• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Israel 'satisfied' with Iran's rejection of West's demands

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
I have to love the TLC point of,"They are playing the same game that Saddam did. That game cost him his life. Hopefully the Mullahs and Mr. Dinnerjacket aren't as stupid in the long run."

The point is and remains, Saddam had no WMD and the IAEA and various international bodies were the parties in the wrong.

If the credibility of the IAEA has not been greatly reduced after its screw up with Saddam, it will be in the sewer if it gets it wrong again.
Saddam tried to pretend that he did. He made it a point to keep area off limits to the inspectors. The IAEA could only report what they learned; it was up to others to interpret the data that they collected.

Had Saddam not tried to play the shell game; then there would have been no questions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As again EK understands nothing about the game Saddam was playing with GWB even if its well documented.
LL

Other than a wall of text, what did I state that you did not? :confused:
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,738
13,855
136
You on the other hand still believe there are inspectors as we speak in Iran....thats sad since it was proven to you that the IAEA has pulled all inspectors out....
Back to beating your drum of distortion. Iran has not prevented the IAEA from performing agreed upon inspections of any of their nuclear facilities. TLC quoted the definition of such earlier.

Your contention is false, and you know it, although it takes some digging outside of the usual propaganda to find the truth-

http://en.ria.ru/world/20120402/172560615.html

More IAEA inspectors should be send to Iran, Russian Foreign Ministry Sergei Lavrov said on Monday during his visit to Armenia.

The Russian foreign minister said it was &#8220;of principal importance to maintain and boost the presence of IAEA inspectors and monitors in Iran.&#8221;

&#8220;They currently work at all nuclear objects of Iran and have uncovered no illicit activities so far,&#8221; Lavrov added.
Readers would be wise to take the word of the Russian foreign minister over that of partisan warmongers.
 
Last edited:

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,506
3,083
126
Back to beating your drum of distortion. Iran has not prevented the IAEA from performing agreed upon inspections of any of their nuclear facilities. TLC quoted the definition of such earlier.

Your contention is false, and you know it, although it takes some digging outside of the usual propaganda to find the truth-

http://en.ria.ru/world/20120402/172560615.html



Readers would be wise to take the word of the Russian foreign minister over that of partisan warmongers.
The Russian Foreign Ministry is the propaganda arm of Russia...so go figure...

yeah right --- More IAEA inspectors should be send to Iran, Russian Foreign Ministry Sergei Lavrov said on Monday during his visit to Armenia.


says more as in...please send more inspectors.....we are sorry the inspectors got mad and left......

Then in the related news section next to this article it says that IAEA is presently in Iran conducting talks---NOT inspecting!!!


Then you will notice that you are using an English translation of an article that was written in Russian. Do I need to school you in translating Russian into English or Polish into English or Hebrew into English.......

Its a close translation but depending on who is translating you cannot take that article word for word. It does not matter how experienced the translator or the translation program is it will always side with easiest case translation even if it the translation is off just a wee bit.

Why don`t you find an English published article that says the IAEA is back in Iran inspecting???
Probably because yuo cannot.....so as is par for the course you find anything that appears to support your bloviations!!
 
Last edited:

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
The UN atomic agency says that despite "intensive efforts" by its team visiting Iran, it has been denied access to a key military site.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8423719/iaea-denied-access-to-key-site-in-iran

Of course, they could be biased against the Middle East. I wonder if there is a pro Middle East source I could use? How about this one:

The International Atomic Energy Agency has said that its team visiting Iran was denied access to a military site where the UN watchdog suspects activities related to the country's nuclear programme could be taking place.
The head of the IAEA said on Wednesday that Iran had not accepted a request for its inspectors to visit the Parchin facility, a weapons development complex south of Tehran.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/02/201222202920481596.html
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,738
13,855
136
The Russian Foreign Ministry is the propaganda arm of Russia...so go figure...

yeah right --- More IAEA inspectors should be send to Iran, Russian Foreign Ministry Sergei Lavrov said on Monday during his visit to Armenia.


says more as in...please send more inspectors.....we are sorry the inspectors got mad and left......

Then in the related news section next to this article it says that IAEA is presently in Iran conducting talks---NOT inspecting!!!


Then you will notice that you are using an English translation of an article that was written in Russian. Do I need to school you in translating Russian into English or Polish into English or Hebrew into English.......

Its a close translation but depending on who is translating you cannot take that article word for word. It does not matter how experienced the translator or the translation program is it will always side with easiest case translation even if it the translation is off just a wee bit.

Why don`t you find an English published article that says the IAEA is back in Iran inspecting???
Probably because yuo cannot.....so as is par for the course you find anything that appears to support your bloviations!!
You've been exposed, Jedi. Time to man-up.

