-
Iran Nuclear Watch: Carrot and Stick?
Graphic Courtesy of Cox & Forkum
AP: Iran wants to talk but keep nuke program
Iran said Tuesday it was ready for “serious negotiations” on its nuclear program, insisting it was not trying simply to buy time to develop weapons. A semiofficial news agency said the government was unwilling to abandon uranium enrichment — the key U.S. demand.
The statements came as the government delivered its written response to a package of incentives offered by the United States and five other world powers if Iran rolls back on its nuclear program — and punishments if it does not.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said Washington will “study the Iranian response carefully” but was prepared to move forward with sanctions against Tehran if it was not positive. The White House held off commenting until it had studied the text. The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said the document was “extensive” and required “a detailed and careful analysis.”
President Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Mullahs have made it CLEAR. They will NOT halt uranium enrichment.
The P-5-Plus-1 can negotiate but Iran does NOT want to “DANCE.”
The Europeans and the world has to understand – IRAN WANTS NUKES and nobody will stop them peacefully.
This Aug. 12, 2006 IKONOS satellite image provided by GeoEye on Tuesday, Aug. 22, 2006 purports to show the Natanz nuclear facility in Iran. Iran’s unprecedented refusal to allow access to its underground facility at Natanz could seriously hamper U.N. attempts to ensure Tehran is not trying to produce nuclear weapons, and might violate the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, diplomats and U.N. officials told The Associated Press.
Iranian officials offered no details of what they called a “new formula” meant to bridge differences with the six powers — the five permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany — over its nuclear program. But Tehran’s response appeared geared at enticing those countries into further negotiations by offering a broad set of proposals vague enough to hold out hope of progress in resolving the standoff.
If the Iranians leaves the door open to halting enrichment as talks progress, that would drive a wedge in the Security Council between the Americans, British and French on one side and the Russians and Chinese on the other. Last month, Russia said the Council was in no rush to pressure Iran, striking a more conciliatory tone than the United States.
The United States should VETO any UNSC resolution that does NOT demand a halt to Iranian uranium enrichment. If there is NO resolution, then the United States should impose their own economic sanctions and travel visa restrictions.
It is doubtful that any of the Europeans, including Britain will EVER have the political will to meaninfully sanction Iran. And who can say these sanctions will be effective anyway?
The August 31 deadline looms but it is HOLLOW.
The question is whether Condoleezza Rice and the Bush administration will have the will and fortitude to say NO to Iran.
Stay tuned…..
Captain Ed has Sanctions Next
In this manner, it will replay the entire Iraq issue all over again, only this time in less than twelve years. The UNSC teeters on the brink of extinction as it continues to follow the League of Nations playbook. If the UNSC gets stymied in its attempt to halt Iranian nuclear development, then the delay of the past several months may come back to haunt the region if Iran achieves success. In fact, if the UNSC cannot agree to unite against the mullahs in Teheran, they may well push the Anglosphere into military options as the only course of action left to us that have some chance of stopping the Islamic Nuke.
Once again, we have tried to engage the global community to stand fast against nuclear extortion and terror-supporting states. If the global community surrenders again, we hope that the multilateralists among us will finally take notice of the futility in engaging nations too committed to appeasement to act in their own defense, let alone ours.
Flap agrees that the United Nations is teetering on non-existence. The UNSC fiasco in Lebanon and the Oil for Food Program are prime examples. If they fumble Iran, then three strikes and the United Nations is OUT of the United States.
But, Flap disagrees with the Captain in that ultimately it will be the United States and Israel that deal Iran’s nuclear program.
Previous:
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Responds to the P-5-Plus-1
Michael Ramirez on Nuclear Iran and the United Nations
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Blocks United Nations Nuclear Inspections
Iran Nuclear Watch: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – Iran Will Continue Nuclear Program
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Says It Will NOT Halt Uranium Enrichment
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Military Exercises to Test Asymmetrical Warfare Combat Doctrine
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Information Blackout – Police Destroying Satellite Dishes in Tehran
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Ready to Discuss Suspension of Uranium Enrichment?
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Cleric Ahmad Khatami Warns Israel of Missile Attack
The Natanz uranium enrichment complex in Natanz is pictured in this January 2, 2006 satellite image.
