Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Islamic Taqiyyah In the Iran Deal

Islamic Taqiyyah In the Iran Deal

By de Andréa, Opinion Editorialist
Published July 15, 2015

'SHEER INSANITY' says Iran Expert

Leading state sponsor of terror is rewarded with the release of billions of dollars and is
now free of global financial sanctions,

Criticism of Americas Muslim President’s nuclear agreement with Iran has been fast and furious.
“I don’t trust Obama on this anymore than I trusted him on “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” radio talk-show host Laura Ingraham said.  “Elections have consequences—from our health-care system, to the definition of ‘marriage,’ to our military strength, to now our national security, Barack Obama has, indeed, ‘fundamentally transformed’ America.” She added.
“This is sheer insanity,” Iran expert Clare Lopez said.  “This agreement legitimizes Iran’s overt nuclear weapons program and provides both cover and funding for its clandestine nuclear weapons program, with extra financial bonuses for its global terrorist network,” said the vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security Policy.
In a dawn speech from the White House on Tuesday, Obama proclaimed, “[W]e have stopped the spread of nuclear weapons in this region,” but a parade of ferocious critics claimed just the opposite.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu feared the worst, saying, “From the initial reports we can already conclude that this agreement is an historic mistake for the world.”  He predicted, “Iran is going to receive a sure path to nuclear weapons.”
“Iran will get a jackpot, a cash bonanza of hundreds of billions of dollars, which will enable it to continue to pursue its aggression and terror in the region and in the world,” said the prime minister.  “One cannot prevent an agreement when the negotiators are willing to make more and more concessions to those who, even during the talks, keep chanting: ‘Death to America,’” Netanyahu concluded.
By contrast, Obama said he hoped the deal would cause Iran to choose a different path, one of tolerance, of peaceful resolution to conflict.” He also predicted a greater chance of war in the Mideast if Congress rejects the deal.  I must say this is blatant Islamic TAQIYYAH nonsense.  “…choose a different path, one of tolerance, of peaceful resolution to conflict.” Islamic Muslim Jihad hasn’t chosen a different path in more than 1400 years. Jihad and the destruction of anything that is non-Muslim is at the very core of Islam.  They will never, never, CHANGE. The only one who will change is us.
Former Israeli military spokeswoman Miri Regev said, instead, it gave Iran a “license to kill.”
Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely called it “a historic surrender by the West to the axis of evil headed by Iran.”
Hillary Clinton endorsed the deal “full-throated,” according to Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va...
The presidential candidate and former secretary of state, met Tuesday morning behind closed doors with Democrats, after which Rep. Steve Israel, D- N.Y., said she blamed President George W. Bush for Iran’s nuclear proliferation.
 “A possible death sentence for Israel” that will “make everything worse” is how Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., described the deal on MSNBC.  ‘This is most dangerous, irresponsible step I’ve ever seen in the history of watching the Mideast. With this deal, you’ve ensured that the Arabs will go nuclear. You have put Israel in the worst possible box. This will be a death sentence over time for Israel if they don’t push back. You put our nation at risk.”
“Barack Obama and John Kerry have been dangerously naive about the Mideast in general. They’ve taken it to a new level and any senator who votes for this is voting for a nuclear arms race in the Mideast,” he said in reference to the Corker bill, which requires a vote by two-thirds of Congress to reject the deal.
Congress now has 60 days to review the deal and to try to stop it with legislation.
However, Obama, promised to veto any attempt by Congress to stop the deal, saying, “I am confident that this deal will meet the national security interests of the United States and our allies.”
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said the deal will secure Iran’s pathway to a bomb, and that, “This deal will guarantee Iran the capability to carry out its clear intent.”  Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said, “I don’t know what information the Obama administration possesses that indicates this deal will actually prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon or will cause the mullahs to reduce their support for worldwide terrorism, but it sure isn’t the same intelligence we’re seeing in the Intelligence Committee.”
Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security and a member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, said, “This Iran deal gives (Iranian Supreme Leader) Ayatollah Khamenei exactly what he wants: billions of dollars in sanctions relief, validation of the Iranian nuclear program, and the ability to stymie inspections.”
“It even lifts sanctions against Quds Force “This act of appeasement by the Obama Administration now legitimizes both Iran’s path to nuclear weapons and the terrorist regime itself. It endangers the national security interests of the U.S., Israel, and allies across the word,” said former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton.
“Not only can Iran continue to pursue its 30-plus year objective of pursuing deliverable nuclear weapons, but the regime, the leading state sponsor of terror for over 35 years, is also free of global financial sanctions. Ultimately, we will see that Obama has capitulated to Iran’s demands, and this agreement is simply a pit stop between one set of negotiations and the other,” he added.
Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C. said, “The nuclear agreement is a historic victory — for Iran. For the last 18 months the Obama Administration made concession after concession to the rogue regime in Tehran, while taking the most basic demands off the table to try to secure a deal. I warned when the framework agreement was released that it relied on blind faith in a notoriously dishonest regime.”
He added, “The fact that the President came out today and threatened to veto any legislation that could potentially block the deal’s implementation is particularly concerning. If the deal is in fact strong, why is the President worried that Congress may reject it? Could it be the same reason why the Iranian regime is celebrating their victory? This historic deal requires strict scrutiny by Congress and I will not support any deal that puts the safety and security of the American people at risk.”
The deal is supposed to delay the amount of time required for Iran to assemble a nuclear weapon from a few months to a year, which the West hopes would give them enough time to stop Iran from using such a device.
But many fear the agreement will just give Iran the cover it needs to complete its work in secrecy, and that the U.S had already conceded far too much to the Islamic Republic.
Critics say the reason Iran has refused to take yes for an answer is that the Obama administration had conceded on virtually every key demand, so the Iranians just kept demanding more.
Before the deal was announced, the U.S. reportedly had already made major concessions on these items:
·        Inspections
·        Uranium
·        Plutonium
·        Sanctions
·        Weaponization
·        Missile program
·        Terror
·        Hostages
·        Israel
As of Monday, the only reported sticking points to reaching a deal:
·        Arms embargo
·        Terminology