Or do I need to quote one of my favorite figures from American history, Joseph Welch- "Have you no sense of decency?"

I think not.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
From the IAEA's last report on Iran:

8. During the second round of talks in Tehran, which took place from 20 to 21 February 2012:
&#61623; The Agency reiterated its request for access to Parchin. Iran stated that it was still not able to grant access to that site.
&#61623; An intensive discussion was held on the structured approach to the clarification of all outstanding issues related to Iran&#8217;s nuclear programme. No agreement was reached between Iran and the Agency, as major differences existed with respect to the approach.
&#61623; In response to the Agency&#8217;s request, Iran provided the Agency with an initial declaration in connection with the issues identified in Section C of the Annex to the Director General&#8217;s November 2011 report to the Board of Governors (GOV/2011/65). Iran&#8217;s declaration dismissed the Agency&#8217;s concerns in relation to the aforementioned issues, largely on the grounds that Iran considered them to be based on unfounded allegations.


L. Summary
50. While the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material at the nuclear facilities and LOFs declared by Iran under its Safeguards Agreement, as Iran is not providing the necessary cooperation, including by not implementing its Additional Protocol, the Agency is unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.46
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2012/gov2012-9.pdf

Even the UN says the IAEA is not allowed into the requested site.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,738
13,855
136
From the IAEA's last report on Iran:


http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2012/gov2012-9.pdf

Even the UN says the IAEA is not allowed into the requested site.
You really do have trouble paying attention, huh?

Iran did deny access to Parchin, simply because it is not a nuclear facility as defined under their agreement with the IAEA, who has never claimed it to be. The IAEA has very carefully parsed their words to create the impression that they're not just grandstanding, or going on a fishing expedition outside of their mandate.

You, and others, simply circle back around to the same non sequiters of fearmongering and distortion. Both I and TLC have linked relevant material. Failure on your part to read or understand it doesn't change the facts, or the possible scenarios arising from the situation.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,506
3,083
126
I think not.
Do you speak Russian? Are you a licensed interpreter in the United States if America?
I have interpreted and written legal documents in Russian and Polish for many various agencies in California and for various dignitaries who needed an interpreter.

Nice try -- Jhhnn but the translation of that paper from Russian to English is not accurate..... Bottom line you were caught again posting something that you iether mis-interpreted or did not understand!!

:)
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Do you speak Russian? Are you a licensed interpreter in the United States if America?
I have interpreted and written legal documents in Russian and Polish for many various agencies in California and for various dignitaries who needed an interpreter.

Nice try -- Jhhnn but the translation of that paper from Russian to English is not accurate..... Bottom line you were caught again posting something that you iether mis-interpreted or did not understand.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somehow JediY, I doubt anyone in their right mind would trust your translations from Russian to any other language if it had anything to do with Israel or your other well known biases.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,738
13,855
136
Do you speak Russian? Are you a licensed interpreter in the United States if America?
I have interpreted and written legal documents in Russian and Polish for many various agencies in California and for various dignitaries who needed an interpreter.

Nice try -- Jhhnn but the translation of that paper from Russian to English is not accurate..... Bottom line you were caught again posting something that you iether mis-interpreted or did not understand!!

:)
How did I misinterpret this, Jedi?

More IAEA inspectors should be send to Iran, Russian Foreign Ministry Sergei Lavrov said on Monday during his visit to Armenia.

The Russian foreign minister said it was “of principal importance to maintain and boost the presence of IAEA inspectors and monitors in Iran.”

“They currently work at all nuclear objects of Iran and have uncovered no illicit activities so far,” Lavrov added.
Their English seems to better than your own, and I didn't need to translate anything.

It's utterly remarkable how you can give the IAEA credibility wrt their "information" & the "reasons" they want to go back to Parchin, reasons outside their mandate, and contend that they've abandoned their real jobs at all of Iran's nuclear materials facilities.

Your contention was erroneous many threads ago, inflammatory, and apparently designed only to serve the ends of propaganda & disinformation.

References to their ongoing inspection & verification program in Iran are currently hard to find, because they're non-news, and because of all the misrepresentation & raving by the media. I'm confident that their next official report about the production facilities will verify what I've offered.

Even the IAEA links to the article I offered, so you probably need to contact the propaganda bureau before pressing your absurd claim any further-

http://www.iaea.org/blog/feeds/?p=6174
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
It does not look like this thread title is in anyway accurate. with that thread title being,
" Israel 'satisfied' with Iran's rejection of West's demands "

Simple because quite properly, Israel did not participate in the recently concluded Istanbul talks in which Iran and the various world powers met and found substantial
room for common ground, progress, and agreement. With further talks scheduled 5/23/12.

