Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 16, 2016

When And How Will The U.S. Infringe On The Iran Deal?

The nuclear deal with Iran may go into implementation today.

The question I am currently asking myself is:

How long until the U.S. will, one way or another, transgress against it - if not in letter then in spirit?

Libya disarmed in December 2003 and was attacked by the U.S. and others -with the help of Islamist proxy forces- in February 2011.

I do not expect a Libya like war against Iran. But the U.S. is never short of some subterfuge to to break agreements. Some reason will be found that then will be used to infringe on the nuclear agreement and to implement new measures to hinder Iran's development. The time-frame for this will be much shorter than the eight years it took to attack Libya.

Other ideas?

Posted by b on January 16, 2016 at 18:38 UTC | Permalink


I certainly was 'looking forward' to continued US sabotage of the prospective let-up in the US' perpetual sabotage of Iranian aspirations ... almost on a par with the US' perpetual sabotage of Cuban asperations ... but now I wonder.

With the Saudis over the cliff the only power left in the region is Iran and, just as with China's AIIB, the US can only further isolate itself with uselessm, impotent attempts to sabotage Iran.

Isn't Xi's tour of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran turning into a victory lap, if not for China exclusively, for the non-US-dominated world majority?

It's not only Saudi Arabia that's biting the dust, but US hegemony in the region.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 16 2016 18:52 utc | 1

Sanctions on development of missile technology? Maybe war with KSA? Human rights?

Posted by: Dan | Jan 16 2016 18:57 utc | 2

Now that jihadists are out of control, the Western "civilized leaders" don't want to face directly ISIS on the ground and call Putin, Iran and Hezbollah to deal with the mess they created. Of course, these hypocritical clowns, who are giving us lessons of democracy, are the same who supported the neo-nazis in Ukraine in order to challenge Putin. Now they need him to do the job.

Of course, the neocon clowns will attempt again a new cycle of conflict against Russia and its allies, once the situation in Middle East permit it. Probably after the 2016 elections. Any GOP or Hillary will do the job.

Posted by: nmb | Jan 16 2016 18:58 utc | 3

US should be supporting Assad, Iraqi regime, Iran, and bombing KSR.
Will be anti-Assad/Iran/Russia rhetoric, support for the moderate rebels, blah, blah....

Posted by: Steve | Jan 16 2016 19:02 utc | 4

@2 Dan 'Sanctions on development of missile technology? Maybe war with KSA? Human rights?'

Aren't sanctions about over now? With the whole world economic outlook tanking, doesn't everyone need every bit of action they can get? I think it's more likely that existing sanctions - against Russia - will be lifted than that new ones will be imposed. Of course the US could follow Saudi Arabia's lead - Saudi Arabia threatens to hurt self. I suppose that might happen.

War with KSA? The US goes to war against KSA? Or the KSA goes to war against Iran? I think the latter would be over quickly, but would leave Russia in control of Saudi oilfields. I do think the former is a possiblity ... but it would be USrael/NATO 'stabilizing' Saudi Arabia, and incidentally taking control of her oilfields, post KSA collapse.

Human rights? You're kidding, right?

Posted by: jfl | Jan 16 2016 19:19 utc | 5

How is the 2011 rebellion against Gadhafi a break of the disarmament agreement? Did the agreement have a passage that obliged the US to prop up Gadhafi when challenged by his people, the way the US might prop up the Saudi family, or did support the al-Khalifa family in Bahrain?

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jan 16 2016 19:20 utc | 6

b, can you trust Liar-in-Chief, dem or repug including Bernie Sanders?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jan 16 2016 19:20 utc | 7

Sorry, messed up the link above,

Posted by: jfl | Jan 16 2016 19:23 utc | 8

Losing in Iraq and putting a more loyal to Shia in power was a big moronic setback for the US empire. ( Bot Maliki was criminally corrupt and incompetent - corrupt overall and especially in military terms - which allowed and was crucial for ISIL success in Iraq ). In the 2003 war crime, the US sacrificed Iraq oil theft/control desire, instead of the bigger domination picture of using Iraq to counter Iran.

Also, Proxies against Iran like ISIL, Jundallah etc, won't work because Iran is too strong for that, so measures like sanctions to promote regime change is the next best thing, next to all our war.
The Iranians inviting dialogue and political engagement with the evil US empire is a gigantic mistake. US can endlessly trot out against Iran to keep extending and widening sanctions for things like ; human rights, lack of democracy, secarianisism, lack of women's rights etc. Once you engage with the great Satan ( US) , the great Satan keeps wanting to extract and deny.

The obvious goal of the nuclear deal is to economically weaken Iran - and use that for regime change or colour revolution, keep it under some influence of the US etc. it's just a matter of how stupid, desperate, corrupt, cowardly, the Iranian elite is, so to keep this BS going.

You can point to Cuba - no matter how much you disagree with their political system - for what more independence looks like, and they are far more vulnerable, Isolated, and exposed than Iran is.

Posted by: tom | Jan 16 2016 19:25 utc | 9

thanks b.. interesting question/s... i sort of see it the way jfl@1 does, but i do agree with nmb @3 as well... obviously these positions don't agree with one another.. so here are my simple thoughts..

it seems to me that the usa has been quite content to have a state of destabilization in the middle east and europe for obvious reasons.. i am not sure how long it can go on for. i continue to believe we are approaching a major war and that the dynamic in syria is just a beginning phase of something bigger.. i would suspect the conflict will be with saudi arabia and iran, but maybe i am all wrong on this.. perhaps yemen is the present developing battle ground for this? it is hard for me to get my head around the usa/britian and etc offering tactical support to sa in their war on yemen.. none of that makes sense to me other then for arms deals in exchange for oil and etc.. so maybe what is happening with yemen is the key question in my speculation here..perhaps the usa/britian are hoping to pull iran into some quagmire with the help of sa?

of course i don't trust the west for much of anything.. it is such a shame and i wish i viewed it differently, but i don't..

Posted by: james | Jan 16 2016 19:33 utc | 10

@9 tom.. thanks.. i forgot about how iraq plays into all of this - another open unresolved question - like libya, but even more central to iran and saudi arabia..

Posted by: james | Jan 16 2016 19:35 utc | 11

@10 james

I don't think the two are in disagreement.

nmb: 'Of course, the neocon clowns will attempt again a new cycle of conflict ...'

The keyword is attempt. The US 'elite' may/will continually amount weaker and weaker 'challenges' to the writing on the wall, spreading death, devastation, and destruction, impoverishing us all worldwide ... unless and until we do something about it.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 16 2016 19:44 utc | 12

There might be sanctions because of Iran's missiles program (of course, due to US bogus interpretation), but what I'm nearly 100% sure, is that US will be back on sanctions track when next president will be elected. Killary wouldnt miss a chance, and Republicans are even more hell bent to screw Iran over, "Real men go to Tehran."

Posted by: Harry | Jan 16 2016 19:47 utc | 13

Sanctions only work if everybody abides by them. Once the Europeans and Chinese etc. start doing business with Iran it will be very hard to stop them.

Posted by: dh | Jan 16 2016 19:54 utc | 14

>> How long until Oceania will, one way or another, transgress against it - if not in letter then in spirit?

In "one way or another"? Sounds like you're setting an easy-to-meet threshold. Don't "navigational errors" count? How many lost sailors or tourists until Iran concludes it's justified to (1) treat pawns as "invaders" rather than "incompetent" and (2) charge and process them as criminals? Will Oceania spin the story as a "hostage situation" and use it to justify both rescue missions and concomitant bomb strikes against known jihadists hangouts like water treatment facilities, electricity generation plants, and hospitals?

Frankly, my answer -- a linear progression extrapolating from what's already happened -- is lame. The interesting challenge is in trying to anticipate either discrete, game-changing (well, "game-advancing") events or the start of other lines.

Posted by: dumbass | Jan 16 2016 19:58 utc | 15

@dh 'Once the Europeans and Chinese etc. start doing business with Iran it will be very hard to stop them.'

Impossible. The USA needs a Plan B to effect after the failure of Plan A : world dominance. So far, nothing on the horizon but unknowing decline.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 16 2016 19:58 utc | 16

The G W Bush administration was responsible for the North Korean [NK] negotiations failing, then the US pledge to supply 500,000 tons of oil per year together with some light water reactors in exchange for NK decommissioning their [enriching uranium capable] reactors, failed because of foot dragging on the US's part. The whole nuclear issue with Iran has nothing to do with Iran getting the bomb, and all to do with stopping Iran's economic and conventional military rise to becoming the hegemon of the middle east. The tactic of destroying Syria [the so called low hanging fruit] served the purpose of not only taking out Assad but Hezbollah also, leaving Iran to be destroyed by the death of a thousand cuts. Alas for the West/Israel it is not to be, instead the 'arc of resistance' will go from strength to strength hopefully culminating in the demise of the true axis of evil Saudi Arabia the other Gulfies and Israel.

Posted by: harry law | Jan 16 2016 20:03 utc | 17

I think the House of Saud is being set up to come undone. The whole specter of the 'Father' of terrorism being supported by the USA is creating the mother of all cognitive dissonances, even in the politically (and emotionally) backward areas in the American psyche.

