Follow by Email

Monday, August 10, 2015

David Albright, "What Iran’s hostile reaction to the Parchin issue means for the nuclear deal": Democrats, Don't Read This Opinion Piece!

Are you a House or Senate Democrat planning to support Obama's nuclear deal with Iran? If so, the president has personally asked me to inform that you are forbidden from reading a new Washington Post opinion piece entitled "What Iran’s hostile reaction to the Parchin issue means for the nuclear deal," by David Albright, founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security. Why? Simple! You will not be able to conscientiously support the president's deal if you do read it, or stated more succinctly, what you don't know can't hurt you!

Observing that his organization is neutral concerning Obama's agreement, Albright begins:

"Chico Marx said: 'Who you gonna believe? Me or your own eyes?' Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said over the weekend that my organization, the Institute for Science and International Security, was spreading lies when we published satellite imagery that showed renewed, concerning activity at the Parchin military site near Tehran. This site is linked by Western intelligence and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to past work on nuclear weapons. But like Chico, instead of acknowledging the concern, the Iranians chose to deny the visible evidence in commercial satellite imagery. Iran’s comments would be mirthful if the topic were not so serious.

. . . .

All we did was publish satellite imagery showing this activity and restate the obvious concern."

Noting concern over IAEA access to Parchin and reports that Iran is now engaged in sanitizing this site to prevent the discovery of past nuclear activity, Albright continues:

"This concern is further heightened because Iran has demanded to do this sampling itself instead of letting the IAEA do it. Such an arrangement is unprecedented and risky, and will be even more so if Iran continues to sanitize the site. In the cases of the Iranian Kalaye Electric site and the North Korean plutonium separation plant at Yongbyon, the success of sampling that showed undeclared activities depended on samples being taken at non-obvious locations identified during previous IAEA visits inside buildings. The IAEA will not be able to visit Parchin until after the samples are taken, and it remains doubtful that the inspectors will be able to take additional samples."

This is what the 29 scientists, who wrote the recent letter supporting Obama's deal, declared to be "a technically sound, stringent and innovative deal that will provide the necessary assurance in the coming decade and more that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons"? Yeah, right.

Regarding Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif's claims that the current activities at Parchin amount to "road work," Albright writes:

"[H]is words appear to reflect Iranian government intransigence on its past nuclear weapons program. Its action is an assault on the integrity and prospects of the nuclear deal."

Albright's conclusion:

"The United States and Congress should clearly and publicly confirm, and Congress should support with legislation, that if Iran does not address the IAEA’s concerns about the past military dimensions of its nuclear programs, U.S. sanctions will not be lifted. To do otherwise is to make a mockery of the nuclear deal."

And also have Obama veto this new legislation?

Once again, Congressional Democrats, Obama asks that you do not read this opinion piece, which calls into question the very underpinnings of his deal with Iran. If you do read it, he might also subject you to the very same threats and anti-Semitic insults issued by the White House against Senator Schumer. You have been warned!

1 comment:

  1. Bret Stephens and Mike Bloomberg on the credibility of #44:

    "...Apparently, the president figures that the politics work better when he projects Olympian confidence about his diplomacy than when he acknowledges some measure of uncertainty. Apparently, he thinks it’s wiser to tar opponents of the deal as partisans or idiots or paid stooges than to engage them as sincere, thoughtful people who came to their own conclusions. Apparently, he thinks there’s nothing amiss in suggesting that the only thing standing between the present moment and the broad, sunlit uplands of a denuclearized Iran is the Jewish state and its warmongering Beltway lobbyists.

    [Bloomberg posted his opinion at, but the NYPost re-quotes, and shows picture of the Times Square billboard sponsored by United Against Nuclear Iran that thanks Sen. Schumer]:
    "...Meanwhile, former Mayor Mike Bloomberg posted a strongly worded column on his news service’s Web site chastising the Obama administration for its “intimidation” of critics of the agreement.

    “This is one of the most important debates of our time, one with huge implications for our future and security and the stability of the world,” Bloomberg wrote. “Yet instead of attempting to persuade Americans on the merits, supporters of the deal are resorting to intimidation and demonization, while also grossly overstating their case.” "

    [in other news, the Parchin revelations are weighing on still-undeclared Senators. Imagine the pressure on Delaware Senator Coons and NJ Senator Booker is intense. Perhaps getting slammed by both Stephens and Bloomberg will get the WH attention. or not. ]

    In other non-news, no one else noticed Trump said 24 hours (not 24 days) twice when he deigned to get 'specific' about the Iran deal during his debate debut. Oops, not?

    Placebo Diplomacy at work...