IAEA Cannot Inspect Iran’s Military Sites (Rev 16)

National view: A fatal flaw exists in Iran nuclear deal


A sunset clause?
The news from the nuclear talks with Iran already was troubling. Iran was being granted the “right to enrich.” It would be allowed to retain and spin thousands of centrifuges. It could continue construction of the Arak plutonium reactor. Yet so thoroughly was Iran stonewalling International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors that on Feb. 19 the IAEA reported its concern “about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed . . .development of a nuclear payload for a missile.”
Bad enough. Then it got worse: News leaked Monday of the elements of a “sunset clause.” President Obama had accepted the Iranian demand that any restrictions on its program be time-limited. After which, the mullahs can crank up their nuclear program at will and produce as much enriched uranium as they want.
Sanctions lifted. Restrictions gone. Nuclear development legitimized. Iran would re-enter the international community, as Obama suggested in an interview in December, as “a very successful regional power.” A few years — probably around 10 — of good behavior and Iran would be home free.
The agreement thus would provide a predictable path to an Iranian bomb. Indeed, a flourishing path, with trade resumed, oil pumping and foreign investment pouring into a restored economy.
Why is Iran building them? You don’t build ICBMs to deliver sticks of dynamite. Their only purpose is to carry nuclear warheads. Nor does Iran need an ICBM to hit Riyadh or Tel Aviv. Intercontinental missiles are for reaching, well, other continents. North America, for example.
Such an agreement also means the end of nonproliferation. When a rogue state defies the world, continues illegal enrichment and then gets the world to bless an eventual unrestricted industrial-level enrichment program, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is dead. And regional hyperproliferation becomes inevitable as Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others seek shelter in going nuclear themselves.
Wasn’t Obama’s great international cause a nuclear-free world? Within months of his swearing-in, he went to Prague to so declare. He then led a 50-party Nuclear Security Summit, one of whose proclaimed achievements was having Canada give up some enriched uranium.
Having disarmed the Canadian threat, Obama turned to Iran. The deal now on offer to the ayatollah would confer legitimacy on the nuclearization of the most rogue of rogue regimes: radically anti-American, deeply jihadist, purveyor of terrorism from Argentina to Bulgaria, puppeteer of a Syrian regime that specializes in dropping barrel bombs on civilians. In fact, the Iranian regime just last week, at the apex of these nuclear talks, staged a spectacular attack on a replica U.S. carrier near the Strait of Hormuz.
Well, say the administration apologists, what’s your alternative? Do you want war?
It’s Obama’s usual, subtle false-choice maneuver: It’s either appeasement or war.
There is a third choice. If you are not stopping Iran’s program, don’t give away the store. Keep the pressure, keep the sanctions. Indeed, increase them. After all, previous sanctions brought Iran to its knees and to the negotiating table in the first place. And that was before the collapse of oil prices, which would now vastly magnify the economic effect of heightened sanctions.
Congress is proposing precisely that. Combined with cheap oil, it could so destabilize the Iranian economy as to threaten the clerical regime. That’s the opening. Then offer to renew negotiations for sanctions relief but from a very different starting point — no enrichment. Or, if you like, with a few token centrifuges for face-saving purposes.
And no sunset.
That’s the carrot. As for the stick, make it quietly known that the United States will not stand in the way of any threatened nation that takes things into its own hands. We leave the regional threat to the regional powers, say, Israeli bombers overflying Saudi Arabia.
Consider where we began: six U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding an end to Iranian enrichment. Consider what we are now offering: an interim arrangement ending with a sunset clause that allows the mullahs a robust, industrial-strength, internationally sanctioned nuclear program.
Such a deal makes the Cuba normalization look good and the Ukrainian cease-fires positively brilliant. We are on the cusp of an epic capitulation. History will not be kind.
Charles Krauthammer is a columnist for the Washington Post Writers Group. He can be reached at letters@charleskrauthammer.com.

Why Nuclear War Is Inevitable (Rev 15:2)

Terrorist attack in India may lead to nuclear war: US experts

download (1)
The US Senate and the House of Representatives held a series of hearings this week to consider the Obama administration’s budget proposals for 2016.
While debating the US State Department’s proposals for foreign aid, lawmakers invited senior US officials — including Secretary of State John Kerry — and think-tank experts to explain the administration’s foreign policy.
“South Asia is the most likely place nuclear weapons could be detonated in the foreseeable future. This risk derives from the unusual dynamic of the India-Pakistan competition,” said Perkovich, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Tellis of the same institute urged the United States to use its influence to preventing a terrorist attack.
“Other than this, there is little that the United States can do to preserve deterrence stability between two asymmetrically-sized states where the gap in power promises to become even wider tomorrow than it is today,” he said.

Babylon the Great: NOT the Land of the Free (Ezekiel 17)

Americas Corporate press get humiliated in world ranking; drops to 49th in free press status

American Hypocrisy

Reporters without Borders (ROWB) released their 2015 World Press Freedom Index report, and the United States fell to 49th out of 180, down from 32nd in from just two years ago.

According to RWOB,

“In the United States, 2014 was marked by judicial harassment of New York Times investigative reporter James Risen in connection with the trial of Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer charged under the Espionage Act with giving him classified information. US journalists are still not protected by a federal shield law that would guarantee their right to not name their sources or reveal other confidential information about their work. Meanwhile, at least 15 journalists were arbitrarily arrested during clashes between police and demonstrators protesting against black teenager Michael Brown’s fatal shooting by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri.”

The US ranked behind all of the Scandinavian countries, much of western Europe, and countries you might not expect like the Czech Republic, Ghana, and Niger.

The top-ranked country for the fifth year in a row was Finland, who had an abuses score — which “reflects the intensity of the violence and harassment to which journalists and other news-information providers were subjected during the year — of zero. For comparison, America’s abuses score was 31.78.

Rounding out the top ten were, in order, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, New Zealand, Austria, Canada, Jamaica, and Estonia.

The bottom five on the list were China, Syria, Turkmenistan, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Eritrea, about which RWOB said was “deservedly last” for its systematic violations of the freedom of the press.

“It is Africa’s biggest prison for journalists, with at least 16 currently detained – some of them held incommunicado for years. In 2014 alone, Reporters Without Borders supported about 30 requests for international protection filed by Eritrean journalists who had fled their country. President Afeworki, who is on the [RWOB] list of ‘Predators of Press Freedom,’ does not envisage reforms any time soon and continues to ignore the international community’s recommendations. In early 2014, he said: Those who think there will be democracy in this country can think so in another world.”

Coincidentally, Eritrea’s abuses score was identical to the United States’.

While the US might be relatively safe for journalists in terms of imprisonment or violence, coming in 49th is embarrassing. America is supposed to be a safe haven for journalists and allegedly has the best news media in the world. The consistent drop in the rankings proves that’s not even close to true and a lot of work needs to be done to improve the country’s position.

The Islamic Revolution: Esau Breaks Jacob’s Yoke (Genesis 27)

Supreme Leader: Islamic Revolution Stood against Imperialism


Local Editor

Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei said that the recent Iranian scientific advances have been achieved thanks to martyrdom for the sake of Allah.
During a message published Thursday, and delivered when his eminence received members of the secretariats of Congress of Educational Martyrs, Congress of University Student Martyrs and Congress of Artist Martyrs, Ayatollah Khamenei said the elites’ effective contribution to the Sacred Defense has exemplified the fact that the heavenly motivation to “sacrifice for the sake of Allah” had been deeply rooted in the multitudes of the pious.

He emphasized on the necessity of honoring the martyrs and reviving their valuable and beloved memories.

“The sessions to honor martyrs are in fact to perpetuate their path; their lifestyle and memories should be sought as a public way of finding virtues of their life in society,” the Supreme Leader said.

Ayatollah Khamenei brought a historical example of the early decades of Islamic history to compare between the today’s martyrs and the life of Imam Hussein (AS) and his epic campaign in saving and protecting Islam, Quran, and Islamic tradition and teachings.

“Any society which finds martyrdom as an everlasting truth, would not accept defeat. And that nation would move in its path toward progression without any fear and qualms,” asserted the Leader.

His eminence praised ‘the great feat’ by Iranian great nation as rejecting the division of the world to two categories of dominated and dominant.

“Rather, our nation brought to the scene an identity called Islamic Identity, which courageously stands against the imperialism drawing upon Godly and moral principles,” he said, adding that “this is despite the fact that the colonial powers still have continued to dominate over the downtrodden and oppressed of the world through many mechanisms available.

Source: IRNA