This is a bit of a rush job because the Globe had live video of Netanyahu's speech to Congress -- which not only shoves the Zionist control over this government right in your face, Americans, but outs the AmeriKan pre$$ as well.
I won't be watching it because it will drive me to drink and assault my senses, and then it occurred to me that I'd rather put on some other glasses to find out what really happened in front of Congre$$ today (for starters; I'll try to be more active in monitoring my blog list).
Anyhow, the big question in the AmeriKan ma$$ media has been will Netanyahu speech fracture U.S.-Israel ties, and it's all a bunch of show theater, folks.
They have traded jabs and I'm told "personal tensions have put Democratic lawmakers in awkward positions that threaten bipartisanship when it comes to Israel," that Democrats should boycott Netanyahu’s speech in some sort of showdown when nothing has changed because Kerry is now trying to PATCH the RIFT before the speech as he is in the cross hairs of Israel (my printed headline says Netanyahu's words may impair Kerry).
I don't even like the guy, but.... even less so after seeing this:
Kerry defends Israel before UN human rights panel
Defending the indefensible, as if the U.S. government had any credibility whatsoever on human rights these days. Admitted torture, and the mass-murder of millions in wars based on lies going back decades. Honestly, they blow Israel out of the water when it comes to the list of war crimes -- and Israel's war crimes are always enabled by the AmeriKan government with weapons and money. Without those, no Israeli war crimes.
So what else is he trying to defend?
Meanwhile, the Globe plays along by saying Benjamin Netanyahu hurts Israel by wading into US politics. Why? Have the aid checks stop flowing? Obama throw on sanctions and stop delivery of military aid? Globe did not want me to know that fraud farce of a rift, or that Iran tested a weapon during war games drills that ‘‘seems to have destroyed the equivalent of a Hollywood movie set.’’
Talk about in your face! After all the staged and scripted hoaxes and false flag fakes we have been witness to the last few years?
PFFFFFTT!
So what's next Iranian spies inside America?
Post reporter held in Iran gets lawyer, but not one of his choosing
Meaning he was a CIA spy with pre$$ as his non-official cover, and the braying about it by a nation that intends to hold innocent men in indefinite detention forever without charge, be it at Gitmo or somewhere else, really looks bad. Looks like pure war propaganda at this crucial juncture just when Nuttyahoo is speaking today.
"UMass Amherst stops admitting Iranians to some graduate programs" by Jeremy C. Fox and Steve Annear, Globe Correspondent | Globe Staff February 13, 2015
The University of Massachusetts Amherst told students this week that it will no longer accept Iranian nationals into graduate programs in chemical, computer, and mechanical engineering or the natural sciences, to avoid violating US sanctions against Iran.
The college’s new policy, which appears to be rare if not unique among US universities, appeared to catch the US State Department by surprise and also drew criticism from some Iranian students in UMass Amherst graduate programs.
**************
In explaining its stance, the university cited a US Department of Homeland Security policy, based on a 2012 federal law, that declares Iranian citizens ineligible for US visas if they seek higher education in preparation for careers in Iran’s energy sector or any field related to nuclear power.
The decision was announced as the United States and other nations pursued restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program. Iran says its program is for civilian purposes, but some Western countries fear it is seeking to build a nuclear arsenal.
A US State Department official said that the department was aware of news reports about the UMass decision but that there had been no changes in federal policy regarding Iranian students and he could not say why UMass would change its policy. The department will contact UMass to discuss the decision and will answer any questions from other academic institutions about the law, the official said.
“All visa applications are reviewed individually in accordance with the requirements of the US Immigration and Nationality Act and other relevant laws that establish detailed standards for determining eligibility for visas and admission to the United States,” the official, who declined to be quoted by name, said in an e-mail.
“US law does not prohibit qualified Iranian nationals coming to the United States for education in science and engineering,” the official continued. “Each application is reviewed on a case-by-case basis.”
The UMass policy was formalized and published online after an inquiry by an Iranian student. The university’s goal was to clarify the rules and protectstudents, faculty, and fund sources from disruptions to research caused when current students are delayed or prevented from reentering the country because of visa issues, said Mike Malone, UMass’s vice chancellor for research and engagement.
He said such a situation arose with an Iranian student in the past two months.
The written UMass policy, which includes an acknowledgment that “the exclusion of a class of students from admission directly conflicts with our institutional values and principles,” was developed “reluctantly” and after consultation with faculty and graduate students, Malone said.
Malone said that after discussing the issue with outside legal counsel and with faculty at other institutions, administrators believe UMass is in the mainstream of American institutions in having such a policy, though it is rare to publish it.
Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said it is “not aware of any other universities that have announced it” but that others probably have quietly developed similar policies.
“There are undoubtedly other universities that have misinterpreted the law,” he said.
Parsi said that after the passage of the federal Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012, “several companies had misinterpreted the law this way,” but he had hoped that phase had passed.