Questions: What happens to the property of people who are found to be terrorists?
What happens to the money in a bank account when that person/entity is DECLARED to be a terrorist?
What group of people are, obviously, the EASIEST folks to paint as the GRANDDADDY of terrorism?
Que the missing pages in the 9/11 Report! (oh wait, they've been queued for a while!)

Posted by: kafkananda | Jan 16 2016 20:05 utc | 18

North Korea already has the capacity to deliver a nuclear strike on the US. All that is needed is for them to sail a small boat into a US harbor or harbors [New York would be favorite] with one of their nuclear weapons on board [weight approx 2,000lbs]. I hope I don't give them any ideas, but it would be a good negotiating tactic.

Posted by: harry law | Jan 16 2016 20:13 utc | 19

I think we are in a verly different period of history right now. The Deep State and its associated tendrils is disunited and deeply fragmented in my view. This should be obvious by the incoherent policy in the ME and elsewhere. It's been going on for years but is now worse. The Deep State had hoped that the GWOT would have provided a unifying sense of "mission" among the population of the U.S. and the bureaucrats. Instead we are moving into a period of deeper corruption and nihilism both within gov't and without. There seems to be no basis for unity within the official gov't, the populace, or the Deep State. I think there remains powerful forces that want a state of permanent war and thus will try to unermine the Iran agreement but these forces are so blatantly corrupt that those elements that don't directly profit from war or who believe that more tension is just bad for bidness. With a revived Russia and China beginning to enter the international field of action everything becomes riskier and those elements in the Financial community that usually have the whip hand in the Deep State don't want more tension at this delicate time in the world economy.

Posted by: Banger | Jan 16 2016 20:17 utc | 20

It wouldn't be the Iranians to first observe that (some) white men speak with forked tongues (and treaties not worth the parchment they were written on).

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Jan 16 2016 20:30 utc | 21

Achieved at the expense of clean water supplies in Oceania (via fracking chemicals) plus overpumping by a few of the most loyal subordinate dictatorship colonies, one might speculate that the unsustainable assault on oil prices serves -- by design or not -- to:

(a) strengthen Oceania's trade balance, thereby decreasing the rate at which Oceania's currency -- plus purchasing power and freedom-from-influence -- ends up in colonists' hands

(b) strengthen Oceania's currency, after (a) years of stories about the impending demise of that currency and (b) some (many?) of those oil exporters had already issued bonds (i.e., borrowed money) in Oceania currency

(c) undermine the economies and social stability of oil exporting countries (many of which sought to distance themselves from Oceania)

(d) give Oceania itself, via its subordinate, unauditable currency printers, financial leverage over those now-vulnerable oil exporters

(e) give Oceania itself the political leverage to demand concessions (bases, "privatization", etc.)

What's more, via its subordinate, unauditable currency printers, Oceania can continue funding hopelessly unprofitable subordinate oil producers, because the "set of books" accounting for power ("e") matters far more than the set of books accounting for meaningless 1's and 0's for unauditable "financial" conduits.

How does the foregoing hypothetical scenario compare against an ordinary economic blockade? Just as powerful? More so?

(Reminds me. Didn't one of the Nazi leaders say something to the effect that: "We learned we didn't have to disadvantage our political opponents but could instead just give an advantage to our political allies." Basically, an "unlevel playing field, with naive referees" is as favorable as a "level playing field, with bribed referees", since in the latter scenario you risk detection and backlash from the polloi. (LOL. Who am I kidding??) ...Anyway, you can always attempt both.)

...Of course, this does not begin to consider allegations of printing the colonists' own currencies, in order to mess with their economies. Heck, you could print the colonists' own currencies, use it to buy all the local goods (e.g., toilet paper), ship the goods out of country, and thereby ensure headlines like "No toilet paper in socialist paradise!" appear on blogs like OceaniaHedge (which, normally, are very skeptical of other Oceania narratives).

Posted by: dumbass | Jan 16 2016 20:34 utc | 22

After the dot-com crash, I concluded that "insiders sell when it's time to get out" and theorized that "KSA's insiders will IPO Aramco before they lose their power". Now that they're talking about an IPO -- waaay late IMO -- I have to wonder.

Posted by: dumbass | Jan 16 2016 20:38 utc | 23

When and how? They spelled it out years ago in Brooking's 'Which Path to Persia':

"Regime change and perhaps even military operations against Iran are talked about as a foregone conclusion, with Brookings using the pretext of sanctions as merely a means of incremental escalation to tip-toe the world into backing regime change, including war with the nation if need be. This is exactly what has been done in regards to Libya, with disingenuous humanitarian concerns translated into a no-fly zone, which incrementally transitioned into attacks on Qaddafi's ground forces, targeted assassinations against Qaddafi himself, and now talk of destroying civilian infrastructure and a full-out ground invasion.

