Trump And Israel: Carrots And Peas

why would Hussein....brought up as a Muslim


This was "Hussein" in high school.... a GAY COKE WHORE, not exactly an "islamic lifestyle...."


Obama Was A Cocaine-Using Gay Hustler, Says Woman Who Claims To Have Been Hawaiian Classmate | HuffPost



"“He always portrayed himself as a foreign student,” Pope said. “Girls were never anything that he ever was interested in ... He would get with these older white gay men, and this is how we just pretty much had the impression that that’s how he was procuring his cocaine.”

She then notes, “In other words, he was having sex with these older white guys and that’s how he was getting this cocaine to be able to freebase.”"



Time for a lesson???


Sure thing.


Sheikh Uthman al-Khamis adds that Muhammad often used it.[12] Indeed, Islam’s prophet is on record saying “Allah has commanded me to equivocate among the people inasmuch as he has commanded me to establish [religious] obligations”; and “I have been sent with obfuscation”; and “whoever lives his life in dissimulation dies a martyr.”[13]
As for the Islamic prophet himself—whose example is to be upheld as closely as possible by Sunni Muslims (sunna meaning “example”)—above and beyond the aforementioned, according to a canonical hadith, it is well known that he permitted lying in three scenarios: to reconcile quarreling parties, to one’s wife, and in war, or jihad.[22]

It is the third of these categories, jihad, that is relevant here.

According to one Arabic legal manual devoted to jihad as defined by the four schools of Sunni Islamic law, “The ulema [“scholars”] agree that deception during warfare is legitimate … deception is a form of art in war.”[23] Moreover, according to Dr. Mukaram, the foremost expert on taqiyya, this deception is classified as taqiyya: “Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible.”[24]

Taqiyya about Taqiyya - Raymond Ibrahim



Exactly what Hussein Obama did.....and you bought it like it was on sale.
 
Barack Obama is a faggot, a coke whore, a HATE HOAX organizer, a kleptocrat, a bigot, and a traitor.


Y'all Zionists controlled him by threatening to open the CLOSET DOOR on him.....
 
A strong argument can be made, just as this thread is premised, that Republicans favor Israel, and harbor little sentiments against Jewish folks....

.....and Democrats are opposed to Israel, and this is a proxy attitude for anti-Semitism.


"President Carter called settlements “inconsistent with international law.” President Reagan disagreed, saying they were “entirely legal” by his reading of UN resolutions. President George W. Bush wrote to Prime Minister Sharon that some settlement would remain, while President Obama’s deputies said they were “illegitimate.”

The [Obama] administration at the time considered even the least consequential Jerusalem zoning law tweaks an overwhelming blow to peace. President Trump’s first representatifvehere, Nikki Haley, in her new book, “With All Due Respect,” describes her alarm when Israel’s ambassador, Danny Danon, told her his American counterparts completely shut him out before their abstention on the security council’s “anti-settlements” resolution.

That treatment, Ms. Haley writes, signaled that America was being led by the UN consensus, rather than leading it."


On Wednesday the entire Security Council save for America agreed with Palestinian Authority’s observer, Riad Mansour, who said nothing can trump “international law” as defined in the Obama era’s settlement resolution — never mind that it overturned previous, more ambiguous, resolutions."
France Denounces Israel Over U.S. Proclamation
 
Branco-Land-of-the-Bible.jpg
 
nd
Liar.
The International Atomic Energy Association has conducted dozens of nuclear freeze inspection successfully for decades, and not once have they failed.
They use instrumentation, seals, etc., and can not be evaded or sanitized as you claim.
Who do are we to beleive, the IAEA and the UN, or your ridiculous lies?



I never lie and I'm never wrong.


Watch this:



"IAEA not authorized to inspect Iran’s military sites: Russia
A senior Russian diplomat has criticized certain countries’ calls for the expansion of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspections to include Iranian military sites, saying the IAEA has no authority to carry out such inspection. “I would like to say absolutely clear and directly that acquiring some false topicality [about] the theme of the IAEA work […"
IAEA not authorized to inspect Iran’s military sites: Russia - iran news daily iran news now | iran news daily iran news now




How ya' like dat...booooooyyyyyeeeeeeee!!!!


Another custard pie in your ugly kisser!

You obvious are an idiot as well as a liar.
Of course the IAEA is not authorized to ever inspect anyone.
What allows the IAEA inspections is a voluntary agreement.
In this case, it was Obama offering to reduce economic sanctions if Iran would allow inspections.
Iran agreed.
Therefore the inspections occurred and would have until Trump stopped them.



Dolt.....the Obama deal never allowed any real inspections.


Once they were caught cheating, they had 45 days to allow the IAEA in.

Gads, you're a moron.

Bet you're tired of everyone telling you that.


Liar.
The standard IAEA procedure is to install instrumentation, including video cameras and seals.
No one has ever been able to defraud IAEA inspections yet.
They are the experts.
You are just a liar.


I never lie....and I'm never wrong.


But I do like these verbal vivisections of dopes like you....


Watch this:


In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im




Want some more, dunce????

“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close




The key term in today's NYSun editorial is UNVERIFIABLE.


"Under this agreement the United States released approximately $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, which substantially have been squandered in underwriting the terrorist acts and infiltrations supervised by the late Soleimani — especially by the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthi in Yemen.

Apart from being unverifiable, and giving a tremendous stimulus to Iran’s terrorist and other destabilizing activities around the Middle East, the agreement (also ratified by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China), only dealt with fissile material, not rocket development or the perfection of a warhead. So Iran’s nuclear military research has continued apace, as it escalated its terrorist activities: a terrible and indefensible agreement the Democrats are now robotically defending."
Democrats Start To Look Like the Gadarene Swine



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.
 
A strong argument can be made, just as this thread is premised, that Republicans favor Israel, and harbor little sentiments against Jewish folks....

.....and Democrats are opposed to Israel, and this is a proxy attitude for anti-Semitism.


"President Carter called settlements “inconsistent with international law.” President Reagan disagreed, saying they were “entirely legal” by his reading of UN resolutions. President George W. Bush wrote to Prime Minister Sharon that some settlement would remain, while President Obama’s deputies said they were “illegitimate.”

The [Obama] administration at the time considered even the least consequential Jerusalem zoning law tweaks an overwhelming blow to peace. President Trump’s first representatifvehere, Nikki Haley, in her new book, “With All Due Respect,” describes her alarm when Israel’s ambassador, Danny Danon, told her his American counterparts completely shut him out before their abstention on the security council’s “anti-settlements” resolution.

That treatment, Ms. Haley writes, signaled that America was being led by the UN consensus, rather than leading it."


On Wednesday the entire Security Council save for America agreed with Palestinian Authority’s observer, Riad Mansour, who said nothing can trump “international law” as defined in the Obama era’s settlement resolution — never mind that it overturned previous, more ambiguous, resolutions."
France Denounces Israel Over U.S. Proclamation

Incorrect.
First of all, most Jews are liberal.
Second is that Israel is anti Jewish, and is instead secular Zionists instead of religious Jews.
Third is that the word "Semitic" does not mean Jewish, but means of an Arab language group.
Forth is that Palestine was legally created with all of what now called Palestine and Israel, in 1920, and that can not be legally changed by the US or the UN.
 
I never lie and I'm never wrong.


Watch this:



"IAEA not authorized to inspect Iran’s military sites: Russia
A senior Russian diplomat has criticized certain countries’ calls for the expansion of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspections to include Iranian military sites, saying the IAEA has no authority to carry out such inspection. “I would like to say absolutely clear and directly that acquiring some false topicality [about] the theme of the IAEA work […"
IAEA not authorized to inspect Iran’s military sites: Russia - iran news daily iran news now | iran news daily iran news now




How ya' like dat...booooooyyyyyeeeeeeee!!!!


Another custard pie in your ugly kisser!

You obvious are an idiot as well as a liar.
Of course the IAEA is not authorized to ever inspect anyone.
What allows the IAEA inspections is a voluntary agreement.
In this case, it was Obama offering to reduce economic sanctions if Iran would allow inspections.
Iran agreed.
Therefore the inspections occurred and would have until Trump stopped them.



Dolt.....the Obama deal never allowed any real inspections.


Once they were caught cheating, they had 45 days to allow the IAEA in.

Gads, you're a moron.

Bet you're tired of everyone telling you that.


Liar.
The standard IAEA procedure is to install instrumentation, including video cameras and seals.
No one has ever been able to defraud IAEA inspections yet.
They are the experts.
You are just a liar.


I never lie....and I'm never wrong.


But I do like these verbal vivisections of dopes like you....


Watch this:


In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im




Want some more, dunce????

“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close




The key term in today's NYSun editorial is UNVERIFIABLE.


"Under this agreement the United States released approximately $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, which substantially have been squandered in underwriting the terrorist acts and infiltrations supervised by the late Soleimani — especially by the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthi in Yemen.

Apart from being unverifiable, and giving a tremendous stimulus to Iran’s terrorist and other destabilizing activities around the Middle East, the agreement (also ratified by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China), only dealt with fissile material, not rocket development or the perfection of a warhead. So Iran’s nuclear military research has continued apace, as it escalated its terrorist activities: a terrible and indefensible agreement the Democrats are now robotically defending."
Democrats Start To Look Like the Gadarene Swine



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


Incorrect.
The typical way that the IAEA verifies nuclear protocols is with electronic equipment, so no physical access is needed.
 
You obvious are an idiot as well as a liar.
Of course the IAEA is not authorized to ever inspect anyone.
What allows the IAEA inspections is a voluntary agreement.
In this case, it was Obama offering to reduce economic sanctions if Iran would allow inspections.
Iran agreed.
Therefore the inspections occurred and would have until Trump stopped them.



Dolt.....the Obama deal never allowed any real inspections.


Once they were caught cheating, they had 45 days to allow the IAEA in.

Gads, you're a moron.

Bet you're tired of everyone telling you that.


Liar.
The standard IAEA procedure is to install instrumentation, including video cameras and seals.
No one has ever been able to defraud IAEA inspections yet.
They are the experts.
You are just a liar.


I never lie....and I'm never wrong.


But I do like these verbal vivisections of dopes like you....


Watch this:


In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im




Want some more, dunce????

“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close




The key term in today's NYSun editorial is UNVERIFIABLE.


"Under this agreement the United States released approximately $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, which substantially have been squandered in underwriting the terrorist acts and infiltrations supervised by the late Soleimani — especially by the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthi in Yemen.

Apart from being unverifiable, and giving a tremendous stimulus to Iran’s terrorist and other destabilizing activities around the Middle East, the agreement (also ratified by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China), only dealt with fissile material, not rocket development or the perfection of a warhead. So Iran’s nuclear military research has continued apace, as it escalated its terrorist activities: a terrible and indefensible agreement the Democrats are now robotically defending."
Democrats Start To Look Like the Gadarene Swine



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


Incorrect.
The typical way that the IAEA verifies nuclear protocols is with electronic equipment, so no physical access is needed.


Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.
 
Dolt.....the Obama deal never allowed any real inspections.


Once they were caught cheating, they had 45 days to allow the IAEA in.

Gads, you're a moron.

Bet you're tired of everyone telling you that.


Liar.
The standard IAEA procedure is to install instrumentation, including video cameras and seals.
No one has ever been able to defraud IAEA inspections yet.
They are the experts.
You are just a liar.


I never lie....and I'm never wrong.


But I do like these verbal vivisections of dopes like you....


Watch this:


In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im




Want some more, dunce????

“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close




The key term in today's NYSun editorial is UNVERIFIABLE.


"Under this agreement the United States released approximately $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, which substantially have been squandered in underwriting the terrorist acts and infiltrations supervised by the late Soleimani — especially by the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthi in Yemen.

Apart from being unverifiable, and giving a tremendous stimulus to Iran’s terrorist and other destabilizing activities around the Middle East, the agreement (also ratified by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China), only dealt with fissile material, not rocket development or the perfection of a warhead. So Iran’s nuclear military research has continued apace, as it escalated its terrorist activities: a terrible and indefensible agreement the Democrats are now robotically defending."
Democrats Start To Look Like the Gadarene Swine



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


Incorrect.
The typical way that the IAEA verifies nuclear protocols is with electronic equipment, so no physical access is needed.


Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.
 
Liar.
The standard IAEA procedure is to install instrumentation, including video cameras and seals.
No one has ever been able to defraud IAEA inspections yet.
They are the experts.
You are just a liar.


I never lie....and I'm never wrong.


But I do like these verbal vivisections of dopes like you....


Watch this:


In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im




Want some more, dunce????

“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close




The key term in today's NYSun editorial is UNVERIFIABLE.


"Under this agreement the United States released approximately $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, which substantially have been squandered in underwriting the terrorist acts and infiltrations supervised by the late Soleimani — especially by the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthi in Yemen.

Apart from being unverifiable, and giving a tremendous stimulus to Iran’s terrorist and other destabilizing activities around the Middle East, the agreement (also ratified by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China), only dealt with fissile material, not rocket development or the perfection of a warhead. So Iran’s nuclear military research has continued apace, as it escalated its terrorist activities: a terrible and indefensible agreement the Democrats are now robotically defending."
Democrats Start To Look Like the Gadarene Swine



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


Incorrect.
The typical way that the IAEA verifies nuclear protocols is with electronic equipment, so no physical access is needed.


Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.



"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.
 
I never lie....and I'm never wrong.


But I do like these verbal vivisections of dopes like you....


Watch this:


In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im




Want some more, dunce????

“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close




The key term in today's NYSun editorial is UNVERIFIABLE.


"Under this agreement the United States released approximately $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, which substantially have been squandered in underwriting the terrorist acts and infiltrations supervised by the late Soleimani — especially by the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthi in Yemen.

Apart from being unverifiable, and giving a tremendous stimulus to Iran’s terrorist and other destabilizing activities around the Middle East, the agreement (also ratified by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China), only dealt with fissile material, not rocket development or the perfection of a warhead. So Iran’s nuclear military research has continued apace, as it escalated its terrorist activities: a terrible and indefensible agreement the Democrats are now robotically defending."
Democrats Start To Look Like the Gadarene Swine



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


Incorrect.
The typical way that the IAEA verifies nuclear protocols is with electronic equipment, so no physical access is needed.


Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.



"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.

Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.
 
The key term in today's NYSun editorial is UNVERIFIABLE.


"Under this agreement the United States released approximately $150 billion of frozen Iranian assets, which substantially have been squandered in underwriting the terrorist acts and infiltrations supervised by the late Soleimani — especially by the Iranian-sponsored terrorist organizations Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the Houthi in Yemen.

Apart from being unverifiable, and giving a tremendous stimulus to Iran’s terrorist and other destabilizing activities around the Middle East, the agreement (also ratified by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia and China), only dealt with fissile material, not rocket development or the perfection of a warhead. So Iran’s nuclear military research has continued apace, as it escalated its terrorist activities: a terrible and indefensible agreement the Democrats are now robotically defending."
Democrats Start To Look Like the Gadarene Swine



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


Incorrect.
The typical way that the IAEA verifies nuclear protocols is with electronic equipment, so no physical access is needed.


Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.



"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.

Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.


You'd best learn these two facts:
I never lie, and I'm never wrong.



. In 2015, President Obama promised when he tried to sell the deal to a skeptical American public that the Iranians agreed to the "most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime, ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history," based on "unprecedented verification." Moreover, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes reassured the public repeatedly that the deal included "anywhere, anytime" inspections and 24-7 access to Iran's key nuclear facilities.

But in reality, the administration repeatedly lied to the American public by misrepresenting the deal and the nature of the inspections Iran agreed to. The robust inspections referred only to Iran's declared nuclear sites. Other sites that the IAEA has suspicions about, including all military sites and undeclared nuclear sites, fell under a separate cheating-friendly procedure.

One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.

Instead, the deal stated that in order to allay IAEA concerns, Iran would give access within a 24-day time frame, after the IAEA made a request to visit a suspected site. Furthermore, the deal stated that if Iran refused the access, the Islamist state and the IAEA would have additional 14 days to resolve the agreement among themselves. If they failed to agree, a joint commission comprising the six member-nations who are parties to the agreement would consider the matter for an additional week.

In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im



More????


“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close





Drop back when you need another spanking.....you dunce.


 
Incorrect.
The typical way that the IAEA verifies nuclear protocols is with electronic equipment, so no physical access is needed.


Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.



"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.

Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.


You'd best learn these two facts:
I never lie, and I'm never wrong.



. In 2015, President Obama promised when he tried to sell the deal to a skeptical American public that the Iranians agreed to the "most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime, ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history," based on "unprecedented verification." Moreover, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes reassured the public repeatedly that the deal included "anywhere, anytime" inspections and 24-7 access to Iran's key nuclear facilities.

But in reality, the administration repeatedly lied to the American public by misrepresenting the deal and the nature of the inspections Iran agreed to. The robust inspections referred only to Iran's declared nuclear sites. Other sites that the IAEA has suspicions about, including all military sites and undeclared nuclear sites, fell under a separate cheating-friendly procedure.

One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.