Before Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, Parsi said, Iranians made up perhaps the largest group of foreign students in the United States. While those numbers have dropped significantly, many top students still come from Iran and go on to take leadership roles in major US companies and important positions in Iran, he said.
“It has actually created a tremendous amount of soft power for the US in Iran; in fact several top Iranian ministers are US-educated,” he said.
This is why, despite poor relations between the nations’ governments, the Iranian people remain among the most pro-US in the Middle East, he said. “It’s much more difficult to vilify the United States when you actually know the United States,” Parsi said....
Actually, if you know the United States like a citizen that lives here you know they are the villain -- and so does the rest of the world. You can't overthrow people's governments and murder people over lies and for profit without them resenting the hell out of it. What people in the world realize is the AmeriKan government does not represent the American people.
--more--"
Related:
"Students at the state’s flagship campus who had protested the initial aggressive new response to US sanctions when it was announced to students on Feb. 12 said they welcomed the shift sparked a groundswell of protests from students and faculty — with some reservations."
Well, if the Iranians are fine with it who am I to gainsay?
UMass tolerates inequality, though:
"Number of highly paid state workers surges; 10,500 now make at least $100,000" by Peter Schworm and Todd Wallack, Globe Staff February 03, 2015
More than 10,500 state employees were paid more than $100,000 last year, up significantly from the year before, and in a couple of cases the earnings hovered around $1 million.
Derek Kellogg, in his seventh season as the men’s basketball coach at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, brought in more than $1.1 million in total compensation in 2014.
I don't want to kick the ball around, but....
Kellogg was followed by Charley Molnar, the former UMass Amherst football coach, who received $963,000, more than half of which was a one-time lump sum payment to buy him out of his contract, university officials said. Molnar was fired in December 2013, after posting back-to-back 1-11 seasons, but still had three years left on his contract.
Michael Collins, chancellor of UMass Medical School, earned close to $900,000.
All 50 of the highest-earning state employees worked for UMass, a trend in keeping with previous years. Over the past two years, the number of state workers overall earning more than $100,000 has jumped by more than one-third.
A spokesman for the UMass athletics department defended the coaching salaries, saying the contracts are market-driven and based on what coaches earn at comparable schools.
I'm ju$t wondering if you debt-laden kids are $ick of $eeing that excuse for looting.
“The revenue and money that can be brought in through their respective programs balances out that salary level,’’ said the spokesman, John Sinnett. “We’re competitive and we pay a competitive rate for our coaches.”
That ju$tifies everything, I guess.
The current head football coach, Mark Whipple, made $379,000.
The final 2014 payroll figures were posted recently on the state’s “Open Checkbook” website, which debuted in 2011 to make government spending more transparent.
With the state facing a budget shortfall, fiscal watchdogs said the increase in higher-paid employees was concerning.
Yeah, right.
“State government proves to be like a high-speed locomotive, very hard to slow down and get your arms around,” said Paul Craney, executive director of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. “With a new administration, it’s a good time for state leaders to reexamine our state’s hiring practices and payroll levels.”
Overall, the number of employees collecting more than $100,000 jumped 16 percent between last year and this. More than 127,000 people were on the state payroll in 2014.
The median pay was $50,000. About 8 percent of all state employees earned at least $100,000.
For the first time, the state posted salaries for employees at more than a dozen independent state agencies, from the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority to Massport.
At the MBTA, the highest-paid employee was Transit Police Chief Paul MacMillan, who made $265,000, while Massport director of aviation Edward Freni earned $233,000.
Related: Fixing the MBTA
Haven't seen much about Massport lately.
Mary Connaughton, director of government transparency at the Pioneer Institute, said the increase in high salaries puts an increasing strain on the state’s pension system, where retired workers can receive up to 80 percent of their pay.
I was told the fund was earning big returns.
“In the past, administrations had been cautious when salaries inched over the $100,000 mark because of the public scrutiny that would follow,” Connaughton said. “That threshold seems to have lost its relevance.”
Not to me.
Governor Charlie Baker, whose state salary is $151,800, has said overspending is the primary cause of the budget woes, and he has pledged not to raise taxes, making budget cuts seemingly inevitable.
The administration has instituted a hiring freeze and ordered reviews of agencies to rein in spending, a spokeswoman said.
He's baking up a budget and I will be getting to that soon (yeah, right).
“Governor Baker has vowed not to cut local aid, funding for the homeless, and the Department of Children and Families, but will keep all budgetary items on the table for discussion to chip away at the deficit without raising taxes,” said Elizabeth Guyton.
Health care costs for state workers and retirees have also contributed to the deficit, budget specialists say.
Never a mention of all the debt interest payments running into the hundreds of millions a month due to bonds and borrowing, though.
After the coaches, the list of people collecting more than $100,000 was dominated by UMass administrators.
It's never the rank-and-file grunt staffs, but they are the ones having to reopen contracts and give back benefits.