A repeat scenario is playing out in Syria where foreign-fueled violence is being used as a means to engage in broader intervention. While Western governments feigns inaction and hesitation in the face of a bloodbath they themselves instigated, in reality they are creating the same sense of "bringing it upon themselves" for Syria as Brookings talks about in regards to Iran."

That was written in 2012, and so the best-laid-plans may have stalled out a bit in Syria, but failure only seems to embolden the forces of Kakistocracy. Mentioned in the report is manufacturing an Iranian transgression which might soften international opposition to war with Iran, such as accusing Iran of violating provisions of a sanction-ending deal if it goes into effect; or goading Iran into a hostile military action, among other scenarios (two navy boats straying near a sensitive military facility, anyone?)

As we see with the timeline for Assad's departure that was leaked- and I don't think anyone buys the "it's just random thoughts put on paper by low level staffers" excuse, or however they put it, the plans for regime change in Iran are certainly still on the table in some quarters of our increasingly fractured 'leadership' and surely in the wet dreams of the McCains, Grahams, Israel-firsters, psycho generals, think tanks, and defense contractors of the zio-western world. Expect more anti Iran pieces in the press, "concerns" about Iranian activity in Syria and Iraq expressed by state and Pentagon pr flaks, and Lord only knows what else, besides the nearly guaranteed meddling of human rights ngos accompanied by the now-ubiquitous, utterly ridiculous Ken Roth tweet for which he will receive much verbal abuse in the comment section.

Posted by: Colinjames | Jan 16 2016 20:39 utc | 24

Iran presents a huge business opportunity for the EU and the USA with 80 millions citizens eager to join the 21th century technology. Unless Iran becomes a serious threat to Israel and snubs the Us companies, I believe any administration would respect the deal. There would now and then little conflicts fueled by envious Saudi Arabia but overall the relation will be smooth

Posted by: virgile | Jan 16 2016 20:48 utc | 25

@ virgile #24

>> Iran presents a huge business opportunity for Oceania

Oceaniamart recently announced plans to close stores in the many poorer areas of its domain, which implies poor people are running out of money to buy cheap goods. With increasing automation, they'll grow even poorer -- the world over. Extrapolating from this, I doubt Oceania's leaders want a "business opportunity" with more poor people -- unless by "business opportunity" you mean "control over the colony's people, resources, and relations".

Posted by: dumbass | Jan 16 2016 21:20 utc | 26

This will be the deal to watch....the Iranians need to make sure they have iron-clad guarantees regarding spare parts...

Posted by: dh | Jan 16 2016 21:31 utc | 27

@12 jfl.. fair enough.. i guess we can wait and see..

@26 dh... when you have been burned more then a few times, i think it is hard to trust.. i suspect iranians have long memories - if they know what is good for them..........

Posted by: james | Jan 16 2016 22:07 utc | 28

ot - US-made cluster bombs kill civilians in Yemen - but who answers for it? - See more at:

Posted by: james | Jan 16 2016 22:20 utc | 29

Hi Banger.

Hope you are well.

I've been dying to ask you: Is Trump the benevolent oligarch that you were speaking during our discussions at NakedCapitalism?

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jan 16 2016 22:49 utc | 30

Hey b, this is a trick question, right?

The USA/West/"Oceania" will never break the agreement. Iran will (of course!) as they respond to KSA/Israel/Turkey/ISIS/etc.

Lead from behind = lulz for the asshats

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jan 16 2016 22:55 utc | 32

Cue The Fat Lady: "You've got to know when to hold 'em / Know when to fold 'em / Know when to walk away / And know when to run...."

I believe the smarter Deep State faction understands the Vision 2020 gambit has failed and the best possible move is to position itself to reap what it can from Russia & China's Eurasian Integration plans. Since Iran will become a full SCO member later this year, I don't see using Daesh anymore as a destabilization tool despite the temptation for the remaining neocons since Daesh existed to make Vision 2020 reality. The rapid escalation of the Climate Crisis and the large and very energetic pushback against TTP, TTIP, etc., are also very influential, along with the consequences of the new Multipolar geopolitical reality, and hollowing out of the Metropole.

The above and more are reasons why Sanders will become POTUS as Killery will be indicted by the FBI for her numerous security violations and the remaining neocons are purged from power while the artificial Teaparty dies. With all the ferment amongst the global citizenry, I don't think this is wishful thinking. Russia has exploited the Deep State's overplayed hand, impossible policy goal, and deadly cynical politics, while the International Propaganda System is no longer as influential and subject to ridicule like never before.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 16 2016 23:06 utc | 33

Economics 101, Chapter 21C:

US-IL will unfreeze Iran's assets in tranches, interspersed with provocation for ZioMedia rabble-rousing to refreeze and The Trump babble-fishing about a Big Rewind, that will roil the ZioBanks credit-debt markets, making it very difficult for Iran to execute on, say, acquisition of 114 AirBus with Bank Letters of Credit, except at usurious insurance rates.