Technorati Tags: Iran, Ahmadinejad
-
Dixie Chicks Watch: Film Documentary – “Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing” Picked Up for Worldwide Distribution
Musicians (L-R) Emily Robison, Natalie Maines and Martie Maguire of the group The Dixie Chicks arrive for Time’s celebration of the magazine’s ‘100 Most Influential People’ in New York May 8, 2006. The politically charged documentary ‘Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing’ has been picked up for worldwide distribution by the Weinstein Co.
Reuters: Dixie Chicks documentary could be election issue
The politically charged documentary “Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing” has been picked up for worldwide distribution by the Weinstein Co.
A release is tentatively scheduled for the fall, possibly right before the November elections.
The film revolves around the aftermath of singer Natalie Maines’ statement at a 2003 London concert, where she said, “Just so you know, we’re ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas.”
It chronicles death threats, political attacks and radio boycotts against the country trio, and that could make the film a political hot potato as well as potential ammo should longtime Democratic party supporter Harvey Weinstein become involved in the fall political campaigns.
Does anyone think that this documentary that will appeal to the LEFTY FRINGE NUTTERS who hate President Bush will have ANY effect on American’s voting patterns?
NOPE
Only a Hollywood Lefty Democrat activist would think this film would have ANY appeal at all – no matter how many new songs there are in the soundtrack.
If folks wish to boycott Dixie Chick recordings and concerts because of Natalie Maines’ political statements, this is their right. If privately owned radio stations no longer wish to play Dixie Chick’s songs, this is their right – in fact no one has a right to air play – this is certainly an artistic discretionary choice.
Flap does not know who is advising the Dixie Chick’s on their career. They have already had a number of concerts cancelled because of a lack of interest. This documentary will have NO political effect and only alienate the Chicks further from their country-western base of fans.
Stay tuned……
Previous:
Dixie Chick Watch: Red States Disapprove With Their Feet
Dixie Chick Watch: Natalie Maines – “I Don’t See Why People Care About Patriotism.â€
Dixie Chicks Watch: Tour Struggling in Red State Markets
Dixie Chicks Watch: Taking The Long Way, Debuts At #1 On Billboard Top 200
Technorati Tags: DixieChicks, NatalieMaines
-
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: More Dirty Politics from the Lamont Left
Sen. Joseph Lieberman is seeking reelection under his own new party.
AP: Some Dems want Lieberman out of party
Critics of Sen. Joe Lieberman’s independent run to keep his job attacked on two fronts Monday, with one group asking an elections official to throw him out of the Democratic Party and a former rival calling on state officials to keep his name off the November ballot.
Staffers for Lieberman, who lost the Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, called both efforts dirty politics. The senator filed as an independent candidate a day after the loss, running under the new Connecticut for Lieberman party.
A group whose members described themselves as peace activists asked Sharon Ferrucci, New Haven’s Democratic registrar of voters, to remove Lieberman from the party, arguing that he cannot be a Democrat while running under another party’s banner.
The request could lead to a hearing in which Lieberman, the Democrats’ vice presidential nominee in 2000, would have to argue that he still adheres to the party’s principles.
“The law is pretty clear he is no longer a member of the Democratic Party in good standing,” said group leader Henry Lowendorf. “There was an open vote and he was voted out. He joined a different party.”
Ferrucci said she would research the request, the first of its kind in her two decades on the job.
What? Throw the Democrat’s Vice Presidential candidate in 2000 out of the party? While he is a sitting Democrat United States Senator?
These Ned Lamont LEFTY NUTTERS in Connecticut are looking like a Jon Lovitz routine.
But, wait there is more…..
John Orman, a Democrat who gave up a challenge to Lieberman last year, argued in complaints filed with the state Monday that Lieberman should be kept off the Nov. 7 ballot.
Orman, a Fairfield University political science professor, accused Lieberman of creating “a fake political party,” adding: “He’s doing anything he can to get his name on the ballot.”
Excuse me, Flap thought voting for candidates for political office was a democratic exercise and if you have complied with Connecticut’s voting laws then…….
What about Ned Lamont? What does he say about these attempts to sabotage the Lieberman campaign?
Lamont distanced himself Monday from the peace activists’ request. He told reporters that Lieberman should not be removed from the Democratic rolls, and that Lieberman has the right under state law to form the new party.
“He’s got the right to run. It’s not what I would have done,” Lamont said.
Right and didn’t Lamont distance himself from Jane Hamsher and this?
“I don’t know anything about the blogs. I’m not responsible for those. I have no comment on them.â€
These dirty tricks continue to emanate from the lefty fringe that is driving Ned Lamont’s candidacy.