Derek Lovley, an associate dean and professor at UMass Amherst, earned $723,000. Robert Caret, the outgoing president at UMass, made $558,000; Kumble Subbaswamy, chancellor at UMass Amherst, made $432,000. Martin Meehan, chancellor at UMass Lowell, made $333,000.
Related:
"As University of Massachusetts trustees prepare to launch a search for a new president, some board members say they were blindsided by president Robert Caret’s announcement that he was leaving to become chancellor of the University of Maryland system. Criticism has surfaced over the secrecy leading up to Caret’s decision in December as well as the timing of it — just weeks after he had signed a three-year contract extension with UMass and just before a new governor took office."
Also see:
UMass forms committee to search for new president
Meehan seen as contender in hunt for UMass chief
$cum.
Some of the highest-paid employees are from the medical school, which says that just 5 percent of its budget comes from a state appropriation.
Most of the revenue comes from contracts, federal research grants, and licensing revenues, a spokesman said.
Ann Scales, a UMass spokeswoman, said salaries are established to meet market conditions. “It’s necessary that the salaries be competitive to attract and retain top faculty and staff,” she said.
Why did tuition and student debt loads just shoot through my mind?
--more--"
Related: UMass Amherst to ban guests during Blarney Blowout weekend
And the kid looks like he is having a good time.
Also see: UMass Student Sues Police for Blarney Blowout Arrest
Got him down pretty good, don't they?
"Anti-Palestinian fliers posted at UMass Amherst; Student rights group targeted" by Steve Annear, Globe Staff February 26, 2015
Fliers comparing a University of Massachusetts Amherst student group that supports Palestinian rights to the militant organization Hamas were found around campus this week, prompting members to file a complaint with police and to call on the school to condemn the posters.
Gee, jwho would want to do that?
I mean, once you break through the wall it can only be one group.
“There is no need for this to happen,” said Annalise Pforr, vice president of the UMass chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, the targeted group. “A lot of our members feel very threatened.”
The posters, which show two men in black masks holding guns and standing over a hostage, bear the words “Jew Haters” and tie the image of terrorists to the student activists.
“This act not only threatens our Arab members, our Jewish members, but all of us as fellow students on the same campus,” Students for Justice in Palestine said in a statement.
The posters went up during Israeli Apartheid Week, an international series of events criticizing Israeli policies.
The group hosted a panel of speakers Wednesday, including two UMass professors, as part of the campus series.
Pforr said the organization has been targeted with hate speech in the last year.
Similar images were found this week on the campus of the University of California, Los Angeles. The UMass chapter said it also learned of incidents at DePaul University and Drake University.
The organization believes the campaign is part of a nationwide coordinated attack against student groups advocating for Palestinian rights and an end to the Israeli occupation in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Enku Gelaye, UMass Amherst’s vice chancellor for student affairs and campus life, said the posters were “deeply upsetting.”
“We know similar misleading posters have been found on campuses across the country as part of an organized effort connected to an outside group. Such actions serve only to undermine civil discourse and prevent sustained conversations on difficult issues,” Gelaye said.
UMass Amherst police would not comment on whether an investigation is underway, but a representative from the department said officers are familiar with reports about the posters.
To ensure safety, Students for Justice in Palestine are urging members to take advantage of the police department’s safety escort service.
Walking teams of students with mobile radios will also be available for escort across campus from 7 p.m. until 3 a.m. nightly, Pforr said.
“We are mainly worried because of the extreme threatening nature of the fliers, and we have experienced this getting worse and worse,” she said. “We don’t want any of our members to feel threatened.”"
--more--"
Have they tracked down anyone yet or has the investigation hit a wall?
Either way, I'm sure leads to Iran:
"Hopes dim for nuclear deal with Iran" Associated Press February 20, 2015
VIENNA — The UN nuclear agency reported deadlock Thursday in its probe of allegations that Iran worked on atomic arms — an assessment that further dims hopes that Tehran and six world powers could negotiate a full nuclear deal by their June deadline.
The United States and five other powers insist that Tehran must fully cooperate with the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency’s probe for any nuclear agreement that grants Iran total sanctions relief.
‘‘Iran has not provided any explanations’’ on the suspicions, according to a confidential report obtained by the Associated Press.
The agency also said that Iran is honoring commitments to put temporary restraints on its atomic activities as it negotiates on the long-term nuclear deal.
I'm starting to become intolerant of crap pre$$.
Iran agreed a year ago to work with the IAEA. But like previous probes, the investigation quickly stalled over Tehran’s insistence that it never wanted or worked on such weapons and that any evidence to the contrary is fabricated.
The hand and hallmark of USraeli intelligence.
Diplomats have told the AP that Washington is willing to extend the IAEA investigation if an agreement is reached by June that constrains Iran’s uranium enrichment program and other activities that could be turned into making nuclear arms.
They say the United States would set a time limit on such an extension and keep some sanctions on Tehran in place until the IAEA ruling.