The whole 2000s Kabuki play with Unfreeze-for-U235, an wholly illegal act of war of extortion by US-IL, that 'Lost Decade' engineered by these goobers, heyuk-heyuk, was a war crime to bid time for the US and KSA to completely fill up the global oil pipeline tankage, even spilling over into VLCC contango.

This is designed to 'cork' Iran oil sales, shut in their oil production, and force them to trade oil futures at super low current discount rates, for moar credit-debt at super high usurious ZioBank interest rates, plus insurance fees, and no 'easy credit' discounts like other NATO nations receive.

Here, let's break it down. You move into a new neighborhood, working at a refinery and living off the grid. Nobody likes you, so for a decade the Sheriff freezes your bank account, locks you out of your job, and lets you live hand to mouth. Finally you hand over what the Sheriff wanted all along, your solar and wind power, and you agree to be bound over. OK, now you can have access to a tranche of your savings to spend on utilities bills, and you can go back to work, ...but when you get there, there isn't any, the refinery is shut in. Now you are dependent on the Sheriff and the ZioBanks for access to your savings, to pay interest on their credit-debt loans, to keep your family alive, until the refinery starts up again.

Which is never. We're in a global demand destruction crISIS.

In other words, even though Iran rejected the Ponzi world of ZioBankers and tried to live outside the system, true to your own beliefs, the goddamn mf'rs will have you by the balls in perpetual credit-debt, like all the rest of us. The Jackboot of 1000 Years stomping down in our upturned faces...forever.

Now you can juice this up with all the war pron you want, and jibberjabber about which minister is in urgent meetings with which, and which new group of 'freedom fighters' is holding which latest piece of torn up hellhole today, or even next week, ...but there's really, really nothing left to say.

MegaDaeth has secured another credit-debt victim: Iran.

That leaves only North Korea, in all the world, still holding out against the ZioBankers, and leaves the ZioBankers with, according to Bloomberg, $2 TRILLION in maturing T-notes and MBS CDOs that they will have to either default on, or else loot our Social Security, as the Congress-stipulated 'buyer of last resort' for The Chosen's Vampire Empire fiat paper.

I wonder if WalMart's will cash my T-Bills, after The Chosen burn Social Security down to smoke and ash, as Joni put it? Oh, wait, you never actually hold a physical T-Bill, just a ZioBank Treasury Fund that they CLAIM is 100% capitalized.

Oh, look, a білка~!

Posted by: Chipnik | Jan 17 2016 0:46 utc | 34

- Right. The US (G.W. Bush) made a deal with the iraqi shiites to let US troops stay in Iraq for another 2 to 3 years but both Bush & Obama didn't intent to keep their end of the deal and let stay US troops for ever. But the iraqi government was quite adament. After the SOFA (Status Of Forces Agreement) expired in 2011 the iraqi government forced US troops to leave.

- No. I think that Obama (if he was to remain president for say the next 10 years) would do everything to upheld the agreement. So, the big question is what will the next president do ?
- In his 1st term of president, Obama has sent then US army chief of staff Mike Mullen to Israel with one very clear message. Tell Netanjahu that he think about of making any provocative moves (e.g. towards Iran) that could lead to an escalation of tensions in the Middle East and could lead to new war in that region.
- The incident with the US soldiers in the Persian Gulf doesn't bode well for the future. It seems there're still people in the military that want to ratchet up tensions in the Persian Gulf.

Posted by: Willy2 | Jan 17 2016 0:55 utc | 35

@26 dh

If I were the Iranians I'd never buy anything American for which there is an alternative supplier. For decades, the Jews in the northeast of the US used to drive Volvos rather than Mercedes-Benzes. I guess they feel the Germans have come around now. Maybe Sweden doesn't make submarines.

Doesn't Russia make an airliner? Aren't rubles cheap now? Pay in rubles directly. But make sure the S-300 betrayal is foremost in Russian minds, and buy some Airbusses as an alternative to the alternative. Of course both Russia and the EU have thrown Iran under the bus in the recent past ... not like the Americans though. Remember Mohammad Mosaddegh.

There's no honor among thieves. 'Economics' is just another name for thievery in the West, the US and their droogies have made that plain as day over the past decade and a half, for those of us who are slow learners, or quick to forget.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 1:12 utc | 36

Four attempts to post a (long-ish) comment. Still hasn't appeared. Odd.

