Jeb: Iran's Leaders Are Taking Note of Obama's Cuba Concessions

capitolhillcubans

Governor Bush's Statement on the Removal of Cuba From U.S. State Sponsors of Terrorism List

Right to Rise PAC Honorary Chairman Governor Jeb Bush issued the following statement today in response to Secretary of State John Kerry signing an order removing Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism:

“Neither continued repression at home nor Cuba’s destabilizing activities abroad appear sufficient to stop President Obama from making further concessions to the Communist regime in Havana. Today’s news is further evidence that President Obama seems more interested in capitulating to our adversaries than in confronting them. Iran’s leaders are surely taking note.

The removal of Cuba from the State Sponsors of Terrorism List and the unilateral concessions to Havana, before it changes its authoritarian ways and stops denying the Cuban people their basic human rights, is a mistake. I call on Congress to keep pressure on Cuba and hold the Administration accountable.”

Pentagon: US Carrier ‘Repositioning,’ Not Intercepting

breitbart

by Jordan Schachtel

The Pentagon has stated that a U.S. aircraft carrier is “repositioning” for a security operation, contrary to prior reports that the warship was tasked with intercepting an Iranian fleet off the coast of Yemen.

The USS Theodore Roosevelt is “repositioning to conduct maritime security operations,” Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren told VOA.

Earlier, an unnamed Navy official told the AP that the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier is part of an American fleet that has been tasked with intercepting Iranian vessels that may attempt to dump an arms shipment into the hands of Houthi militants in Yemen.

Navy officials announced on Monday that the nuclear-powered Roosevelt was among nine U.S. warships that are patrolling the waters of the Arabian Sea. The unnamed Navy spokesperson told the Associated Press that the ships are moving into the Gulf of Aden to intercept Iran’s eight-ship convoy before it can link up with the Houthis.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest refused to comment specifically on any Navy movements, telling reporters that the U.S. is concerned with the Shiite regime’s “continued support for the Houthis.”

“We have seen evidence that the Iranians are supplying weapons and other armed support to the Houthis in Yemen. That support will only contribute to greater violence in that country. These are exactly the kind of destabilizing activities that we have in mind when we raise concerns about Iran’s destabilizing activities in the Middle East,” Earnest added.

The White House Press Secretary told reporters that “the Iranians are acutely aware of our concerns for their continued support of the Houthis by sending them large shipments of weapons.”

Iran continues to support Shiite Houthi militants in Yemen, who have overthrown the country’s internationally-recognized government and now hold vast swaths of territory throughout the nation. The United States has backed a nine-country Saudi-led military operation that seeks to reinstall the recognized Yemeni government and its Sunni leadership.

Netanyahu Calls Iran Nuclear Agreement a Threat to Israel's Survival

.@netanyahu responded to the deals reached in the #Irantalks with a tweet. pic.twitter.com/Rkw0Kpdxrg
— FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) abril 2, 2015

Any deal must significantly roll back Iran’s nuclear capabilities and stop its terrorism and aggression. #IranTalks pic.twitter.com/BOQ7YcHxyn
— בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) abril 2, 2015

             

          

Read >>

Iranian Dictator Calls for 'Death to America' as Nuke Talks Approach Deadline

Breitbart

By Jordan Schachtel

www.frontpagemag.com

Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei led chants of “Death to America” over the weekend, as talks between the P5+1 world powers and the Iranian regime are closing in on a March 31 deadline to accept a basic framework for an agreement.

Just one day after President Obama was commending the Ayatollah for his supposed (but never evidenced) fatwa against nuclear weapons development, Khamenei told a crowd in Iran’s capital, “Of course yes, death to America, because America is the original source of this pressure.”
“They insist on putting pressure on our dear people’s economy. What is their goal? Their goal is to put the people against the system,” said the Ayatollah. “The politics of America is to create insecurity.”
The Iranian negotiating team left the talks in Switzerland on Friday under unusual circumstances. An unnamed Iranian official told Bloomberg that the entire delegation was flying to Tehran to attend the funeral of the mother of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. The Washington Post reported that the Iranian team was originally going to break for the Persian new year of Nowruz, but then decided on tentatively staying through the holiday, before they suddenly packed up and left. Others have suggested that the Ayatollah has intervened directly and has pulled back his negotiating team for unknown reasons.
Nevertheless, Secretary of State John Kerry remains optimistic that a framework will be agreed upon by the March 31 deadline. Kerry told reporters over the weekend that “substantial progress” has been made, but “important gaps remain.”
“It’s time to make hard decisions. We want the right deal that would make the world, including the United States and our closest allies and partners, safer and more secure. And that is our test,” added Secretary Kerry.
France remains the most skeptical of the P5+1 that a good deal will come by the deadline. “France wants an agreement, but a robust agreement,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told a French broadcaster. “That is to say, an accord that really guarantees that Iran can obviously have access to the civilian nuclear (program). But to the atomic bomb? No.”

Why the West has it wrong on Rouhani

American Enterprise Institute

Obama wrote secret letter to Iran on Islamic State

Mary Greeley

A nuclear deal with Iran? Weighing the possibilities

American Enterprise Institute

U..S. delegation to brief Israel on Iran talks: It's Okay That Iran Has Nukes

Mary Greeley

ALERT: U.S. has accepted country's nuclear enrichment program

Mary Greeley

Iran shows 'documentary' of mock-up attack on US, Israel

Iran Announces That It Is Sending It's Naval Fleet To The U.S. Coast

War News Updates

"The Iranian Army's naval fleets have already started their voyage towards the Atlantic Ocean via the waters near South Africa," Commander of Iran's Northern Navy Fleet Admiral Afshin Rezayee Haddad announced on Saturday.

The admiral, who is also the commander of the Iranian Army's 4th Naval Zone said, "Iran's military fleet is approaching the United States' maritime borders, and this move has a message."

In September 2012, Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari reiterated Iran's plans for sailing off the US coasts to counter the US presence in its waters in the Persian Gulf.

Sayyari had earlier informed of Tehran's plans to send its naval forces to the Atlantic to deploy along the US marine borders, and in September 2012 he said that this would happen "in the next few years".

Read more >>

Does US have good reason to fully trust Iran?

Iran Celebrates American 'Surrender'; Obama Says 'Give Peace a Chance'

breitbart

By Joel B. Pollak 

Our relationship w/ the world is based on Iranian nation's interests. In #Geneva agreement world powers surrendered to Iranian nation's will
— Hassan Rouhani (@HassanRouhani) enero 14, 2014

Iran's "moderate" president, Hassan Rouhani, tweeted this morning that "world powers," including the U.S., had "surrendered" to the "Iranian nation's will" in confirming a six-month interim nuclear deal that will allow the Iranian regime to continue its advanced centrifuge program and develop a new nuclear facility at Arak. President Barack Obama, meanwhile, implored Americans to "give peace a chance" with the Iran deal.

Though the Obama administration claims that the interim deal--which includes a secret side deal--will lead Iran to give up any ambitions of becoming a nuclear power, the regime has publicly declared that the agreement reached in Geneva last November is the first step in removing all sanctions, and that it virtually recognizes Iran's "right" to enrich uranium. All agree that it contradicts a decade of UN Security Council resolutions banning such enrichment.

Obama has threatened to veto new sanctions currently under consideration by Congress as a risk to the nuclear deal, even though the sanctions would not take effect until after the interim deal is over, and are designed to act as a deterrent against Iranian efforts to cheat on the agreement. The sanctions enjoy bipartisan support, though most support comes from Republicans: it enjoys 59 co-sponsors in the Senate, near a veto-proof majority.

Obama: Iran Deal Better than 'All-or-Nothing' Approach

breitbart

By William Bigelow 

Barack Obama, speaking at the Saban Forum of the Brookings Institute on Saturday, insisted that the deal he struck with Iran allowing Iran to keep its uranium enrichment while the West relaxed sanctions will “eliminate the incentive” for Iran to build nuclear weapons. Obama lambasted those, including Israeli prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who favor what he called an “all-or-nothing” approach in which Iran would dismantle its entire nuclear program before the West relaxed sanctions, saying:

You’ll hear arguments, including potentially from the prime minister, that said we can’t accept any enrichment on Iranian soil, period, full stop, end of conversation. One can envision an ideal world in which Iran said, ‘We’ll destroy every element and facility and you name it, it’s all gone.’ I can envision a world in which Congress passed every one of my bills that I put forward. There are a lot of things that I can envision that would be wonderful.”

Obama said there is no way to stop Iran from enriching uranium: “Theoretically, they will always have some capability because technology here is available to any good physics student at pretty much any university around the world. And they have already gone through the cycle to the point where the knowledge we are not going to be able to eliminate. But what we can do is eliminate the incentive for them to want to do this.”

He continued, “When I hear people criticize the Geneva deal say it’s got to be all or nothing, I would just remind them that if it’s nothing, if we did not even try for this next six months to do this, all the breakout capacity we are concerned about would accelerate in the next six months. They’d be that much closer to breakout capacity six months from now. And that’s why I think it’s important for us to test this proposition.”

Obama said that despite the fact that Netanyahu publicly denounced the deal, they share the same goals: “Bibi and I have very candid conversations and there are occasionally significant tactical disagreements. But there is a constancy in trying to reach the same goal, and in this case that goal is to make sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon.”

Then Obama loaded his argument, insisting that sanctions were ineffective in turning the Iranians from their nuclear ambitions and cunningly making the opposition to the deal look as if it only came from Israel and its American supporters, ignoring the Arab states who are nervous about Iran’s nuclear ambitions: “The idea that Iran, given everything that we know about their history, would just continue to get more and more nervous about more sanctions and military threats and ultimately just say, ‘We give in,’ I think does not reflect an honest understanding of the Iranian people and the Iranian regime. I think even the so-called moderates or reformers inside of Iran would not be able to simply say, ‘We will cave and do exactly what the U.S. and the Israelis say.’”

The reality is: Sanctions brought Iran to the table. The Saudis and others in the Arab world don’t want a nuclear Iran. The deal does nothing to inspect the dangerous nuclear work done in Parchin.

But for Barack Obama, vilifying the Israelis and tacitly encouraging Iran to go forward with its deadly ambitions are the reality he has chosen.

Report: Iran Takes Next Step in Uranium Enrichment

breitbart

By AWR Hawkins 

On December 7, Iranian atomic energy agency's Behrouz Kamalvandi said Iran is taking the next step in uranium enrichment by testing more efficient technology. This includes more advanced centrifuges.

According to The Jerusalem Post, Kamalvandi said "initial testing on a new generation of more efficient centrifuges had been completed." 

While this next step in uranium enrichment may not technically violate "the agreement struck between world powers and Iran last month," it is disconcerting in so much as the material provided by the advanced centrifuges can "provide the fissile core of a nuclear bomb if enriched to a high degree."

It is important to note that the "new generation of centrifuges" could also "enable [Iran] to refine uranium much faster." 

On December 4, Breitbart News reported that the White House was willing to allow Iran to continue a "strictly limited enrichment program."

Report: IAEA Stats Show Iranian Centrifuges Jumped 400% Under Obama

breitbar

www.thisismoney.co.uk

According to a new report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran’s nuclear enrichment capabilities skyrocketed under President Obama’s administration. According to Fox News’ analysis of IAEA documents, “the vast majority of Iran’s enrichment capability came online during the Obama administration.” In 2007, Iran had 3,000 centrifuges. By 2009, Iran likely had 5,000. Today, Iran has 19,000 centrifuges according to Secretary of State John Kerry.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters that the administration wasn’t attempting to blame anyone for the development of Iranian centrifuges; instead, she said, they were focused on “the fact that we're now at a point where we are halting and rolling back the progress of their program and we're working towards a comprehensive agreement to bring an end to it."

The Obama administration has been trumpeting its sanctions as both effective, and conversely unable to stop Iranian nuclear development. President Obama suggested during the 2012 campaign that he had been dramatically harsh on Iran via sanctions, but Kerry recently stated, “sanctions came in, and today there are 19,000 centrifuges and growing.”

White House Says Uranium Enrichment Still on the Table in Iran Talks

breitbart

By AWR Hawkins 4 Dec 2013

On December 3rd, White House National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan said that while the U.S. is not prepared to recognize Iran's right to enrich uranium, the Obama administration is "prepared to negotiate a strictly limited enrichment program."

According to The Jerusalem Post, Meehan said the administration is willing to do this because "Iranians have indicated for the first time" that they are willing to accept "rigorous monitoring and limits on level, scope, capacity, and stockpiles" of nuclear material.

Meehan says the administration believes that under such terms, it is possible to allow "a very modest amount of enrichment" while also eliminating "any near-term breakout capability."

Israel is opposed to "permanent enrichment capacity" for Iran at any level. They argue that leaving the infrastructure for enrichment in place necessarily gives Iran "the ability to manufacture a weapon."

Hezbollah Leader: America Surrendered

breitbart

By William Bigelow 4 Dec 2013

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, absolutely giddy after Iran bamboozled the P5+1 nations into signing a one-sided nuclear agreement, is clear that two of his dreams have been realized: the U.S. has seen its global power reduced and Israel cannot bomb Iran because America would prevent it.

On Tuesday, Nasrallah, speaking on Lebanon’s OTV, said the agreement prevented a Middle Eastern war: "The number one winner in this deal is the people of this region ... I can not say that this agreement has annulled the choice of war permanently but I can say it has pushed it away for a long time." He continued without American permission, Israel would not bomb Iran, as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has asserted that America was against any war in the region. Nasrallah chortled of America’s demise: "The wars they fought in Iraq have failed, in Afghanistan they reached a dead end and the wars on Lebanon and Gaza foiled the New Middle East scheme, and now they have failed in Syria. They were not able to topple the regime in Iran, but I cannot claim that they did not succeed in shaking its economic situation."

Nasrallah claimed that not only has U.S. monopoly on power waned, but Iran rebuffed the American attempt to discuss issues outside the nuclear program. He also ripped Saudi Arabia for its hostility to Iran, saying the Saudis won’t talk to Iran because of American pressure and are committed to unseating the Assad regime in Syria. He said, "There is a Saudi decision to try and change the events on the ground until January 22 ... they will fail … If you monitor all the Saudi-financed media outlets, the Saudi war against Iran has never stopped. The Saudis waged wars against the Iranians in Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Gulf, Iraq and Syria, and of course through its proxies, because it does not dare to wage a direct war."

Nasrallah protested that Hezbollah does not take marching orders from Iran, asserting, "Right now, Iran is the most important state in the region and it is consulting with us and it sometimes endorses our viewpoint on certain issues.”

Iran Strongly Rejects Obama Interpretation of Nuclear Deal

breitbart

By Ben Shapiro 

On Tuesday, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard news agency FARS released a statement from the Foreign Ministry denouncing the version of the Iranian nuclear deal released by the Obama administration on Sunday. “What has been released by the website of the White House as a fact sheet is a one-sided interpretation of the agreed text in Geneva and some of the explanations and words in the sheet contradict the text of the Joint Plan of Action (the title of the Iran-powers deal), and this fact sheet has unfortunately been translated and released in the name of the Geneva agreement by certain media, which is not true,” said Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Marziyeh Afkham.

Afkham said that the negotiations between the White House, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany were lengthy and rigorous due to disputes over wording – and she added that the deal points explanation released by the White House was inaccurate. FARS released its own version of the agreement, which matched the text released to the press over the weekend.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry did not state what in the White House explanation of the deal it found objectionable, but its opposition to the White House’s version of the deal demonstrates that Iran is already working to undermine the supposed freeze on its nuclear program.

Iran also recognizes that it now has the White House boxed in, since President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry have been so adamant in pushing the Iranian deal; reinterpreting the deal by Iran puts both Obama and Kerry in the unpalatable position of having to disown a deal that was supposedly designed to buy time to come up with further negotiation points with Iran.

Valerie Jarrett, Chicago, and the Iran Deal

breitbart

By Joel B. Pollak 

www.trevorloudon.com

Last week, the Times of Israel reported that senior presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett had been leading talks with Iran in secret for a year before the formal negotiations in Geneva this month. While the White House denied the report "100 percent," the existence of back-channel talks has been confirmed by other reporting. The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday that President Barack Obama had "personally overseen" the talks.

Almost anything "personally overseen" by the President Obama is likely to bear the heavy stamp of Ms. Jarrett, who is the president's closest adviser, despite a shocking track record of failure. In foreign policy, her most important mistake was her effort to dissuade the president from proceeding with the raid on Osama bin Laden. It was one of the few times that President Obama overruled her counsel--and one of his few successes.

Jarrett's involvement in Iran is cause for concern for three additional reasons--two minor and one major. One minor reason is that she was born there. That should not automatically disqualify anyone, of course, any more than being born in the Soviet Union would have disqualified an anti-Soviet dissident. But Jarrett was born in 1956 to American expatriates in the aftermath of the CIA-assisted coup that deposed Mohammad Mossadegh.

The Iranian regime remains obsessed with the Mossadegh coup as proof of America's innate evil--and for decades, some Americans have felt a sense of post-colonial guilt about it. That feeling may be particularly acute for an American born in the shadow of that event. The temptation to show contrition by acceding to Iran's goals, as a kind of restorative justice, could well shape Jarrett's involvement, and Obama's approach.

The second minor reason to worry about Jarrett's involvement in Iran is her political background. Her entrée into the world of left-wing politics in Chicago was through her father-in-law, Vernon Jarrett, a journalist with somewhat radical views. Jarrett spoke out against antisemitism in the black community, for example, but also took anti-Israel stands, accusing pro-Israel Jews of "support of genocide" in the Lebanon War, for example.

These two reasons for concern are fairly minor, because they are based on mere speculation, and would have to be balanced out by other factors, such as Ms. Jarrett's personal associations with leaders of the pro-Israel community in Chicago. But the major reason for concern about her role is simply that Jarrett has banished, and repulsed, most of the Obama administration's most competent appointees from the White House.

One of the most important departures was that of Dennis Ross, who was brought into the White House early in the Obama presidency to advise the president on the Middle East. Ross, who advocated a tough approach to Iran, is widely thought to have been marginalized by the president's inner circle. He left the White House in 2011, ostensibly because he had only promised to serve two years, but likely because he was not being utilized.

Finally, it is worth noting that Jarrett, despite her expatriate origins, has little experience in international affairs, and is said to manage Obama's policies through a domestic political lens. If she was as involved in the talks as reports suggest, that could be a major reason for the president's eagerness to sign almost any deal, even one the French rejected as too weak. In any other administration, she likely would have been ignored.