That, however, would satisfy neither hardliners in Iran who want a full lifting of sanctions, nor critics in the US Congress who worry that any deal would fall short of seriously crimping Iran’s ability to make nuclear arms.
And we know Netanyahu's views on the issue -- or will tomorrow when I get a Globe.
With Tehran showing no signs that it is ready to cooperate, the international community might have to settle longer term for an IAEA assessment based only on US, Israeli, and other intelligence and its own information gathering.
Like anyone is going to believe any garbage those two trot out.
A senior diplomat said IAEA chief Yukiya Amano planned to meet next week with Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in hopes of advancing the talks. He demanded anonymity because he is not authorized to divulge the information.
--more--"
"Top US, Iranian nuke officials joining Iran talks
GENEVA (AP) — Top nuclear officials of Iran and the United States joined seven-nation talks Saturday in a move that may help resolve technical disputes standing it the way of a deal meant to curb Tehran's atomic activities in exchange for sanctions relief for the Islamic Republic.
Technical experts for Iran and the six nations it is negotiating with have been meeting alongside senior political officials. But Saturday was the first time that Iranian Atomic Energy chief Ali Akbar Salehi and U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz also joined in.
Western officials say the U.S. decided to send Moniz only after Iran announced that Salehi will be coming. Still, their presence could improve chances of a deal by fast-tracking complex technical details of constraints on Iran's nuclear programs that are acceptable to Tehran.
They were expected to discuss the number of centrifuges Iran can operate to enrich uranium; how much enriched material it can stockpile; what research and development it may pursue related to enrichment, and the future of a planned heavy water reactor that could produce substantial amounts of plutonium — like enriched uranium, a potential pathway to nuclear arms.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif is also at the talks, with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry scheduled to join Sunday and Monday.
The negotiations have been primarily between Washington and Tehran, but Kerry has said the other powers — Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany — are united....
Are they, or is that just more sh** flowing from his mouth?
--more--"
"Kerry and Iran’s Zarif meet again in Geneva in search of a nuclear deal" by Carol Morello, Washington Post | February 22
Secretary of State John F. Kerry joined high-level talks Sunday in Geneva that could curtail Iran’s nuclear program, as negotiators race to reach a comprehensive agreement by the end of next month.
Kerry met with his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, in the lakeside city. In an indication that the talks are at a sensitive stage, they were joined by Ernest Moniz, the secretary of energy, and Iran’s nuclear chief, Ali Akbar Salehi. Hossein Fereydoon, the brother of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and one of his close aides, also participated. Zarif told reporters that Rouhani’s brother came to ensure “better coordination with the president.”
Both Kerry and Zarif, however, sought to play down speculation that an agreement was imminent. Kerry said Saturday in London that significant gaps remain, a status update that has changed little in months. “There is still a distance to travel,” he said.
And Zarif told reporters Sunday that there are still differences in negotiating positions staked out in the talks, which he recently characterized as so spirited at times that his bodyguards, overhearing his raised voice, have poked their heads into the room to make sure nothing was wrong.
“The fundamental gap, in my view, is psychological,” Zarif said. “Some Western countries, the United States in particular, see sanctions as an asset, a lever to exert pressure on Iran. As long as this thinking persists, it will be very hard, difficult to reach a settlement.”
The United States and five other partners in the talks — Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia — are working to strike a deal in which Iran would agree to curb its ability to make nuclear weapons, something Iran says it has no interest in manufacturing. In exchange, international sanctions against Iran would be eased and could eventually be lifted.
The talks are taking place amid a heightened sense of urgency. Though a temporary agreement is in place through June, Kerry has said that if the parties cannot agree on the major principles of a long-term accord by late March, there’s no point in continuing. Deadlines for a pact have been extended twice, and Kerry said President Obama is unlikely to ask for a third extension.
Why not?
In Tehran, many hard-liners are opposed to making concessions on the nuclear program in talks with the West, particularly the United States. “The Islamic Republic of Iran will not give up its nuclear rights,” Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Sunday.
It shouldn't have to; they signed the nonproliferation agreement and nuclear power is their legal right.
In addition, the secretive talks are being held barely a week before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to deliver a controversial speech to Congress that he says will lay out the case for why the Israeli government considers the deal with Iran very dangerous, for Israel and for the world.
Then please explain the 30,000 Jews in Iran who are well treated or the memorial honoring Jewish heroes.
Netanyahu has been highly critical of the Obama administration’s handling of the talks.
Blah, blah.
On Sunday, he opened a cabinet meeting saying he was astonished that negotiations were continuing after a leaked report from the International Atomic Energy Agency reportedly said Iran was not fully cooperating with the agency’s monitors. Netanyahu said the deal could allow Iran “to develop the nuclear capabilities that threaten our existence.”
Whatchyasay?
--more--"
"Nuclear talks yield promise on Iran limits; Long-term deal discussed; many obstacles remain" by Michael R. Gordon, New York Times February 24, 2015
Oh, look, one of lead Iraq war liars.
GENEVA — Iranian and US officials ended a round of high-level nuclear talks here Monday with a discussion of limiting for at least 10 years Iran’s ability to produce nuclear material, but gradually easing restrictions on Tehran in additional years of any deal.
The proposed phasing out of restrictions is part of a broader effort to mollify critics in Tehran, where some hard-liners in the government and military oppose any deal that would force Iran to forsake nuclear production for a generation, and Washington, where some members of Congress have objected to an agreement that would expire in fewer than 10 years.
The question of how long any agreement would endure is a critical one: President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have said they will not sign an agreement that would give Iran the ability to produce enough fuel for a nuclear weapon in less than a year should it decide to “break out” of the accord. The administration has insisted that Iran’s breakout capacity be constrained for as long as possible, giving the United States, Europe, and Israel plenty of warning time to respond to a threat from Tehran. But after an accord expires, so would that warning time.
By phasing in a gradual easing of limits on Iran’s production, Kerry and Energy Secretary Ernest J. Moniz, who joined the negotiations for the first time, aim to extend the length of a potential deal. US officials said they would insist that Iran face hard constraints for “at least a double-digit number of years.”
Limits on the number of centrifuges Iran would be allowed to operate to enrich uranium, and for how long, are only part of an enormously complex negotiation.
“The number in the abstract is meaningless,” Antony J. Blinken, the newly appointed deputy secretary of state, said at the Aspen Institute in Washington on Monday. Warning time, he added, depends on a number of other factors, including how the centrifuges are configured, whether new or more efficient centrifuges would be used for enrichment, and how much nuclear fuel Iran is allowed to stockpile in the country. Part of an agreement would require Iran to ship much of its stockpile to Russia, but it is not clear yet how much.
The key, Blinken said, is getting an accord “that gives you plenty of time to do something” if Iran races for a bomb.
He said he could not predict whether an agreement was possible, but any deal would have to “cut off all pathway for Iran to get to a nuclear weapon,” including the covert path. That would require highly intrusive inspections, Blinken said, the details of which were still up for negotiations.
Ones that the U.S. and Israel won't allow for themselves.
Moniz dealt directly with Ali Akbar Salehi, director of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, who joined Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister, at the talks here.
Salehi was a student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology decades ago, when Moniz was a young professor there.
The inclusion of the countries’ top nuclear officials in the latest talks reflects the complexity of the potential agreement, which seeks to constrain Iran’s nuclear program in return for suspending and eventually removing economic sanctions.
The negotiations, which began Sunday night in a luxury hotel near Lake Geneva, sought to make progress toward an agreement before a March 31 deadline for finalizing an outline of an agreement.
The two sides plan to meet again Monday.
“We have made some progress,” a senior administration official told reporters. “We still have a long way to go.”
Take as long as you need to get there then.
--more--"
Don't know why this never appeared in print:
"Document details US-Iran cyberattacks" by David E. Sanger, New York Times February 23, 2015
WASHINGTON — A newly disclosed National Security Agency document illustrates the striking acceleration of the use of cyberweapons by the United States and Iran against each other, both for spying and sabotage, even as Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart met in Geneva to try to break a stalemate in the talks over Iran’s disputed nuclear program.
I believe it is only one side because of cui bono? Iran is not hacking the United States: it is the Jewish mafia that is off-limits, or the government itself to advance the $ecurity and $urveillance agenda.
The document, which was written in April 2013 for General Keith B. Alexander, then director of the NSA, described how Iranian officials had discovered new evidence the year before that the United States was preparing computer surveillance or cyberattacks on their networks.
It detailed how the United States and Britain had worked together to contain the damage from “Iran’s discovery of computer network exploitation tools” — the building blocks of cyberweapons. That was more than two years after the Stuxnet worm attack by the United States and Israel severely damaged computer networks at Tehran’s nuclear enrichment plant.
The document, which was first reported this month by The Intercept, an online publication that grew out of the disclosures by Edward J. Snowden, the former NSA contractor, did not describe the targets. But for the first time, the surveillance agency acknowledged that its attacks on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, a George W. Bush administration program, kicked off the cycle of retaliation and escalation that has come to mark the computer competition between the United States and Iran.
The document suggested that even while the high-stakes nuclear negotiations played out in Europe, day-to-day hostilities between the United States and Iran had moved decisively into cyberspace.
Translation: Iran will be blamed for whatever hack happens.
“The potential cost of using nuclear weapons was so high that no one felt they could afford to use them,” said David J. Rothkopf, the author of “National Insecurity,” a new study of strategic decisions made by several American administrations. But the cost of using cyberweapons is seemingly so low, Rothkopf said, that “we seem to feel we can’t afford not to use them” and that “many may feel they can’t afford ever to stop.”