Lieberman campaign manager Sherry Brown said the effort was “dirty political tricks at its worst.”
“This kind of ridiculous, partisan game-playing is not going to provide anyone in Connecticut with better jobs, better health care, or better schools,” she said.
Certainly, this will turn off the moderate Democrat voters of Connecticut and explains why Lieberman continues to lead in the latest polls. Has the Democrat party of FDR, Truman, and JFK devolved into disqualifying folks?
A Jon Lovitz routine may be too kind of words.
Stay tuned……
Previous:
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Kerry Calls Lieberman the New Cheney
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Lieberman Calls for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld’s Resignation
The Ryskind Sketchbook: Re-post
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Lieberman Leads Lamont 53 – 41 Among Likely Connecticut Voters
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Richie Rich and the Two Anti-Semites
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Latest Rasmussen Poll Has Lieberman Beating Lamont
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Karl Rove Called Lieberman On Primary Election Day To Wish Him Well
Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Lieberman Kicks Off Independent Campaign
Technorati Tags: JoeLieberman, NedLamont
-
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Responds to the P-5-Plus-1
Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani attends a meeting with the envoys of Germany, France, Britain, China, Russia and Switzerland in Tehran, August 22, 2006. Iran on Tuesday handed over its reply to an incentives package by world powers aimed at allaying Western fears that Tehran seeks to build atomic bombs, Iran’s state-run Arabic-language Al-Alam television reported.AP: Iran ready for ‘serious’ nuclear talks
Iran formally responded Tuesday to a package of Western incentives aimed at persuading Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment, with officials saying it has offered a “new formula” to resolve the dispute. The country’s top nuclear negotiator said Tehran was ready to enter “serious negotiations.”
Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, hand-delivered Iran’s response to the Western package of nuclear incentives to ambassadors from Britain, China, Russia, France, Germany and Switzerland, state-run television said, without disclosing details.
Officials close to the meeting said Iran’s response offered the “new formula” to resolve the dispute over Tehran’s nuclear activities. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information.
“Iran has provided a comprehensive response to everything said in the Western package. In addition, Iran, in its formal response, has asked some questions to be answered,” one official said, without elaborating.
(L-R) British Charge d’Affairs Kate Smith, French ambassador Bernard Poletti, Russian ambassador Alexander Sadavnikov, and German ambassador Baron Paul Von Maltzahn, wait for a meeting with Iran’s top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani in Tehran, August 22, 2006.
So, let’s “TALK ABOUT TALKS.”
Another STALL by IRAN.
In the meantime, the centrifuges are spinning and enriching uranium at Natanz and Iran is a few moments closer to possessing a nuclear weapon.
The P-5-Plus-1 will probably negotiate again with Iran. And the August 31 deadline by the UNSC demanding Iran halt uranium enrichment?
Who knows? AND Who cares?
United Nations Security Council sanctions are WORTHLESS.
The United States and Israel will make their OWN assessment and when the “POINT OF NO RETURN” is reached…..Previous:
Michael Ramirez on Nuclear Iran and the United Nations
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Blocks United Nations Nuclear Inspections
Iran Nuclear Watch: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – Iran Will Continue Nuclear Program
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Says It Will NOT Halt Uranium Enrichment
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Military Exercises to Test Asymmetrical Warfare Combat Doctrine
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Information Blackout – Police Destroying Satellite Dishes in Tehran
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Ready to Discuss Suspension of Uranium Enrichment?
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Cleric Ahmad Khatami Warns Israel of Missile Attack
The Natanz uranium enrichment complex in Natanz is pictured in this January 2, 2006 satellite image.
Technorati Tags: Iran, Ahmadinejad
-
CIA Leak Case Watch: Was it Richard Armitage?
AP: Calendars show Armitage met reporter
The No. 2 State Department official met with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward in mid-June 2003, the same time the reporter has testified that an administration official talked to him about CIA employee Valerie Plame.
Official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show then-Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage held a one-hour meeting marked “private appointment” with Woodward on June 13, 2003.
And why is a June 13, 2003 meeting important?
Let’s look at a time line:
Now, we know why the Fitzpatrick prosecution of Karl Rove has been dismissed. But, what about Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff?
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has investigated whether Bush administration officials intentionally revealed Plame’s identity as a one-time CIA covert operative to punish her husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, for criticizing the administration’s march to war with Iraq.
When contacted at home Monday night, Woodward declined to discuss his meeting with Armitage or the identity of his source in the CIA leak case. Instead, he referred to his statement last year that he had a “casual and offhand” discussion about Plame with an unidentified administration official in mid-June 2003.