Suddenly Israel is no longer satisfied with Iran as we can see by a recent Netanyuhu statement.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/netanyahu-iran-received-gift-from-world-powers-with-further-nuclear-talks-1.42442

And now we can probably expect to see Israeli funding of AIPAC to greatly increase US congressional interference with US foreign policy. Simply because other world powers no longer believe a word of what Netanyuhu says.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
OP was attempting at trolling when he started the thread.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
It does not look like this thread title is in anyway accurate. with that thread title being,
" Israel 'satisfied' with Iran's rejection of West's demands "

Simple because quite properly, Israel did not participate in the recently concluded Istanbul talks in which Iran and the various world powers met and found substantial
room for common ground, progress, and agreement. With further talks scheduled 5/23/12.

Suddenly Israel is no longer satisfied with Iran as we can see by a recent Netanyuhu statement.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/netanyahu-iran-received-gift-from-world-powers-with-further-nuclear-talks-1.42442


And now we can probably expect to see Israeli funding of AIPAC to greatly increase US congressional interference with US foreign policy. Simply because other world powers no longer believe a word of what Netanyuhu says.
suspect incorrect link
Link

Also, foriegn $$ is not allowed for lobbying.

It seems as if you are stating that Israel funds AIPAC which does congressinoal lobbying.
If that is the case; they are in US law violation. Can you back up your funding statment?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
suspect incorrect link
Link

On that point you are correct EK, your link is the one I meant to post

Also, foriegn $$ is not allowed for lobbying.

It seems as if you are stating that Israel funds AIPAC which does congressinoal lobbying.
If that is the case; they are in US law violation. Can you back up your funding statment?
On the latter point about AIPAC, I believe Israel and AIPAC violate the letter and the spirit of US lobby laws. Yet Israel will continue to get away with it until that loophole in US law is reformed. For all intents and purposes AIPAC should be required to register as a lobbying organization for a foreign nation.

Yet Israel and only Israel is able to get away with it because AIPAC itself does not disperse a single dime of money to US officeholders in the form of political lobbying corruption. And instead, AIPAC approval acts as a clearing house and those funds appear from other sources. And long odds, some of it can be linked to US foreign aid to Israel.

Simply a US loophole that needs to be reformed, IMHO.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,506
3,083
126
On the latter point about AIPAC, I believe Israel and AIPAC violate the letter and the spirit of US lobby laws. Yet Israel will continue to get away with it until that loophole in US law is reformed. For all intents and purposes AIPAC should be required to register as a lobbying organization for a foreign nation.

Yet Israel and only Israel is able to get away with it because AIPAC itself does not disperse a single dime of money to US officeholders in the form of political lobbying corruption. And instead, AIPAC approval acts as a clearing house and those funds appear from other sources. And long odds, some of it can be linked to US foreign aid to Israel.

Simply a US loophole that needs to be reformed, IMHO.
You have a link to back up your funding statement??
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
You have a link to back up your funding statement??
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no lack of links that question the legality of AIPAC and its US failure to register as a agent of a foreign power.

I can submit the following Wiki link, that in turn has many links inside of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee

But by no means is that link the most critical of AIPAC. As I can also say, no other foreign country in the history of the USA has been allowed to exert such influence without being required to register as a agent of a foreign Country.

Or JediY, I can also submit a Haaretz editorial that questions the wisdom of Israel using AIPAC and other tactics to advance a unsustainable foreign policy.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/a-lack-of-vision-is-making-israel-a-short-term-state-1.42427
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
I saw critics of AIPAC in the Wiki link. I did not see anything that Israel provides funding. Where is that link to back up your accusation?

Where is the link tbat proves they are an agent of Israel?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
I saw critics of AIPAC in the Wiki link. I did not see anything that Israel provides funding. Where is that link to back up your accusation?

Where is the link tbat proves they are an agent of Israel?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its in the link that I provided, but even then EK, you somewhat have to be incredibly naive to somehow believe all that Israeli lobbying money that funds the so many US congressional and Senate political campaigns comes only from the Easter Bunny and the Tooth fairy. As various US congressmen, Senators and US law enforcement agencies have investigated and proved that Israeli lobbying money has amounted to at least 50 million dollars a year. And in case you missed it the link also States, the USA subsidizes the Average Israeli to the tune of 500K/yr.

In comparison the average Egyptian gets a whole $8.00/yr.

But point granted, EK, in the USA its politically incorrect to criticize Israel, but that is a two edge sword for Israel, if Israel keeps over reaching, favorable US publicity can vanish over night.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,506
3,083
126
On the latter point about AIPAC, I believe Israel and AIPAC violate the letter and the spirit of US lobby laws. Yet Israel will continue to get away with it until that loophole in US law is reformed. For all intents and purposes AIPAC should be required to register as a lobbying organization for a foreign nation.