The NSA’s new director, Admiral Michael S. Rogers, has declared that his first task is to deter attacks by making it costly for such countries as Russia, China, and Iran to wage cyberwar. But a former senior intelligence official who looked at the two-page document prepared for Alexander after it was published 10 days ago said it provided “more evidence of how far behind we are in figuring out how to deter attacks, and how to retaliate.’’
In Geneva, Kerry joined the high-level talks Sunday as negotiators race to reach an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program by the end of next month. Kerry met with his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif.
In an indication that the talks were at a sensitive stage, they were joined by Ernest Moniz, the US secretary of energy, and Iran’s nuclear chief, Ali Akbar Salehi. Hossein Fereydoon, a top aide and the brother of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, also participated. Zarif told reporters that Rouhani’s brother came to ensure ‘‘better coordination with the president.’’
Both Kerry and Zarif, however, sought to play down speculation that an agreement was imminent. Kerry said Saturday in London that significant gaps remain, a status update that has changed little in months.
And Zarif told reporters on Sunday that there are still differences in negotiating positions staked out in the talks, which he recently characterized as so spirited that his bodyguards, overhearing his raised voice, have poked their heads into the room to make sure nothing was wrong.
‘‘The fundamental gap, in my view, is psychological,’’ Zarif said. ‘‘Some Western countries, the United States in particular, see sanctions as an asset, a lever to exert pressure on Iran. As long as this thinking persists, it will be very hard, difficult to reach a settlement.’’
And that will persist as long as Israel has a lever to exert pre$$ure on the AmeriKan Congre$$, I guess.
--more--"
Did Netanyahu end the speech with another guilt-tripping reminder™ of a distortion at best or ma$$ive lie at wor$t, because I watched a rerun of the "Love Boat" instead?
Thank you for tolerating me all these years, dearly beloved readers.
UPDATE:
"Making War on Everyone; Blame the media
by Philip Giraldi • March 3, 2015
The New York Times is reporting
that most Republican voters as well as quite a few Democrats are
leaning in favor of American soldiers intervening directly in Syria and
Iraq. Republican politicians are paying attention, sounding more
bellicose than ever, demanding “boots on the ground” and even suggesting
that a John Bolton presidential run is a real possibility.
Apparently the widely noted war fatigue resulting from all the
unsuccessful military engagements after 9/11 has worn off. ISIS and
Russia are, of course the enemies du jour, but there is also a
frequently expressed hankering to go after the Mullahs in Iran if they
don’t completely cede their sovereignty tout suite. And there is always the “Red Menace” from China if all else fails. So many enemies, so little time to defeat them all.
How did all this come about as the United States has almost no actual
interests compelling getting involved in the Middle East or Eastern
Europe yet again? It is not as if a new foray into realms that we Yanks
know little or nothing about is likely to be any more successful than
the last couple of misadventures. To be sure, a series of sickening
atrocities by ISIS has gotten the juices flowing, but the White House’s
desire to obtain blanket authority to initiate and deepen an open ended
conflict that presumably will go on forever is just about as poorly
defined and prone to failure as was the Bushite global war on terror
that it replaces.
Part of the problem is undoubtedly an ignorant public. Foreign news
coverage is superficial and tends to follow a preordained groupthink
that is set by the engaged punditry in Washington and New York City.
Putin is always evil and the Iranians are always perfidious. Americans
remain ignorant because they are fed a steady diet of untruths and are
rarely allowed to hear or read alternative viewpoints. The journalists
who write the lies for the leading newspapers and who interview Senator
John McCain repeatedly on Sunday mornings are far worse than Brian
Williams, who only embellished his stories. The Judy Millers of this
world go far beyond that in selling a complete set of bogus goods
carefully packaged into prefabricated arguments, which, in the case of
Iraq, led to an unnecessary and ultimately disastrous war.
The media has a responsibility to challenge such dishonesty but it rarely does so. A recent puff piece in the Washington Post
on Republican President wannabe Mike Huckabee’s acting as a tour guide
to Israel was astonishing in terms of what it forgot to mention.
Huckabee clearly thumped his belief that God and Israel and the United
States are all joined at the hip, but along the way he also revealed
that he believes that the Palestinian people do not actually exist,
denying them any kind of historical claim to their own land. The article
also quoted Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of
America, who was accompanying Huckabee, as saying “there’s really no
such thing as the ‘Palestinians’.”
The author of the piece, the Post’s Israel correspondent
William Booth, did not point out that the claim is ridiculous and
un-historical, that Palestine has been settled for thousands of years
with an indigenous population that was initially pagan and Jewish, then
mostly Christian, and finally mostly Muslim. If roots define national
legitimacy then the Palestinian Arabs have more claim to the land that
now makes up Israel than do the recent Jewish settlers who came from
Europe, America and elsewhere in the Middle East. But a casual reader
knowing none of that would not be enlightened by Mr. Booth and might
quite possibly leave the article with the impression that there are no
Palestinians.