Sorry for the duplication if they all show up.

Posted by: dumbass | Jan 17 2016 1:12 utc | 37


Iran is far from being poor. In 2014 Iran GDP is close to Venezuela and higher than Brazil.

It is expected that without the sanctions, the GDP will be much higher. Iran is a virgin market, education level is high and there is a young population and ambitious youth. The Iranian diaspora in the USA and Europe is very active and will immediately take advantage of the opening up of the country.
Iran is now the new Eldorado...

Posted by: Virgile | Jan 17 2016 1:18 utc | 38

@35 They are buying Airbus and Boeing. More of a lease than an outright purchase. They won't get caught again.

Posted by: dh | Jan 17 2016 1:20 utc | 39


PRNK could already do that at any time with a freighter full of ANFO disguised as soy oil exports, since they don't have nukes, they never have had nukes, they never have had ICBMs, and they only simulate nukes with underground ANFO bursts, in order to obtain more free AN and FO foreign aid; which suits MegaDaeth just fine, it's not their money, but it sure juices their Mil.Gov TS-SCI 6-Sigma salaries and pensions-for-life, right on cue, in fact to conflate PRNK 'nukes' with IRAN oil sanctions easing, and the need to keep the screws on Levant.

See how that works? Then Obama talks about closing Gitmo, the neocon's secret underground railroad for papering right-wing Cuban immigration, complete with special welfare on arrival and Green Cards after just a year, to start their own drug and money laundering business in South Florida, feeding NYC with profits, and genocidal gentrification of inner cities, once they drug-euthanize brown communities out of existence.

So you solve all those crISIS issues by 'drifting' two super-patrol boats over the line with Iran and having Lil Kim claim a HB, together with RNC debates, on the eave of Obama's SOTU, so he STFU about closing Gitmo and the drug-money laundering pipeline through DHS TSA pre-cleared Cubans given Right Stuff clearance to work at Gitmo, then after a year, flying to FL.

There are 32 Most Favored Nation "Buy America" (sic) foreign nations contracting to DoD with literally millions of foreign nationals on the Defence payroll, all getting pre-cleared, working towards a Green Card, then disappearing into the US Mil.Gov bureaucracy using minority-hiring and former Defense (overseas) employment as their edge over natural US citizens.

It's just business, get over it!

Jeez, so much they didn't teach you in public school!

Posted by: Chipnik | Jan 17 2016 1:33 utc | 40

It didn't take long for the Istanbul bombing to look like a false flag attack agsinst Germany and in favor of Turkey's interests in Syria.

Turkey asks Berlin to step up military involvement in Syria

"If Germany and others want to stop the influx of refugees, they must stop the bombings by Syrian and Russian forces against the Syrian opposition," Simsek said, speaking days after 10 German tourists were killed in a suicide attack in Turkey.

Posted by: Les | Jan 17 2016 1:36 utc | 41

The real issue is the inconstancy of amerikan foreign policy. Yes there is a wider agenda where destabilisation of ME states is regarded as an essential to grabbing resources for little or no real expenditure. Israel (tho less & less as each year passes) still has a stranglehold on most aspects of amerikan foreign policy so there can never be any certainty about how the corrupt puppets on the hill will behave over what appears to be relatively inconsequential issues.

That last bit touches on the real danger and goes to the heart of why Iran held out for so long and ensured that all the other permanent members of the UN security council were also independent signatories to the deal.

Oblammer and Kerry jettisoned the plethora of zionist and xtian fundie special interests as soon as they could and obeyed the instructions from the heavy mob in the hydrocarbon industry who believe that sanctions are not the go since all it generally means in the long term is that amerikan based corporations don't cop a slice of the pie.

Iran has been burned so many times in the past by amerika for example:
The seizure nad sequestration of all assets earned from iranian oil trades by amerikan banks back in 1979 which precipitated the so called 'hostage crisi' a crisis that could have been ended immediately Iran regained control of it's money. Then the rethugs burned 'em big time over so called Irangate when notorious sociopath donny the dingbat rumsfeld promised a 'normalisation' of relations and return of the seized assets if reagan won the election.

And again during the civil war in Lebanon when Iran assisted with the release of amerikan hostages and attempted on many occasions to broker a peace deal only to find negotiations continually sabotaged and amerikan pols hi-fiving to their domestic media with claims they had caught Iran with their pants down.

It took a while but Iran eventually accepted that it doesn't matter how sincere amerikan negotiators are/appear to be they can never be trusted since a) lying for the alleged 'greater good' isn't regarded as dishonerable in amerikan political circles and b) amerikans don't consider themselves to be bound by any agreement made by their predecessor no matter how iron clad and swear on a bible/honour/mother's life the original guy was who called the deal.

