Secret or out in the open, any negotiations with Iran regarding their nuclear program are as delicate as they are important. Obviously they must be handled by a very experienced diplomatic negotiator ..well not according to this President.
Israeli Newspaper Yediot Ahranot published in their Print edition today, that it is friend of Obama , former slumlord, and friend of the radical Islamist community Valerie Jarrett who is the president’s secret envoy to Iran.
You may remember the reports about Jarret’s last foray into foreign policy, she tried to convince Obama NOT to approve the raid on Bin Laden.
Ask yourself this, do you really want “re-hire” as commander-in-chief a person that sends a former slumlord with no diplomatic experience to negotiate with Iran about its Nuclear Program?
An English Translation of the full Yediot Ahranot story follows:
Yediot Ahranot, November 5, 2012, page 10
Obama’s Woman in Tehran Meet Valerie Jarrett – Obama’s secret envoy to talks with Iran
By Alex Fishman
Valerie Jarrett, senior advisor to President Barack Obama, is the key figure in the secret contacts conducted by the White House with the Iranian government. According to senior sources in Israel, the attorney from Chicago serves as the American president’s personal envoy for contacts with representatives of the spiritual leader Khamenei.
Jarrett, a close friend of Michelle Obama, is a central figure among the advisors to the president. She was born in the city of Shiraz in Iran to parents who were sent on an agricultural mission.
On October 21 the New York Times claimed that the American administration had secret contacts with Iran with the goal of opening direct talks immediately after the presidential elections in the US. A spokesman for the US National Security Council denied that there was any agreement between the Americans and the Iranians for direct talks or of any meeting after the elections, however, the next day senior officials in the administration confirmed that talks existed through a secret channel. They claimed, however, that no meeting was set between the sides.
The American administration made great efforts to minimize the contacts because central countries to the negotiations, like Russia, were not partners to the secret talks.
Israel was apparently surprised by the revelations. Today, however, senior officials in Jerusalem know of secret negotiations taking place between the sides for several months. The contacts, the sources say, were initiated by Jarrett and she serves as the head of the negotiations. Jarrett served, according to them, as the direct and personal envoy of the president to the secret meeting with the Iranians which apparently were held in one of the Persian Gulf emirates, most likely in Bahrain.
At the Iranians request, the talks will open – if they open – after the US elections and only if Obama is reelected.
According to the estimates done in the US State Department, the economic pressure on Iran will reach a climax at the beginning of next year – in February and March, immediately after the presidential inauguration. The direct contacts with Iran on a nuclear understanding are therefore expected to take place precisely in the same time frame that Iran will find itself under particularly heavy pressure. This confluence is likely to bring about positive results in the secret direct talks and in the P5+1 talks.
This week a German doctor in Bavaria filed a criminal complaint against Rabbi David Goldberg.
Rabbi Goldberg’s “crime”? He performs ritual circumcisions on Jewish male infants in accordance with Jewish law.
The doctor’s complaint came shortly after a ruling by a court in Cologne outlawing the practice of male circumcision.
The Austrians and the Swiss also took the ruling to heart and have banned infant male circumcision in several hospitals in Switzerland as well as in the Austrian state of Vorarlberg. Denmark and Scandinavian governments are also considering limiting the practice of circumcision which has constituted one of the foundational rituals of Judaism for four thousand years.
Meanwhile, in Norway Dr. Anne Lindboe has come up with the perfect way out of the artificial crisis. Lindboe serves a Norway’s ombudsman for children’s rights. And she proposes that we Jews just change our religion to satisfy anti-Jewish sensitivities. She suggests we replace circumcision with “a symbolic, nonsurgical ritual.”
It’s worth mentioning that circumcision isn’t the only Jewish ritual these enlightened Europeans find objectionable. Sweden, Norway and Switzerland have already banned kosher slaughter.
Attacking circumcision isn’t just a European fetish. The urge to curb Jewish religious freedom has reached the US as well. Last year San Francisco’s Jewish Community Relations Council had to sue the city to strike a measure from last November’s ballot that would have banned circumcision if passed. The measure’s sponsor gathered the requisite 12,000 signatures to enter the proposition on the ballot. Circumcising males under the age of 18 would have been classified as a misdemeanor punishable by a $1,000 fine and up to a year in prison. Sponsors of the measure distributed anti-Semitic materials depicting rabbis performing circumcisions as villains.
The people involved in banning or attempting to ban circumcision are not on the political fringe of their societies. They are part of a leftist establishment. They are doctors and lawyers, judges and politicians. This doesn’t mean that all their fellow leftists are anti-Semites. But it does mean the political Left in the Western world feels comfortable keeping company with anti-Semites.
This state of affairs is even more striking in international affairs than in domestic politics. On the international level the Left’s readiness to rub elbows with anti-Semites has reached critical levels.
While the Europeans have long been happy to cater to the anti-Semitic whims of the Islamic world, the escalation of the West’s willingness to accept anti-Semitism as a governing axiom in international affairs is nowhere more apparent than in the Obama administration’s foreign policy.
And the American Left’s willingness – particularly the American Jewish Left’s willingness – to cover up the administration’s collusion with anti- Semitic regimes at Israel’s expense is higher today than ever before.
A clear-cut example of both the Obama administration’s willingness to adhere to anti- Semitic policies of anti-Semitic governments and the Left’s willingness to defend this bigoted behavior is the Obama administration’s decision not to invite Israel to participate in its new Global Counterterrorism Forum.
The GCF was founded with the stated aim of fostering international cooperation in fighting terrorism. But for the Obama administration, it was more important to make Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan, who supports the Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist groups, feel comfortable, than it was to invite Israel to participate.
Not only did the US exclude Israel, at the GCF’s meeting last month in Spain, Maria Otero, the State Department’s under secretary for civilian security, democracy and human rights, seemed to embrace the Muslim world’s obscene claim that Israelis are not victims of terrorism because terrorism against Israel isn’t terrorism.
In her speech, titled “Victims of Terrorism,” Otero spoke of terror victims in Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, Uganda, Colombia, Northern Ireland, Indonesia, India and the US. But she made no mention of Israeli terror victims.
Rather than criticize the administration for its decision to appease bigots at the expense of their victim, American Jewish leftists have defended the administration. Writing in The Atlantic, Zvika Kreiger, senior vice president of the far-left S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace, wrote that allowing the Jewish state entry to the GCF parley would have “undermined the whole endeavor.”
Kreiger sympathetically quoted a State Department official who explained that actually, by ostracizing Israel the administration was helping Israel.
The source “reasoned the progress made by the organization would ultimately better serve Israel’s interests (not to mention those of the United States) than would the symbolic benefits of including it in a group that likely wouldn’t accomplish anything. [Moreover]… once the organization was up and running, and its agenda was established, they could find ways to include Israel that would not be disruptive.”
So despite the fact that Israel is a major target of terrorism, and despite the fact that many of the states the US invited to its forum condone terrorism against Israel and support terrorist groups that murder Israeli Jews, Israel is better off being excluded, because the anti-Jewish governments invited by the Obama administration will somehow totally change their perspective on anti-Jewish terrorism as long as they don’t have to suffer the irritation of sitting in the same room as real-live representatives of the Jewish state.
THE CYNICISM of the State Department official’s statement to Kreiger is only outpaced by Kreiger’s stubborn refusal to acknowledge that cynicism.
Kreiger’s behavior makes sense. If he acknowledges the bigoted nature of the Obama administration’s policies he will have to stop defending them.
To a degree, Kreiger’s willingness to defend and justify the Obama administration’s anti-Israel behavior parallels the behavior of Israelis who argue against Israel unilaterally striking Iran’s nuclear facilities in order to delay the Iranian regime’s acquisition of nuclear weapons.
Since 2003, when Iran’s nuclear weapons program was first revealed to the world community, Iran’s leaders have succeeded in convincing world leaders that Israel is No. 1 on their target list. And so, the international debate about what a nuclear-armed Iran will mean for the world has always followed the Iranians’ lead and centered on the dangers it would pose to Israel.
Israel’s leaders from then-prime minister Ariel Sharon down to the last governmental spokesman have maintained that Iran’s nuclear program threatens the entire Free World. Sharon – like his leftist disciples today – claimed that given the threat Iran’s nuclear program constitutes for global security, Israel has no reason to lead the global fight to destroy Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Indeed, Israeli leadership of the campaign against Iran’s nuclear program would cause some countries to do nothing because they hate Israel even more than they fear Iran.
Like his followers today, Sharon insisted that the US, as the leader of the Free World, is responsible for preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. And they are right. Iran’s nuclear program does threaten global security and Iran’s nuclear program does threaten the US specifically. Iranian dictator Ali Khamenei just ordered his troops to carry out terror attacks against the US in retaliation for US moves to overthrow Iran’s Syrian puppet Bashar Assad. Iran was the principle sponsor of the insurgency in Iraq and remains the principle supporter of the Taliban in Afghanistan.
It’s not that Israel’s leaders belittle the threat Iran’s nuclear weapons program constitutes for Israel. Across the spectrum on the Iran debate in Israel – from former Mossad director Meir Dagan and President Shimon Peres on the Left to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak on the Right – everyone agrees that in light of the Iranian regime’s religious fanaticism and its millenarian belief that Armageddon will hearken the coming of the Shi’ite messiah, Iran cannot be trusted not to use nuclear weapons against Israel.
Everyone admits that given Iran’s open sponsorship of terrorism, it is a certainty that terror groups would use the Iranian nuclear umbrella to massively expand their terrorist war against Israel.
Just as Dagan, Peres and their associates share Netanyahu’s assessment of the threat Iran’s nuclear program poses for Israel, Netanyahu agrees with their assessment that Israel’s options for contending militarily with Iran’s nuclear program are limited and imperfect. No one argues that Israel has a magic bullet to destroy Iran’s nuclear project.
Netanyahu and Barak have repeatedly warned that Israel has no perfect strike option. They have also warned that a response from Iran and its proxies in Syria and Lebanon to an Israeli strike will likely be harsh and deadly. All they say is that it is better than the alternative of Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons.
The doves agree with Netanyahu that a limited Israeli strike is better than the alternative of a nuclear-armed Iran. They differ with Netanyahu on only one issue: their assessment of the US’s willingness to use military force to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
Voicing the doves’ assessment of the Obama administration and Europe, this week former commander of Military Intelligence Maj.-Gen. (res.) Aharon Zeevi Farkash told NBC news, “I think Western leaders realize a nuclear Iran is the No. 1 challenge facing the world.”
Unfortunately, Farkash is wrong. Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, made this point earlier this week in an interview from Afghanistan. There Dempsey said frankly, “Israel sees the Iranian threat more seriously than the US sees it, because a nuclear Iran poses a threat to Israel’s very existence.”
In other words, Dempsey told us that Iran’s cynical packaging of its nuclear program as an anti-Israel initiative has worked. The Americans – and the Europeans – believe that Iran’s nuclear program is Israel’s problem to deal with. The Israelis are right that as the leader of the Free World it is the US’s responsibility to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. But as Dempsey’s statement shows, the US is not interested in fulfilling its responsibility.
Like the Europeans, the Americans will only act when Iran forces them to do so. And that means they will do nothing to prevent Iran from developing the bomb. They will only move when Tehran has already crossed Israel off the top of its target list.
Israeli opponents of an Israeli strike against Iran don’t want to believe that Americans are capable of such cynicism. They would like to believe that the only government capable of behaving cynically is their own. They want to believe that the US – with its vastly superior military capabilities to destroy Iran’s nuclear program – will do the right thing and not leave it to Israel – with its limited means – to take care of the problem for a cynical world.
But just as Kreiger’s defense of the Obama administration’s courtship of anti-Semites at Israel’s expense crosses the line separating naivete from willful, bigotry-enabling blindness, so Peres, Dagan and their colleagues cross the line. And it is not mere bigotry they are enabling.
(mfs other) Iranian suspicion grows over Turkey’s regional role. (AlArabiya) A senior Iranian political figure has spoken out against Turkey hosting Iran’s next talks with world powers on its disputed nuclear program, in the latest anti-Turkish broadside from politicians in Tehran, Fars news agency reported late on Monday. Last month Turkey offered Istanbul as the venue for talks expected to take place on April 13, a proposal which appeared to gather momentum last week when Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said Istanbul would be “the best option.” Turkey has repeatedly backed Iran’s right to develop peaceful nuclear technology. The United States and its allies suspect Tehran of covertly working on nuclear weapons and have imposed tough new sanctions on its financial and energy sectors. Tehran, which says its nuclear activities are purely peaceful, has agreed to renewed talks with the five permanent members of the Security Council — the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain — and Germany this month. Once-warm Iranian-Turkish ties have cooled over the past year due to the popular revolt in Syria, Iran’s closest Arab ally and a steadfast backer of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.“Given the fact that our friends in Turkey have failed to fulfill some of our agreements, the talks… had better be held in another friendly country,” said former presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaie, Fars News reported. Speaking to staff of the Economic Cooperation Organization, a regional trade body with offices in Tehran, Rezaie did not specify what Turkey’s failures were, but said that Baghdad, Damascus or Beirut would be a more suitable venue. “Offering Istanbul as the venue for the upcoming talks … might give this wrong impression to the opposite side that Iran has grown weak and is in weak conditions,” he added. Rezaie has been an influential figure in Iranian politics for more than three decades since he was appointed commander in chief of the Revolutionary Guards, the elite force created to protect Iran’s system of theocratic rule. A critic and electoral rival of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2009, Rezaie is now secretary of the Expediency Council, an influential body that advises Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who directs nuclear policy. His comments are a rare public criticism of neighboring Turkey whose prime minister, Tayyip Erdogan, stressed the value of relations with Iran during a visit to Tehran last week.Iranian MP Esmail Kowsari has accused Turkey of being a messenger of the United States and Israel, saying that “it would surely be hated by its own people and other nations in the region because it is hand in hand with the arrogant (Western) powers,” the Iranian Labor News Agency reported on Monday. Kowsari ridiculed Turkey’s hosting on Sunday of a “Friends of the Syrian People” meeting of mostly Western and Arab countries, which he described as only enemies of Syria. Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani called the Istanbul event a “conference to bribe Israel” and said regional nations that described Syria as a dictatorship were no better themselves, Fars reported.Read the full story here.
politics, politics, politics… this Syrian situation sure has soured the relationship
Obama’s ‘peacepartners’ financed by the U.S. taxpayers, why wouldn’t they laugh?
Hamas Rejects BBC Claims, Vows to Give Crushing Response to Israeli Aggression against Iran. (OTHER)(Fars).Tehran – Mahmoud al-Zahar, a senior official of the Palestinian Hamas movement, strongly rejected a recent BBC report which quoted him as saying that Hamas would take no action in case of an Israeli invasion of Iran, and warned that any Israel or US attack on Iran will be reciprocated by Hamas’s crushing response to the Zionists.
BBC Persian’s website alleged in a report on Wednesday that the No. 2 Hamas official in the Gaza Strip has assured that his movement would not take any action in the face of an Israeli attack on Iran.
Al-Zahar strongly rejected the BBC claim as unfounded and a lie. “Retaliation with utmost power is the position of Hamas with regard to a Zionist war on Iran,” Zahar told FNA on Wednesday afternoon.
Zahar rejected the possibility of any Israeli aggression against Iran, but meantime, reiterated that Hamas will give a crushing response to not only the Zionists but also to “whoever helping them” in such an attack.
Israel and its close ally the United States have recently intensified their war rhetoric against Iran. The two arch foes of the Islamic Republic accuse Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon, while they have never presented any corroborative document to substantiate their allegations. Both Washington and Tel Aviv possess advanced weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear warheads.
Iran vehemently denies the charges, insisting that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. Tehran stresses that the country has always pursued a civilian path to provide power to the growing number of Iranian population, whose fossil fuel would eventually run dry.
Iran has, in return, warned that it would target Israel and its worldwide interests in case it comes under attack by the Tel Aviv. Following the US and Israeli war rhetoric against Tehran, the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, said Tehran has an array of options for confronting the US pressures and sanctions.
Addressing millions of Friday Prayers worshippers on Tehran University Campus in February, Ayatollah Khamenei pointed to the US threats that ‘all options are on the table’, and underlined that the threat of war is harmful to the US interests and war can be ten times more harmful to that country.
“The US threats are sign of its failure in the face of Islamic Republic’s discourse and indicates that they cannot create a logical response to Iran’s reasoning,” the Leader stated at the time.
“That’s why it (the US) resorts to force; they do not have any logic except using force and have no way but bloodshed to go forward.”
Ayatollah Khamenei further underlined that US and others must know and they know that Iran has threats too in face of oil sanctions and “we impose them whenever it is necessary”.Read the full story here.