Instead, the deal stated that in order to allay IAEA concerns, Iran would give access within a 24-day time frame, after the IAEA made a request to visit a suspected site. Furthermore, the deal stated that if Iran refused the access, the Islamist state and the IAEA would have additional 14 days to resolve the agreement among themselves. If they failed to agree, a joint commission comprising the six member-nations who are parties to the agreement would consider the matter for an additional week.

In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im



More????


“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close





Drop back when you need another spanking.....you dunce.



You have proven one things, that you are not very smart.
Read with at least a little comprehension.
{...
One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.
...}
It is NOT nuclear production sites that there was a controversy about surveillance and manual inspections.
It was MILITARY sites.
Which was the same ruse we pulled on Saddam.
The goal of the US military has nothing at all to do with nuclear nonproliferation, but of cataloging Iran's military complexes so that they can be easily neutralized by our NEXT illegal attack on one of the remaining Mideast powers.
We knew for certainly that Saddam never had any significant WMD, and no ambitions to create them, at all.
So then our insistence on gaining access had nothing at all to do with compliance verification.
The IAEA NEVER needs personal access to verify compliance with nuclear nonproliferation.
The IAEA always instead uses electronic means, and never uses personal access.
The ONLY reason to every insist on personal access is if one instead wants to steal military secrets.
No HONEST person would ever insist on personal access.
That is never necessary to verify nuclear nonproliferation treaties.
 
Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.



"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.

Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.


You'd best learn these two facts:
I never lie, and I'm never wrong.



. In 2015, President Obama promised when he tried to sell the deal to a skeptical American public that the Iranians agreed to the "most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime, ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history," based on "unprecedented verification." Moreover, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes reassured the public repeatedly that the deal included "anywhere, anytime" inspections and 24-7 access to Iran's key nuclear facilities.

But in reality, the administration repeatedly lied to the American public by misrepresenting the deal and the nature of the inspections Iran agreed to. The robust inspections referred only to Iran's declared nuclear sites. Other sites that the IAEA has suspicions about, including all military sites and undeclared nuclear sites, fell under a separate cheating-friendly procedure.

One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.

Instead, the deal stated that in order to allay IAEA concerns, Iran would give access within a 24-day time frame, after the IAEA made a request to visit a suspected site. Furthermore, the deal stated that if Iran refused the access, the Islamist state and the IAEA would have additional 14 days to resolve the agreement among themselves. If they failed to agree, a joint commission comprising the six member-nations who are parties to the agreement would consider the matter for an additional week.

In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im



More????


“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close





Drop back when you need another spanking.....you dunce.



You have proven one things, that you are not very smart.
Read with at least a little comprehension.
{...
One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.
...}
It is NOT nuclear production sites that there was a controversy about surveillance and manual inspections.
It was MILITARY sites.
Which was the same ruse we pulled on Saddam.
The goal of the US military has nothing at all to do with nuclear nonproliferation, but of cataloging Iran's military complexes so that they can be easily neutralized by our NEXT illegal attack on one of the remaining Mideast powers.
We knew for certainly that Saddam never had any significant WMD, and no ambitions to create them, at all.
So then our insistence on gaining access had nothing at all to do with compliance verification.
The IAEA NEVER needs personal access to verify compliance with nuclear nonproliferation.
The IAEA always instead uses electronic means, and never uses personal access.
The ONLY reason to every insist on personal access is if one instead wants to steal military secrets.
No HONEST person would ever insist on personal access.
That is never necessary to verify nuclear nonproliferation treaties.



No inspections.


None.


Not any.


Hussein Obama plotted with Iran to guarantee nuclear weapons to the 7th century barbarians.


And suckers....you.....bought it like it was on sale.


You dope.
 
Jot this down as it will greatly reduce your posts: nothing I post is ever incorrect.



Now...watch me destroy you, you dunce:


"Americans and Israelis who hate the new nuclear agreement with Iran are already focusing on one part in particular: It doesn’t authorize snap, no-notice inspections of all locations. Israel’s hard-right Education Minister Naftali Bennett claims the accord is a “farce” because “in order to go and make an inspection, you have to notify the Iranians 24 days in advance.”


This is not exactly right, but close enough. (Iran’s declared nuclear sites will be under continuous monitoring. If the International Atomic Energy Agency wants to inspect a non-declared site and Iran refuses, Iran has 14 days to convince the IAEA it’s doing nothing wrong without providing access. If it can’t, the commission governing the agreement has seven days to vote on whether to force Iran to provide access, and if it does Iran has three more days to comply. The exact procedure is established in paragraphs 74-78 of the agreement text.)"