The Post’s editorial policy is relentlessly neocon under the
tutelage of Fred Hiatt, whom, hopefully, Jeff Bezos will be firing when
he finally gets around to shaking up the paper’s senior staff. There
has been a steady drumbeat to take military action against Russia and
Syria while sniping relentlessly against any possible agreement with
Iran.
Gems that have appeared recently in connection with the upcoming
visit by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu include Dennis Ross’s
February 22 nd op-ed
on “How to ease Israel’s concerns.” Ross, once described as “Israel’s
lawyer,” is inevitably most concerned with making Israel comfortable and
proposes legislation mandating a military strike by the U.S. if Iran
were perceived to be moving towards weapons grade production of uranium.
Of course Ross ignores the evidence that such a perception can be
engineered through fake intelligence or by political interests seeking
to start a war. The IAEA recently determined that much of the case for
Iran having an alleged weapons program in the first place was derived
from intelligence fabricated
by the United States and also Israel. Ross’s advice would create a trip
wire and place the decision whether the U.S. should go to war with Iran
in Israel’s hands.
A day later there was a triple whammy. The Post printed a letter
from one Robert Tropp claiming that Iran is “developing a nuclear
weapon” and “wants to destroy Israel.” Neither assertion is true but the
editorial staff apparently felt the letter made a significant
contribution to the discussion. On the facing page appeared two
articles, one by Hiatt himself, entitled “A credibility gap: Obama’s challenge in selling and Iran deal” and the second by former Senator Joe Lieberman entitled “Hear out Israel’s leader.”
Hiatt argues that President Barack Obama should have sought to
“eradicate[e] Iran’s nuclear weapons potential” and points out that the
president has backed off from previous foreign policy commitments,
including what to do about Iraq, Syria, and Russia. One might note that
Hiatt’s desire to “eradicate” a “potential” could be interpreted to mean
almost anything that Iran does that the Washington Post does not like.
Because Iran is a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty signatory whose
facilities are open to inspection it has a perfect right to enrich
uranium for peaceful purposes. All of which means that Hiatt is
essentially saying that Iran’s rights under international law should be
abrogated because they make Israel nervous, though he does not, of
course, mention Israel. Nor for that matter does he bother to explain
exactly how Iran threatens the United States.
Israel, of course, is central to Hiatt’s argument. It has an
estimated secret arsenal that includes two hundred nuclear weapons and
multiple delivery systems, which Hiatt does not find disturbing,
presumably because Benjamin Netanyahu is such a solid individual. Hiatt
concludes by expressing his desire to see Congress as a partner in any
agreement with Iran. As the Republican majority in Congress is hostile
to any deal he is basically calling for a solution that can only fail.
Lieberman on the other hand does not hide his deep regard for Israel
and all its works. He encourages all Congressmen to attend the Netanyahu
speech on March 3 rd. For Joe, the former “conscience of the
Senate,” it is all about hearing Bibi explain how “best to stop Iran
from getting nuclear weapons” and also because everyone should be a
“strong supporter of America’s alliance with Israel.” In addition
Congressmen have to be informed by experts like Netanyahu because some
day down the road they might have to raise armies and declare war as
Iran is not just threatening Israel. Those mad Mullahs are developing
nukes and long range missiles that can strike America. And nuclear
proliferation by Iran is particularly bad because it might encourage
Arab neighbors to do the same.
Joe then returns to his oft repeated meme that “Israel is one of our
closest and most steadfast allies” before concluding that Iran “remains
the greatest threat to the security of America and the world.” The op-ed
is so bad that one suspects Joe wrote it himself, though possibly with a
little help from AIPAC. Every single point made is wrong or misleading,
most particularly the double assertion that Israel is a wonderful ally.
It is not an ally at all and never has been. And if there is an out of
control secret nuclear proliferator in the Middle East whose paranoid
behavior might well produce a nuclear World War 3 it is Israel, which
ex-Senator Lieberman fails to grasp.
If I could I would like to send a message to the mainstream media. It
might go something like this: “Please tell your readers the truth for a
change. The only thing exceptional about America at the present time is
our hubris. We helped create al-Qaeda by attacking the Soviets
in Afghanistan. Iraq is a basket case because we invaded it without
cause. Syria is in chaos because we have never seriously sought a
peaceful solution with Bashar al-Assad. What we have done in Iraq and
Syria taken together has produced ISIS. Libya is a toxic mess because we
overthrew its government on phony humanitarian grounds. Afghanistan is
about to copy Iraq because we have occupied it for thirteen years
without a clue how to get out. We started the troubles in Ukraine and
with Russia when we broke our promise by expanding NATO and then worked
to overthrow an elected government. And finally there is Israel. Israel
is not an ally and is the source of many of the problems in the Middle
East. American and Israeli interests do not coincide, frequently quite
the contrary.”
--MORE--"
Now if you will excuse me, readers, I need to get down to UMass myself.