Yet Israel and only Israel is able to get away with it because AIPAC itself does not disperse a single dime of money to US officeholders in the form of political lobbying corruption. And instead, AIPAC approval acts as a clearing house and those funds appear from other sources. And long odds, some of it can be linked to US foreign aid to Israel.

Simply a US loophole that needs to be reformed, IMHO.
You assume there is a loophole when nothing has ever been proven or substantiated in a court if law......
Is this another one of your "predictions"......
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,506
3,083
126
Its in the link that I provided, but even then EK, you somewhat have to be incredibly naive to somehow believe all that Israeli lobbying money that funds the so many US congressional and Senate political campaigns comes only from the Easter Bunny and the Tooth fairy. As various US congressmen, Senators and US law enforcement agencies have investigated and proved that Israeli lobbying money has amounted to at least 50 million dollars a year. And in case you missed it the link also States, the USA subsidizes the Average Israeli to the tune of 500K/yr.

In comparison the average Egyptian gets a whole $8.00/yr.

But point granted, EK, in the USA its politically incorrect to criticize Israel, but that is a two edge sword for Israel, if Israel keeps over reaching, favorable US publicity can vanish over night.
Or you have to be incredible anti-Israel to believe your point of view.....
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
LL
You have not provided any link to prove what critics state. You have not provide anything (links) that is proof to your statements as previously requested.

Repeating:

Where is proof that Israel is funnels money to AIPAC?

Where is proof that AIPAC is a foriegn lobby agent?

You made these statements, back them up with facts, not suppositions
 
Last edited:

cave_dweller

Senior member
Mar 3, 2012
231
0
0
You really do have trouble paying attention, huh?

Iran did deny access to Parchin, simply because it is not a nuclear facility as defined under their agreement with the IAEA, who has never claimed it to be. The IAEA has very carefully parsed their words to create the impression that they're not just grandstanding, or going on a fishing expedition outside of their mandate.

You, and others, simply circle back around to the same non sequiters of fearmongering and distortion. Both I and TLC have linked relevant material. Failure on your part to read or understand it doesn't change the facts, or the possible scenarios arising from the situation.
From that same pdf
While the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material at the nuclear facilities and LOFs declared by Iran under its Safeguards Agreement, as Iran is not providing the necessary cooperation, including by not implementing its Additional Protocol, the Agency is unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities.46 51. The Agency continues to have serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme, as explained in GOV/2011/65. Iran did not provide access to Parchin, as requested by the Agency during its two recent visits to Tehran, and no agreement was reached with Iran on a structured approach to resolving all outstanding issues in connection with Iran’s nuclear programme.
 

cave_dweller

Senior member
Mar 3, 2012
231
0
0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no lack of links that question the legality of AIPAC and its US failure to register as a agent of a foreign power.

I can submit the following Wiki link, that in turn has many links inside of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee

But by no means is that link the most critical of AIPAC. As I can also say, no other foreign country in the history of the USA has been allowed to exert such influence without being required to register as a agent of a foreign Country.

Or JediY, I can also submit a Haaretz editorial that questions the wisdom of Israel using AIPAC and other tactics to advance a unsustainable foreign policy.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/a-lack-of-vision-is-making-israel-a-short-term-state-1.42427
Those are all opinions of others not facts. Anyone can edit Wiki.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Or you have to be incredible anti-Israel to believe your point of view.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe JediY, I can turn that question around and ask you JediY, how incredibly pro-Israeli are
you are to believe your own point of view? And at the same time, we have some P&N moderators who maintain any anti-Israel posters are simply trolling.

But I still maintain, in the larger world, the bias or non -bias of any P&N poster is not the issue. Especially since Israeli in the larger world is rapidly losing its credibility. Maybe someone can argue that pro-Us Israeli bias can forever save Israeli butt. As others argue that Bozo Netanyuhu stupidity and extremism will eventually force even the USA to throw Israel under the bus.

As my message has always been that Israeli compromise can produce a soft landing if Israel becomes an accepted and valuable member of the Mid-east by Using its technology to help surrounding Arab States. Which was the original Ben Grunion vision.

How mid-east future events will play out in say even the next ten years, is really the question. As I also maintain Israeli extremism in the Bozo Netanyuyu model will soon force even the US to abandon Israel.

Question JEDIY, are you so still so froggie. As Israel now embarks on a all or nothing gamble while almost every nation on earth is backing away from supporting Israel. And any time the EU questions Israeli settlement policy, Netanyuhu tells the EU to mind its own business. Kinda stupid, when the EU is 25% of the quartet that are judge, juries, and executors of Israeli foreign policy? At the same time, is the link necessary, Abbas will start taking Palestinian Statehood issues before the UN come this Tuesday. As it will continue to become increasingly expensive for US foreign policy viability to continue to veto all anti-Israeli resolutions in the UN security council.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS