Top Iranian Nuke Deal Negotiator Admits "Anytime" Inspections Are Pretty Much Bogus 

Katie Pavlich / Townhall Tipsheet

 

As you know by now, earlier this week the Obama administration struck a nuclear deal with Iran, claiming "the most intrusive inspections ever" were part of the negotiation process.

First, lets take a step back to April when White House Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes said the White House was demanding anytime, anywhere, 24/7 inspections.

"We will have anytime, anywhere access to the nuclear facilities."

As Guy has pointed out, Obama's Energy Secretary also said anytime, anywhere inspections were expected with a deal.

But fast forward to this week and Rhodes is claiming anytime, anywhere inspections weren't ever on the table and that inspections have been tailored to nuclear facilities.

"We never sought anytime/anywhere inspections," he recently told CNN's Erin Burnett.

Further, as part of the deal reached Iran will have a 24 day heads up period before inspections are conducted, giving the regime the ability to move around and hide any potential violations of the nuclear agreement.

Now Wendy Sherman, a top negotiator for the Iranian nuclear deal and the same woman who handled negotiations of North Korea's nuclear program in the 1990s (that went well), is admitting that the entire inspections process is pretty bogus (bolding is mine).

The US pledge three months ago for “anytime, anyplace” access to Iran’s nuclear facilities was more of a rhetorical flourish than anything else, US Under Secretary of State Wendy Sherman said on Thursday “I think this is one of those circumstances where we have all been rhetorical from time to time,” Sherman, who played a central role in the negotiations, said in a conference call with Israeli diplomatic reporters.

“That phrase, ‘anytime, anywhere,’ is something that became popular rhetoric, but I think people understood that if the IAEA felt it had to have access, and had a justification for that access, that it would be guaranteed, and that is what happened.”  

What could possibly go wrong?

Vice President Joe Biden was on Capitol Hill twice this week trying to convince skeptical Democrats to support the deal. Congress is in a 60-day review plan of the bill and waiting for an up or down vote. The United Nations will be given the chance to vote on the plan before Congress in the next few weeks.

Jihad on U.S. Troops Is Not a "Circumstance"

Michelle Malkin / Townhall Columnist

 

Four U.S. Marines, barred from carrying weapons at naval training facilities despite explicit ISIS threats against our military, are dead in Tennessee. Another service member and a Chattanooga police officer survived gunshots after Thursday's two-stage massacre allegedly at the hands of 24-year-old jihadist Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez.

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus called the terrorist's spree "insidious and unfathomable." President Obama bemoaned the "heartbreaking circumstance" in which the murdered Marines found themselves.

"Unfathomable"? Not if you've been paying attention. Islam-inspired hate crimes against our troops have continued unabated since the Obama White House first dismissed the 2009 Fort Hood massacre as "workplace violence."

Here's what's unfathomable: While the social justice warriors in Washington bend over backward to appease CAIR and Muslim civil rights absolutists, Americans in uniform are dying on American soil at the hands of Allah's homicidal avengers -- but the commander in chief couldn't even bother to deliver a live statement to the nation yesterday about the bloodshed.

Instead, Obama issued another bland, bloodless pronouncement about the assassinations of our disarmed troops.

"Heartbreaking circumstance"? Lightning strikes are random events of unfortunate circumstance. The concerted attacks and plots against our troops in their recruitment centers and on their bases here at home are outrageous acts of war.

Have you forgotten?

Chattanooga jihad murderer worked at nuclear power plant

 
By Robert Spencer / Jihad Watch

 

What could possibly have gone wrong? “Chattanooga shooter worked at Perry Nuclear Power Plant; Medra Marketing,” WKYC, July 17, 2015 (thanks to Jerk Chicken): 

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. — The man who opened fire at two military facilities in Chattanooga, killing four Marines and injuring three others, is Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez. WKYC has confirmed that he worked […]

Read in browser »

Homeland Security says Chattanooga shooter WAS ‘ISIS-INSPIRED,’ warns of OTHER attacks

Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

When I broke the story of an ISIS account posting a tweet with what appeared to be fore-knowledge of the Chattanooga jihad slaughter, heads were exploding on the left that the time stamp was after the mass murder began. Perhaps that is true but the ISIS tweet was published well before we know who the was a devout Muslim waging jihad.  The tweet was published before he was named.

Garland was ISIS-inspired as well. Same ideology, same supremacism, same operation — pulling up to the target and opening fire. The only difference is we were armed and the marines weren’t – that is a crime.

It’s not about being ISIS-inspired. It;s about being compelled to wage war in the cause of Islam as commanded in the quran.
...

Read the whole entry »

     

• Email to a friend • Article Search •