Netanyahu, Barak refuse to see US official


with negative report on Baghdad talks

DEBKAfileExclusive Report May 26, 2012, 10:25 AM (GMT+02:00)

State's Wendy Sherman, senior US delegate to world power talks with Iran
State’s Wendy Sherman, senior US delegate to world power talks with Iran

The rupture between the US and Israel over Iran’s nuclear program widened further Friday, May 25  when Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak decided not to be available to hear the briefing brought to Jerusalem from Baghdad by Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman who headed the US delegation to the Six Power talks. The report she delivered to National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror and Foreign Ministry Director-General Rafi Barak was that no progress had been achieved in Baghdad due to Iran’s refusal to budge on its “right” to enrich uranium at low (3.5-5 percent) or high (20 percent) levels or shut down the Fordo nuclear plant near Qom.
Although the participants agreed to reconvene in Moscow in three weeks, the Iranian delegation stressed there would be no progress until the US and the other five world powers (Britain, France, Russia, Germany and China) recognized Iran’s absolute “right” as a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty to enrich uranium.

Meanwhile, every day spent on diplomacy is thoroughly exploited by Iran to zip ahead with its nuclear plans. The Vienna-based UN nuclear watchdog (IAEA)’s quarterly report released Friday reveals that since February Iran almost doubled its stockpile of more highly enriched uranium which is close to weapons grade from 73.4 to 145 kilograms.
The centrifuges at the Fordo facility, built into the side of a mountain, rose to over 500 from 300 in the last report.

Using the IAEA figures, debkafile calculates that if Fordo goes on producing 23.9 kilograms of 20-percent enriched uranium per month, Iran will by the end of December have accumulated 336 kilograms of near-weapons quality uranium.
The IAEA also reported that Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to less than 5 per cent grew to 6,232 kilograms from 5,451 reported in February.

Its inspectors recorded “the presence of particles” of 27 per cent-enriched uranium at Fordo. Iran maintained the particles were a result of “technical reasons beyond the operator’s control.”

The IAEA report was released a day after talks between Tehran and the six powers ended without progress.
Iran’s senior delegate Saeed Jalili declared that his government would never accept the Washington-ruled distinction between two categories of nations – one permitted and the other forbidden to enrich uranium. He claimed this was against international treaties.

Friday, the Washington Post quoted Mohammad Hoseyn Moussavian of Princeton University as revealing that in 2004, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said, “I would resign if for any reason Iran is deprived of its rights to enrichment.”

Moussavian is presented as an Iranian academic visiting Princeton to lecture and write a book on the Iranian nuclear issue. debkafile reveals that he was the contact man in one of the direct, back-channel negotiations taking place in Paris between the White House and Khamenei. His words therefore were intended to carry weight as a reminder to Obama that the supreme leader, like the US president, intended to come out of their dialogue strengthened – not undermined. And therefore, for both their sakes, Washington must endorse Iran’s “right to enrichment.”
Tehran presented a second ultimatum for the nuclear talks to continue: phased sanctions relief, starting with the postponement of the European Union’s oil embargo scheduled for July 1 until the end of negotiations and the reconnection of Iranian banks to the SWIFT international money transfer system.

The gap between Israel and the Obama administration widened in the course of Washington’s direct, secret give-and-take with Tehran. In early April, Defense Minister Barak reported that Israel offered some compromise on the enrichment issue. debkafile disclosed at the time that Israel had informed Washington of its approval of a “1,000 formula.” Iran would be permitted to activate 1,000 centrifuges for enrichment and keep 1,000 kilograms of 3.5-per cent enriched uranium. 

The Netanyahu government backtracked when this concession was used by US officials as a lever for further accommodations with Iran.
The direct US-Iran channel and the second round of Six Power talks with Iran have clearly left the standoff over Iran’s nuclear solidly in place: Iran stands by its right to enrich uranium up to weapons grade, the US stands by diplomacy, however hopeless, for resolving the controversy, while Israel demands a time limit for negotiations. Its military option was put back on the table for so long as Iran’s enrichment centrifuges continue spinning at top speed is totally on the side of the Jews and Israel in this issue of Iranian Nuclear Bombs.


We say that the Iranian regime is as much antisemitic as was Hitler.


In fact there is a direct line. The man who led the Bosnian Muslims against Milosevic and Mladic was called Izetbegovic. His history goes back to the Holocaust. He was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Bosnia during the years of the Holocaust. We do not know how many members of the Muslim Brotherhood there were in Bosnia during the Holocaust, but we do know the name of one, that was Hajj Amin el Husseini, who was the chief organizer of the Holocaust in the Balkans. In other words joint membership of the pro-Hitler Muslim Brotherhood. They may have been the only two in Bosnia.


Move forward just a little, to the early 1990s, and Iran was working with the US State Department and the US Army and Air Force to airlift Nazi Arab Muslims into Bosnia to fight the Serbs. They carried out many beheadings, thus anticipating what happened to Daniel Pearl.


This was Jihad against the Serbs, with the direct help of the US ruling classes.


Now there is a Jihad against Israel and it takes the form of the Iranian Nuclear Bomb.


You can see an antisemite immediately. He or she will offer no interest in what Iran is getting up to in Fordo inside that mountain.


This apparent “naivety” and sometimes even impatience with the issue being raised has at its root Antisemitism.


Some of the worst offenders in this regard are those who claim to talk about defence of the Serbs re Srebrenica, like Harman and Peterson, while they are defending the Nazi Iranian regime and its bomb building AGAINST JEWS.


Of course, this is Antisemitic and Nazi because this bomb building in Iran has got only the one target and that target is Israel.


So what is the future?/ What to do?


The answer is that no step can be taken without putting into place the alternative leadership which has to be


It is necessary to defend Mladic unconditionally. The Serbs had a full right to use whatever methods it decided to use. In the war against the Nazis by the freedom fighters opposed to the Nazis (The resistance) nobody has ever, i mean ever, criticised the methods of The Resistance to Hitler.


Same with the Serbs today. Same with the Jews of Israel today.


We on defend unconditionally each and every method od struggle which the Jews use in order to survive against these enemies.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s