The iranians didn't take as long as indigenous amerikans to understand the favourite play of the imperial party's two halves, but they took a little longer than say Japan maybe even Vietnam, oth many other cultures & societies still don't grasp how english perfidy morphed into amerikan hyper-perfidy - Yet another of Jefferson's tainted gifts.

Neoliberal media has made much of the relationship that has developed between the Kerry sleazebag and Iran's Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif,.
Most likely that is just a lame assed attempt to personalise issues as contemporay media prefers to do - reducing all powerful human beings to 2D cut-outs & so precluding meaningful examination of character. There is of course another side to this reduction of a highly complex and toughly negotiated deal. Amerika breaks it and the media go "once John Kerry left state no one remained who believed Iran was trustworthy" and so, just like a personality disorded adolescent, amerika drop Iran before Iran can drop amerika.

The crux of the problem that Iran faces is that the two warring factions of the amerikan empire party will do anything to gain the approval of their heavily indoctrinated domestic audience because therein lies security for life by winning a term as puppet-in-chief.

Oblammer could ignore the usual whiners and answer to the fattest wallet because he doesn't need to face another election.

That will not be the case for any of his successor (or not for some time) much less the loudmouthed 'candidates' vying for a crack at the gig.

Viewed in this light one could imagine that Iran made finalisation of the deal contingent upon some GI's being found where they shouldn't and being returned immediately with salutations and goodwill all around.

Now the Iranian power structure has learned they won't unlearn. Now they know they have a very small window of opportunity to alter amerikan drongo's perception of them. And amerika's strength - the two halves of one party never sticking to any agreement contains liabilities. bnlike amerika, matter who gets in control of Iran by election, the foreign ministry institutional knowledge and skills will be retained.

Best of all the aparthied ersatz state has become corpulent, corrupt and incapable - they've been caught off guard several times in the last 12 months. Nothing suprising about this it happens to every human construct. History tells us that just like a sports team or tech brand, israel will decay and fall into great unpopularity before any sort of renaissance would or could occur and may it never regain its former position as amerika's favourite tow-headed boy-next-door.

Persians have been playing a good game for close to 3 millenia now they finally have a good grasp of all the unwritten rules I don't believe amerika will succeed in returning them to the wilderness - that is dependant on careful steps over the next 12-18 months.
The world's economic structure has been changed hugely since amerika first began it's siege of Iran. Over the next year or 2 Iran's economy will have become so entangled with everyone else's that re-unravelling would be impossible. If puppet in chief managed to get free of his energy puppet masters and have amerika re-isolate Iran the rest of the world's economies won't be sacrificing their nose for amerika's face. maybe england will go along but that would be all.

Apologies in aedvance for grammer syntax and typo errors but I'm being dragged out into 'fresh air' by my offspring.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jan 17 2016 1:37 utc | 42

@32 karlof

I see the merest crack of dawn as well. I hope chipnik takes it ok, if the sun does come up tomorrow. Well, I wax lyrical ... if the US 'elite' doesn't have it all its own way tomorrow. I saw the reports about the fbi, too ... they're probably on the case to announce that, work as hard as they may, they can find no instance of broken law in the Case of Madam Clinton. And the Bern is Obama's fawning admirer. of his slimey political bait-and-switch anyway, if they do lower the boom. I sent for a ballot for the undemocratic Democratic primary anyway, following Tom Murphy's plea to leave no stone unturned. I'll turn over Bermnie's. Madam does presently represent the endpoint of bad on the Democratic pole. I posted it once before but I'll post it again, Shamus Cooke's, Does Bernie Sanders’ Imperialism Matter?. I won't be giving anything away when I say, Hell yes it does! In more ways than immediately apparent. I like Shamus Cooke. One of the ones who's keeping counterpunch alive. Seems to me, of course.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 1:45 utc | 43

@40 les

Incredible. Terrorist Erdogan thinks he's Sultan of the empire already, and lord of Germany as well as of all the Russias. The poor Turks are going to suffer for his brash egotism for a long time to come.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 1:59 utc | 44

I think that what someone called "lost decade" for Iranian economy was not all that lost. Iran made some progress in domestic industry, non-oil economy, and it positions it better to survive a period of cheap oil. Moreover, the "Shia axis" seem to be recovering, as the war in Syria is very much of a joint project of Syria, Russia, Iran and "resistance" from Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan and even Pakistan.