The “LEAK” or “OUTING” of Valerie Plame occurred a few weeks before Joseph Wilson’s column in the New York Times and Robert Novak’s column.
So, this entire FLAP has been about NOTHING – an off-hand comment by Richard Armitrage on background to Washington Post Bob Woodward prior to the supposed Bush Administration vendetta to GET Plame and Wilson.
NO VENDETTA
Bob Woodward is seen Monday, Dec. 5, 2005 at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage’s official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show a one-hour meeting marked ‘private appointment’ with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward on June 13, 2003. The mid-June 2003 meeting occurred the same time the reporter has testified an administration official talked to him about CIA employee Valerie Plame.
A person familiar with the information prosecutors have gathered, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because the material remains sealed, said Woodward’s meeting with the confidential source was June 13, 2003.
The calendar released to the AP is the first confirmation that Woodward and Armitage met during the key time in the CIA leak case that was the focus of Fitzgerald’s probe.
The identity of Woodward’s source remains one of the big mysteries in the case because the Post reporter is the first member of the news media known to have discussed Plame’s CIA employment with an administration official.
Woodward’s former Post editor, Ben Bradlee, has speculated publicly that Armitage was the reporter’s “likely source.”
Flap first reported this “likely source” of Armitage last Fall here. And Woodward’s knowledge and critique of the Fitzgerald investigation here.
And defense attorneys for I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the lone administration official charged in the CIA leak case, also have suggested that Armitage could have been Woodward’s source when they unsuccessfully tried to persuade a court to order the release of State Department documents.
Fitzgerald’s office declined to comment Monday. Reached at his home in Virginia, Armitage said he could not discuss his cooperation with Fitzgerald’s office, the meeting with Woodward or any details of the case.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage pauses while meeting Russia’s Security Council chief Igor Ivanov in Moscow in this Oct. 28, 2004, file photo. Armitage’s official State Department calendars, provided to The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show a one-hour meeting marked ‘private appointment’ with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward on June 13, 2003. The mid-June 2003 meeting occurred the same time the reporter has testified an administration official talked to him about CIA employee Valerie Plame.
Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, faces trial in January on charges that he lied to authorities about conversations he had with reporters about Plame.
Libby’s lawyer, William Jeffress, said Monday that Armitage’s calendar only bolsters the defense’s argument that information about the State Department official’s role in the CIA leak affair should be released.
So, shouldn’t the prosecution of Scooter Libby be halted?
YES
The entire prosecution has been a WASTE of taxpayer money. But, then Flap has said this before. Why is Fitzgerald stubbornly proceeding? No jury will convict Libby.
Woodward has said Plame came up incidentally during an interview he was conducting for a book he wrote on the Iraq war. He said the source told him that Plame was a CIA analyst on weapons of mass destruction, and no evidence has emerged in public that Woodward’s source actually knew she had been a covert agent. Fitzgerald has signaled there are no plans — beyond the Libby indictment — to prosecute any other officials for releasing Plame’s identity.
Armitage’s calendar also shows that a week before Woodward’s meeting with Armitage, the deputy secretary of state met for 15 minutes with Libby.
Two people familiar with the meeting, however, said the Libby-Armitage meeting dealt with issues involving Pakistan and said the subject of the CIA leak case wasn’t raised. Both spoke only on condition of anonymity because some information about the meeting remains classified.
NO PLOT and NO CRIME
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald should END this two year plus investigation.
Captain Ed has Was Armitage The Plame Leaker?
If Armitage sourced the Plame connection, it would also explain the lack of prosecutorial interest on the part of Patrick Fitzgerald. An Armitage lead pretty much stops at Armitage, given his relationship with the rest of the administration. The fizzling of Fitzmas becomes more comprehensible.
Of course, no AP report on this subject would be complete without a little misinformation:
Wilson reported back to the Bush administration that he was unable to
verify the claim, but the administration continued to use the
information to bolster its argument for war. Wilson has cited the
decision to rely on the bad intelligence in his criticisms of the
administration.The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has long established that this version is nothing more than fiction. Wilson reported that the Nigerien PM believed that an offer from Iraq for secret trade involved uranium, and that he had rejected the overture. The Bush administration said that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium, based on British intelligence that the UK still insists is accurate. Wilson twisted his report to claim that Iraq had not purchased uranium, which was true — but the Bush administration never claimed it had.