When President Obama announced in April that a framework deal had been reached, he said Iran had agreed to “the most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history.” Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said the deal would permit “anytime, anywhere inspections of any and every Iranian facility.’
Iran immediately denied that was true. It also declared military facilities and “non-declared” nuclear sites as off limits to inspectors.
In response, the administration reportedly proposed something called “managed access” instead of “anywhere, anytime” access.
The U.S. also has reportedly dropped demands to inspect non-declared nuclear sites and military facilities.
But even that was too much for Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, who rejected the terms as insufficient.
Nonetheless, the U.S. is reportedly now willing to let International Atomic Energy Agency, or IEAE, limit itself to token inspections of just a few nuclear sites and to monitor suspected sites with intelligence means, a method that proved insufficient in preventing North Korea from obtaining nuclear weapons.

The U.S. has gone from a position of refusing to allow Iran to enrich any uranium to allowing it enrich some, and then, most recently allowing Iran to operate 6,000 uranium centrifuges.

Obama admitted that “it would not prevent Iran from acquiring enough enriched uranium to build bombs, but merely slow it down for a decade, or so.”  I have to interject something right here again.  We have A Muslim trained president who has supported the Islamic Jihad from day one of his regime. And this admission of Obama’s to just “slow down Iran’s nuclear program for a decade or so” is right out of the Islamic playbook called the Hadith. It is reminiscent of the treaty that the so-called prophet Mohammad made with the Meccan’s not to attack them for a period of 10 years, three years latter Mohammad attacked and defeated the City State of Mecca.  The Hadith is the Jihadists Hand Book.  
Iran reportedly also will not have to surrender its current stockpile of uranium.
Iran will keep all of its nuclear infrastructure, and the U.S. has apparently dropped its long-standing demand that Iran stop construction of the Arak heavy-water reactor, which will be able to produce plutonium.

The U.S. had initially demanded that Iran comply with the terms of any deal before economic sanctions would be lifted, but seems to have backtracked on that. Iran has demanded all sanctions be lifted upon the signing of a deal.
The Obama administration has reportedly agreed to a $150-billion “signing bonus,” frozen Iranian money that would be freed up and given to Iran upon the signing of a deal.
Critics say Iran would immediately use that money to speed up its nuclear program and financing of terrorism.
Secretary of State John Kerry indicated on April 16 the West would drop demands that Iran reveal what work it has already done on its efforts to develop nuclear weapons.
He said that was because “we are not fixated on Iran specifically accounting for what they did at one point in time or another. We know what they did,” and that, “We have absolute knowledge with respect to the certain military activities they were engaged in.”
Critics point to a “poor track record of U.S. intelligence in monitoring and detecting WMD programs in Iraq, Iran, North Korea and other states.”

Missile program
Rolling back Iran’s efforts to develop an intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of hitting the United States is not even on the table. The U.S. has settled on trying to keep in place an embargo on missile technology to Iran.
Stopping or reducing Iran’s role as the world’s leading state sponsor of terror is also not on the table.
Also not under discussion, the release of four American hostages held by Iran: Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian; Iranian-American Christian pastor Saeed Abedini; former U.S. Marine Amir Hekmati; and former FBI agent Robert Levinson. Rezaian, Abedini and Hekmati have been charged with espionage.
Ending Iran’s persistent threats to destroy Israel is also not on the table.
Now that the U.S. reportedly has agreed to all of Iran’s key demands, Iran is apparently holding out for more. Resolution of two more demands may be the only things holding up a deal.
Arms embargo
Iran wants an immediate lifting of a 2006 U.N. arms embargo. Not only would that allow Russia and China to sell sophisticated weapons to Iran, it would allow Iran to export with impunity to its terrorist clients such as Hezbollah and Hamas.
Iran also wants the embargo on missile technology lifted.
Iran doesn’t want any deal to refer to its nuclear program as “illegal.”
Lopez was scathing in her appraisal of reported progress toward a deal.
“So now, some bright young staffer over there has no doubt earned his annual bonus by proposing that Iran should demand the lifting of all U.N. arms embargoes – which would mean that Iran henceforth could do openly and with the full approval of the international community behind it what previously, at least nominally, was banned: Import the most modern weaponry available on the market today for the purpose of export to its terrorist proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban and all its Iraqi Shiite terror militias. Think of what this might mean for the genocidal Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, or the U.S. Navy inside the Persian Gulf, or the Hezbollah network operating all over the Western Hemisphere.”
She continued, “And while they were at it, the Iranians decided they didn’t much like the tone we’ve been using to describe their prior illicit nuclear weapons work. So, they decided to demand we clean up that language so that it doesn’t sound so ‘illicit’ anymore. In other words, all prior violations of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (to which Iran was, is, and remains a signatory) would simply be air-brushed out of the picture.
THE BOTTOM LINE: Whether the Iranians will change their ways in the next ten years and voluntarily disband their nuclear weapon ambitions is the whole bases for this deal.  In More than 1400 years Muslims have been guided by the Quran and the Hadith to commit violent Jihad on the world. Do you really think they are going to give that up voluntarily because they are really a peaceful Nation?  

Thanks for listening – de Andréa

Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list.  It may be the only chance for your friends to hear the truth.

No comments: