm

        thanks for the links brewer

  12. pabelmont
    October 15, 2017, 1:18 pm

    Is it “nuts” to say that Iran is planning to (or will) take over the Europe (or just the Middle East)?
    Dunno. But whatever its nutritional content, it seems it uis not antisemitic to say it.

    But when Israel Shamir (in his delightfully argumentative book “Pardes”) tells us at great, even exhaustive, length that Yisroel (the amalgamated Jewish people marching under the single flag of Zionism) are taking over the world (and new- Judaism a/k/a Zionism is defeating Christianity (Holocaust replacing Crucifixion, Creation of Israel replacing resurrection) (hmm, did I get my theology right?), I have no doubt he is (has been) called an antisemite.

  13. JLewisDickerson
    October 15, 2017, 5:24 pm

    RE: “Trump’s speech on Iran deal is an orgy for Israel and its US friends”

    PHIL: Obviously this isn’t a big deal, but you have that screen capture at the top showing Netanyahu in speech mode (note hand/fist gestures), and then right above Netanyahu’s head is the word “orgy”. Definitely NOT a good combination for me!
    ME: Image of Netanyahu + the word “orgy” = a really sick phobia-like feeling, bordering on a panic attack with severe breathing difficulties, acute chest discomfort/pain that spreads to the left arm, dizzyness/lightheadedness, profuse sweating, etc.

    I hope this doesn’t mean I’m going to start having “problems in the bedroom” too now. Not to mention that when I finally got up the courage some months ago to ask my internist whether my heart was “healthy enough for sex” just like the ads suggest, he gave me a really ugly look, and said quite tersely that he was happily married with two children. So I don’t even have a prescription for Viagra!

  14. JLewisDickerson
    October 15, 2017, 6:07 pm

    RE: “Fix it or nix it” ~ Netanyahu’s cutesy tag line

    MY COMMENT: Frank Luntz should be ashamed of himself, if he couldn’t come up with something better than “fix it or nix it”. It’s downright embarrassing. The first time I saw it I thought it was a joke, and asked if perhaps a “nip and tuck” would do the trick (i.e., cure whatever flaws the agreement contained per Netanyahu). It is really difficult to take “fix it or nix it” any more seriously than I would take a dentist who advertised that he liked to “drill ’em and fill ’em”! Isn’t that a knee-slapper! Perhaps I missed my calling (calling as in Mad Men).

  15. James Canning
    October 16, 2017, 6:04 pm

    Bravo. Hamas and Hezbollah are not “enemies” of the US. Is Andrea Mitchell trying to deceive her viewers, so they fail to detect the role of the Israel lobby in this matter? Should one even doubt this for a moment?

  16. shaun patrick
    October 16, 2017, 10:43 pm

    The USA shoots down civilian Iranian aircraft flight 655 and kills all 274 on board then then has to be dragged kicking and screaming to pay compensation, Israel keeps 4 million plus Palestinians under brutal occupation and slaughters 500 plus children in Gaza and Iran’s the terrorist!! The Israeli occupation has spawned more radical terrorists both Israeli and Muslim than any other country on earth. In 2013 Sheldon Adelson when speaking in Tel Aviv said drop nukes on northern Iran and if they don’t get the message then drop them on Tehran. The irony is Iran is a democracy unlike Israel who wont allow occupied Palestinians the vote and denies them human rights. Its no wonder the middle east is so screwed up.

Leave a Reply