Why Is Iran’s Refusal to Allow No-Notice Inspections Legit? U.S. History With Iraq



==============================================



“Particularly troublesome, you have to wait 24 days before you can inspect.”

–Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), speaking to reporters about the international nuclear agreement with Iran, Aug. 10, 2015

“At non-designated sites it will take 24 days to get an inspection.”

–Schumer, speaking to reporters, Aug. 11

=======================================================



" The prime minister exhorted International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano to “go and inspect this atomic warehouse immediately,” before Iran hides its contents.

A week later, however, the IAEA rejected his suggestion. In a statement, the agency said, “All information obtained, including from third parties, is subject to rigorous review and assessed together with other available information to arrive at an independent assessment based on the agency’s own expertise.”

This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. "

... at least twice the IAEA has acknowledged it was not verifying compliance."
What the IAEA doesn't know — or want to know — about Iran’s nuclear program



There never was ANY intention by the Muslim former President to put any bars in place of Iran getting nuclear weapons.
I'm never wrong.


So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.



"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.

Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.


You'd best learn these two facts:
I never lie, and I'm never wrong.



. In 2015, President Obama promised when he tried to sell the deal to a skeptical American public that the Iranians agreed to the "most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime, ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history," based on "unprecedented verification." Moreover, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes reassured the public repeatedly that the deal included "anywhere, anytime" inspections and 24-7 access to Iran's key nuclear facilities.

But in reality, the administration repeatedly lied to the American public by misrepresenting the deal and the nature of the inspections Iran agreed to. The robust inspections referred only to Iran's declared nuclear sites. Other sites that the IAEA has suspicions about, including all military sites and undeclared nuclear sites, fell under a separate cheating-friendly procedure.

One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.

Instead, the deal stated that in order to allay IAEA concerns, Iran would give access within a 24-day time frame, after the IAEA made a request to visit a suspected site. Furthermore, the deal stated that if Iran refused the access, the Islamist state and the IAEA would have additional 14 days to resolve the agreement among themselves. If they failed to agree, a joint commission comprising the six member-nations who are parties to the agreement would consider the matter for an additional week.

In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im



More????


“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close





Drop back when you need another spanking.....you dunce.



You have proven one things, that you are not very smart.
Read with at least a little comprehension.
{...
One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.
...}
It is NOT nuclear production sites that there was a controversy about surveillance and manual inspections.
It was MILITARY sites.
Which was the same ruse we pulled on Saddam.
The goal of the US military has nothing at all to do with nuclear nonproliferation, but of cataloging Iran's military complexes so that they can be easily neutralized by our NEXT illegal attack on one of the remaining Mideast powers.
We knew for certainly that Saddam never had any significant WMD, and no ambitions to create them, at all.
So then our insistence on gaining access had nothing at all to do with compliance verification.
The IAEA NEVER needs personal access to verify compliance with nuclear nonproliferation.
The IAEA always instead uses electronic means, and never uses personal access.
The ONLY reason to every insist on personal access is if one instead wants to steal military secrets.
No HONEST person would ever insist on personal access.
That is never necessary to verify nuclear nonproliferation treaties.



"New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress

Iran is not "complying at all" with the landmark nuclear deal and continues to prevent international nuclear inspectors from accessing key sites suspected of housing the regime's sensitive atomic weapons program, according to the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."
New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress



I'm never wrong.
 
So far, on this topic you have been totally incorrect.
Saddam Hussein did not block inspections originally at all, and only blocked them AFTER the US illegally started blockading Iraqi civilian commerce.
And Iran never blocked inspections either.
They always allowed the IAEA to inspect whenever they wanted.
But it is the IAEA that does not want to just because someone else complains.
The IAEA uses electronic means to measure, so does not want do manual inspections, and manual inspections should never be needed.



"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.

Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.


You'd best learn these two facts:
I never lie, and I'm never wrong.



. In 2015, President Obama promised when he tried to sell the deal to a skeptical American public that the Iranians agreed to the "most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime, ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history," based on "unprecedented verification." Moreover, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes reassured the public repeatedly that the deal included "anywhere, anytime" inspections and 24-7 access to Iran's key nuclear facilities.