Maybe once we establish the actual source of the Plame leak, we can get the press to establish the truth about Wilson’s claims. Unfortunately, we will probably wait at least as long for that development as we did for the Armitage/Woodward meeting to come to light.
Previous:
CIA Leak Case Watch: Karl Rove Won’t Be Charged in CIA Leak Case
Plamegate Watch: Valerie Plame Cashes IN
CIA Leak Case Watch: Bob Novak – “President Knows Leak Sourceâ€
CIA Leak Case Watch: Valerie Plame Retires From CIA
CIA Leak Case Watch: Time Reporter, Viveca Novak, Asked to Testify
CIA Leak Case Watch: Woodward Expresses Regret But WON’T Reveal Source
CIA Leak Case Watch: Is Armitage Woodward’s Source?
CIA Leak Case Watch: Fitzpatrick Proceeds Before NEW Grand Jury
CIA Leak Case Watch: Joe Wilson wants Washington Post to Probe WoodwardCIA Leak Case Watch: Time to Withdraw the Libby Indictment
CIA Leak Case Watch: Woodward Claim on CIA Leak Disputes Charge
CIA Leak Case Watch: Charges Don’t Directly Address CIA LeakCIA Leak Case Watch: Lack-Of-Memory Defense for Libby?
CIA Leak Case Watch: Joe Wilson wants Washington Post to Probe Woodward
CIA Leak Case Watch: Time to Withdraw the Libby Indictment
CIA Leak Case Watch: Woodward Claim on CIA Leak Disputes Charge
CIA Leak Case Watch: Charges Don’t Directly Address CIA Leak
Technorati Tags: RichardArmitage, BobWoodward, ValeriePlame, JosephWilson, CIA, CIALeakCase, PatrickFitzgerald, RobertNovak, ScooterLibby
-
Israel at War Watch: Iran and Syria Ready to Re-Arm Hezbollah
Katyusha rockets are fired from the outskirts of the southern Lebanese port city of Tyre into Israel on August 6. Turkey has grounded two Syria-bound Iranian planes over the past month to search for weapons following Israeli intelligence that Iran is supplying rockets to Hezbollah.
Washington Times: Report: Iran, Syria re-arming Hezbollah
Iran and Syria are working to replenish weaponry and funding for Hezbollah militants in Lebanon, a London Arabic newspaper reported Monday.
The daily al-Sharq al-Awast quoted a senior officer of the Revolutionary Guard in Tehran saying huge quantities of weapons reached Damascus during the last three weeks and are waiting to be transferred to Lebanon.
A spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry, Hamid Rada Asafi, confirmed Sunday “the government is learning the need for aid and ways to transfer it to Lebanon.”
United Nation Security Resolution 1701 is failing. Aren’t Syria and Iran as members of the United Nations obligated to comply with the resolution? Or are they blowing it off like all of the previous resolutions?
If Israel wishes to defend itself, this cease-fire cannot last much longer.
If not, then Hezbollah will re-arm with the acquiescence of the Lebanese Army and UNIFIL. So, in the next war there will be 30,000 troops in southern Lebanon at peril.
Previous:
Israel at War Watch: UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan Expected To Give UNIFIL Teeth
Israel at War Watch: Israel Preparing for More Fighting?
Cox & Forkum: Disproportionate Response II
Israel at War Watch: Kofi Annan – Israel Raid Violates Cease-Fire
Israel at War Watch: Lebanon Warns Israel After Israeli Raid Against Hezbollah
Israel at War Watch: Lebanese Army Reaches Southern Border with Israel
Israel at War Watch: Lebanese Army Moves Below Latani River
Israel At War Watch: Israel Defense Forces To Withdraw Despite Plans To Leave Hezbollah Armed
Michael Ramirez on Israel-Hezbollah War
Israel at War Watch: Israel to STOP Pullout If Lebanese Army Fails to Deploy Timely
Israel At War Watch: Israel Threatens To Resume War If Hezbollah Refuses to Disarm
Israel At War Watch: Hassan Nasrallah – The Disarmament of Hezbollah Should NOT Be Discussed Now
Israel at War Watch: The Arab Street Rejoices – Mocks Israel And United States
Israel at War Watch: Conversation With Benjamin Netanyahu – Hezbollah Will NOT Disarm
Iran Nuclear Watch: Iran Cleric Ahmad Khatami Warns Israel of Missile Attack
-
Day By Day by Chris Muir August 22, 2006