NDUs:
UMass Lowell gets grant to find Earth 2.0
"Netanyahu implores Congress on Iran; Says nuclear pact would be bad deal" by Bryan Bender, Globe Staff March 03, 2015
WASHINGTON — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, in an impassioned speech Tuesday on Capitol Hill. It was a highly unusual spectacle: the leader of a close foreign ally standing before a joint meeting of the House and Senate in the Capitol and publicly rebuking an American president’s foreign policy.
President Obama quickly dismissed the speech as containing nothing new, devoid of alternatives to the current negotiations. But the speech, with references to the longstanding relationship between the United States and Israel, brought lawmakers to their feet numerous times — and increased political pressure on the administration to reconsider its strategy with Iran.
I can't tolerate it, and think I'm going to repuke.
Netanyahu framed his argument in the context of the Holocaust, and emotionally described the threat posed to Israel by an Iranian regime that is bent on the Jewish state’s annihilation.
My statements from above still stand and it turns out I knew what he was going to say.
********************
Netanyahu recalled another dark period involving Iran in Jewish history: the foiled plot to exterminate the Jews in Persia by a viceroy named Haman 2,500 years ago — coincidentally commemorated this week as the Jewish holiday of Purim.
That was how long ago?
That's even worse than bringing up that other guy.
If they gotta go that far back.... f*** him.
Related: Purim Perversion and Other Jew News
Always seem to shed some Palestinian blood in celebration, don't they?
In singling out Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Hosseini Khamenei, Netanyahu warned of “another Persian potentate.”
“He tweets that Israel must be annihilated,” the Israeli leader said of Khamenei.
Did he?
He also read off a list of terrorist attacks around the world attributed to Iran and its proxies, such as the Lebanese group Hezbollah, including attacks on US and Jewish targets.
All Israeli false flags with collaborators inside governments. Sorry, but....
Netanyahu then recalled the Holocaust in recognizing survivor and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Elie Wiesel, who looked on from the gallery as a guest of Boehner.
The whining really has to stop.
“The days of the Jewish people remaining passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over!” Netanyahu said to rousing applause.
They have been far from passive since before the turn of the 20th century if not even farther back.
But he played down any partisan rancor surrounding his appearance.
So have I because it is $hit $how fooley, nothing more.
Netanyahu said he never intended for his appearance to stoke such controversy and thanked both parties for their support of Israel “decade after decade” and “from Harry Truman to Barack Obama.”
He said the US-Israel relationship “must always remain above politics.”
And if it doesn't, expect a primary challenger funded by AIPAC (coverage of that conference curiously lacking in my Globe).
A number of close observers said the speech was likely to be highly effective in shifting the debate in Washington over the Iran issue.
“I think this changes a lot,” said Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, a Washington think tank. “You can see why the administration didn’t want him to speak.”
He got a reception louder than Obama or any other US president.
Of course, that's not the way the thing is playing throughout the nation or the truth media to your right here.
--more--"
At least Iranians watched the damn thing, and I offer my sincere apology for that pathetic performance by the U.S. Congre$$.
I was going to say I couldn't imagine anything more pathetic, but....
"Robert Kraft shows off Super Bowl trophy on Capitol Hill" by Sylvan Lane, Globe Correspondent March 03, 2015
WASHINGTON—Congressional staffers and Capitol staff lined up for yards Tuesday afternoon to meet New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and take a picture with him in front the Lombardi Trophy.
(Sigh)
Representative Richard Neal of Springfield hosted a 3:30 p.m. meet-and-greet for the New England delegation and its aides in a House of Representatives room. A line of staffers and fans from all over the District — some sporting suits while others donned Patriots gear — stretched down Capitol hallways and eventually had to be cut off for time.
“We have a lot of fans and they appreciate you if you appreciate them,” said Kraft after the reception. “They’re what make us special--if we are—by their support.”
Senators, representatives, and staffers shared memories from the nerve-wracking, 28-24 win over the Seattle Seahawks last month, gushed about their love for the Pats, and took selfies with the trophy and its owner.
I certainly hope no tax dollars were used here.
Both Massachusetts Senators Edward Markey and Elizabeth Warren stopped by, along with almost every Massachusetts representative. Representative Chellie Pingree of Maine also attended.
The reception was a cheery break in the midst of a contentious week on Capitol Hill, occurring shortly after a controversial speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the House’s approval of Department of Homeland Security funding.
Kraft’s event was scheduled to coincide with his trip to Washington at Netanyahu’s invitation, so he could watch the speech from the House gallery.
OMFG!
“We have so many weighty issues facing us this week with national security so it’s nice to have a chance to celebrate and show some regional pride,” said Representative Katherine Clark of Melrose. “This is a real treat and my sons are going to be quite jealous of this moment.”
Security and staff began to shut down the event after more than an hour of greeting fans. As Neal’s staff circled around Kraft for a final picture, one more fan sheepishly walked into the room for his own: Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.
Baaaaaaaaa!
--more--"