But in reality, the administration repeatedly lied to the American public by misrepresenting the deal and the nature of the inspections Iran agreed to. The robust inspections referred only to Iran's declared nuclear sites. Other sites that the IAEA has suspicions about, including all military sites and undeclared nuclear sites, fell under a separate cheating-friendly procedure.

One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.

Instead, the deal stated that in order to allay IAEA concerns, Iran would give access within a 24-day time frame, after the IAEA made a request to visit a suspected site. Furthermore, the deal stated that if Iran refused the access, the Islamist state and the IAEA would have additional 14 days to resolve the agreement among themselves. If they failed to agree, a joint commission comprising the six member-nations who are parties to the agreement would consider the matter for an additional week.

In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im



More????


“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close





Drop back when you need another spanking.....you dunce.



You have proven one things, that you are not very smart.
Read with at least a little comprehension.
{...
One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.
...}
It is NOT nuclear production sites that there was a controversy about surveillance and manual inspections.
It was MILITARY sites.
Which was the same ruse we pulled on Saddam.
The goal of the US military has nothing at all to do with nuclear nonproliferation, but of cataloging Iran's military complexes so that they can be easily neutralized by our NEXT illegal attack on one of the remaining Mideast powers.
We knew for certainly that Saddam never had any significant WMD, and no ambitions to create them, at all.
So then our insistence on gaining access had nothing at all to do with compliance verification.
The IAEA NEVER needs personal access to verify compliance with nuclear nonproliferation.
The IAEA always instead uses electronic means, and never uses personal access.
The ONLY reason to every insist on personal access is if one instead wants to steal military secrets.
No HONEST person would ever insist on personal access.
That is never necessary to verify nuclear nonproliferation treaties.



"New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress

Iran is not "complying at all" with the landmark nuclear deal and continues to prevent international nuclear inspectors from accessing key sites suspected of housing the regime's sensitive atomic weapons program, according to the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."
New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress




I'm never wrong.

America. A military occupational presence in 70% of the nations on the planet, supporting 73% of the planet's dictatorships. And still can't be satisfied.
 
"And Iran never blocked inspections either."



I just proved the very opposite...you're simply lying.

Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.


You'd best learn these two facts:
I never lie, and I'm never wrong.



. In 2015, President Obama promised when he tried to sell the deal to a skeptical American public that the Iranians agreed to the "most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime, ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history," based on "unprecedented verification." Moreover, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes reassured the public repeatedly that the deal included "anywhere, anytime" inspections and 24-7 access to Iran's key nuclear facilities.

But in reality, the administration repeatedly lied to the American public by misrepresenting the deal and the nature of the inspections Iran agreed to. The robust inspections referred only to Iran's declared nuclear sites. Other sites that the IAEA has suspicions about, including all military sites and undeclared nuclear sites, fell under a separate cheating-friendly procedure.

One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.

Instead, the deal stated that in order to allay IAEA concerns, Iran would give access within a 24-day time frame, after the IAEA made a request to visit a suspected site. Furthermore, the deal stated that if Iran refused the access, the Islamist state and the IAEA would have additional 14 days to resolve the agreement among themselves. If they failed to agree, a joint commission comprising the six member-nations who are parties to the agreement would consider the matter for an additional week.

In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im



More????


“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close





Drop back when you need another spanking.....you dunce.



You have proven one things, that you are not very smart.
Read with at least a little comprehension.
{...
One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.
...}
It is NOT nuclear production sites that there was a controversy about surveillance and manual inspections.
It was MILITARY sites.
Which was the same ruse we pulled on Saddam.
The goal of the US military has nothing at all to do with nuclear nonproliferation, but of cataloging Iran's military complexes so that they can be easily neutralized by our NEXT illegal attack on one of the remaining Mideast powers.
We knew for certainly that Saddam never had any significant WMD, and no ambitions to create them, at all.
So then our insistence on gaining access had nothing at all to do with compliance verification.
The IAEA NEVER needs personal access to verify compliance with nuclear nonproliferation.
The IAEA always instead uses electronic means, and never uses personal access.
The ONLY reason to every insist on personal access is if one instead wants to steal military secrets.
No HONEST person would ever insist on personal access.
That is never necessary to verify nuclear nonproliferation treaties.



"New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress

Iran is not "complying at all" with the landmark nuclear deal and continues to prevent international nuclear inspectors from accessing key sites suspected of housing the regime's sensitive atomic weapons program, according to the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."
New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress




I'm never wrong.

America. A military occupational presence in 70% of the nations on the planet, supporting 73% of the planet's dictatorships. And still can't be satisfied.



Perhaps you should learn what "occupational presence" means before you next post.

Take your time.
 
Nope. You are lying.
It is obvious.
What Iran said is that they have the OPTION of blocking physical access for 24 days.
But they NEVER used it.
Then never once blocked any inspection access at all, ever.
And it is impossible to block IAEA inspection access because they use electronic means that can not be blocked without an obvious violation to the operation of devices.

Israel was lying and claiming violations that were not true.
The IAEA correctly ignored Israel.
Iran was never in violation, and monitoring by the IAEA was never interferred with.
You clearly are promoting the false lies Israel constantly propagates.
Failed again.


You'd best learn these two facts:
I never lie, and I'm never wrong.



. In 2015, President Obama promised when he tried to sell the deal to a skeptical American public that the Iranians agreed to the "most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime, ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history," based on "unprecedented verification." Moreover, Obama adviser Ben Rhodes reassured the public repeatedly that the deal included "anywhere, anytime" inspections and 24-7 access to Iran's key nuclear facilities.

But in reality, the administration repeatedly lied to the American public by misrepresenting the deal and the nature of the inspections Iran agreed to. The robust inspections referred only to Iran's declared nuclear sites. Other sites that the IAEA has suspicions about, including all military sites and undeclared nuclear sites, fell under a separate cheating-friendly procedure.

One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.

Instead, the deal stated that in order to allay IAEA concerns, Iran would give access within a 24-day time frame, after the IAEA made a request to visit a suspected site. Furthermore, the deal stated that if Iran refused the access, the Islamist state and the IAEA would have additional 14 days to resolve the agreement among themselves. If they failed to agree, a joint commission comprising the six member-nations who are parties to the agreement would consider the matter for an additional week.

In conclusion, according to the agreement, Iran can continue its uranium enrichment program and continue developing its weapon program at its many military sites, and every time the IAEA suspects anything, the Iranians can have 24 days at a minimum and 45 days maximum to delay the access, sanitize the sites, or transfer the unauthorized nuclear work to another unauthorized military site.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/obama_and_irans_nuclear_lies.html#ixzz5nH0Ua9im



More????


“Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close

Iran can easily stretch out the inspection of suspect nuclear sites for three months or more.”
Iran Inspections in 24 Days? Not Even Close





Drop back when you need another spanking.....you dunce.



You have proven one things, that you are not very smart.
Read with at least a little comprehension.
{...
One of the most controversial issues in the 2015 negotiations was whether the U.N.'s IAEA would be able to visit military sites if they had questions about suspected nuclear activities or facilities within them. In the end, Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei on June 23, 2015 stated that granting access to Iran's military sites was a red line, and the U.S. and its partners gave in and agreed on language with Iran avoiding a direct mention of the military sites issue.
...}
It is NOT nuclear production sites that there was a controversy about surveillance and manual inspections.
It was MILITARY sites.
Which was the same ruse we pulled on Saddam.
The goal of the US military has nothing at all to do with nuclear nonproliferation, but of cataloging Iran's military complexes so that they can be easily neutralized by our NEXT illegal attack on one of the remaining Mideast powers.
We knew for certainly that Saddam never had any significant WMD, and no ambitions to create them, at all.
So then our insistence on gaining access had nothing at all to do with compliance verification.
The IAEA NEVER needs personal access to verify compliance with nuclear nonproliferation.
The IAEA always instead uses electronic means, and never uses personal access.
The ONLY reason to every insist on personal access is if one instead wants to steal military secrets.
No HONEST person would ever insist on personal access.
That is never necessary to verify nuclear nonproliferation treaties.



"New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress

Iran is not "complying at all" with the landmark nuclear deal and continues to prevent international nuclear inspectors from accessing key sites suspected of housing the regime's sensitive atomic weapons program, according to the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."
New Secretive Iranian Nuclear Sites Spark Concern in Congress




I'm never wrong.

America. A military occupational presence in 70% of the nations on the planet, supporting 73% of the planet's dictatorships. And still can't be satisfied.



Perhaps you should learn what "occupational presence" means before you next post.

Take your time.


It means what it has always meant sans the gaslighting and unconstitutional rationales. The US has not had a legal constitutional war since WWII.

Show us where all "your" military is "protecting" you.

Take yours love.
 

Forum List

Back
Top