For a few months after Russian air force entered the war directly the progress was very patchy, with many small advances almost balanced by small reversals. In the last week it seems that the momentum is finally achieved, while the main backer of the rebel is busy chasing one emerging threat after another -- the latest are academicians who are getting arrested by a score, but more than two thousands signed a petition that was declared an act of treason and terrorism. As Assad of Syria is forced to fight a war on a hundred fronts, Erdogan of Turkey creates hundred fronts where none had to exist. And in time this hinders supplying Syrian rebels.

Iran's transport minister [...] Abbas Akhondi was quoted by the official IRNA news agency as saying that the first shipment of planes will arrive in Iran before March 20 to upgrade Iran's aging fleet. Iran has said it is looking to buy 400 passenger planes over the next decade.
I guess that in a fullness of time, Iran may buy Russian airliners as well. The relationship between the two is complex, and Iranians will want to see S-300's operational and some other goodies. In the meantime, Russia has to show on their domestic market that their planes are reliable.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jan 17 2016 2:00 utc | 45

...but, but, the S-300's. That will give Iran some added muscle. Not sayin the U.S. won't try their usual 5th column trap crap. Never let a good crisis go to waste...

Posted by: V. Arnold | Jan 17 2016 2:02 utc | 46

karlof1 @ 32: " energetic pushback against TTP, TTIP, etc."

Let's hope your "energetic pushback" bears actual fruit. If these two malignant "trade policies" are defeated, I might share your optimism.

Posted by: ben | Jan 17 2016 2:27 utc | 47

@41 DiD ' a) lying for the alleged 'greater good' isn't regarded as dishonerable in amerikan political circles and b) amerikans don't consider themselves to be bound by any agreement made by their predecessor no matter how iron clad and swear on a bible/honour/mother's life the original guy was who called the deal.'

The rest of the world has finally wakened to those two aspects of the American 'elite' culture as well and, more to the point as far as they are concerned : c) neoliberal economics is just another weapon in the American 'elite' quiver, so all dollar denominated bank accounts are really the property of the American 'elite', as far as that 'elite' are concerned. Others may have access to their own dollars at American 'elite' pleasure only.

That's sunk in, and is why the US is sinkin'. It has nothing of worth left, but other peoples' money. If that dries up so does the 'high life' among the 'elite'. It will and it will, respectively. They've slain the goose who's laid their sacks of golden (Sachs of Goldman?) eggs.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 3:15 utc | 48

@jfl 42

I respect your decision whoever you vote in the primaries and finally POTUS in Nov.

However, nowhere Shamus Cooke mentioned "Israel have the right to defense itself" - every Israeli defender said. Bearing in mind Sanders prevented anti-Israelis protesters in his rallies and shouted back in a recorded video "Shut UP"

You truly believe Tom Murphy's plea to vote for Bernies in the primaries and force Sanders to pick Jill Stein as VP. Gosh I assume like many, makes that same mistake once and repeating it again. The same "strategic voting" in Canada brought about Trudeau's victory and turn out to be another NeoCon:

Palestinians issue, land grabs, murdering in broad daylight does matter to me, if you believe you can force Sander to pick Jill Stein as VP you are really, really drinking too much cool-aids. Strategic voting end up Green Party loosing one of the two seats in Canada Federal Parliament and only Green Party chief holding on her seat.

The slaughtering must stop, anyone who had bloods in his hands are equally guilty, Shamus said "Sanders has Afghan blood on his hands too, having voted for the invasion of the now-endless Afghan war ..."

......and the endless wars continue. Good luck to you and all apologists. I'll have more to add as we heading from primaries into the final stretch and no offense intended. :-)

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jan 17 2016 3:36 utc | 49

@jfl 42

More on Trudeau Pledge Tracker: Ignoring Executions and Proceeding with Saudi Arms Deal

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jan 17 2016 3:50 utc | 50

Until Iran finds a way around or through the Zio-media, its actions will always be subject to misrepresentation, and vulnerable to lies concocted by the Zio-media. EVERY Yankee (& British & French) Regime-change plot on Planet Earth since the 1950s has been painted as slightly more touchy-feely than a Hippie Love-in.

Iran needs control of the stories which are poured into the eyes & ears of the Western Public. While it's figuring out how to do that, it's going to have to waste a lot of the new money pouring in to keep a close watch on every Yankee, Brit and Frenchman who sets foot on Iranian soil (plus all the ones who are already there, which one would hope is already in hand).

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 17 2016 3:58 utc | 51

ad #50.
Right now I'm listening to "news" that (multi-millionaire) Oz PM Malcolm Turnbull, is in Iraq congratulating the Iraqi's on their efforts to "fight ISIS" - (a creation of many of Oz's "other" friends) ... delivered with a straight face.
It reminds me of a line from Alice Cooper's Only Women Bleed...

He lies right at you.
You know you hate this game.
He slaps you once in a while
And you live and love in pain.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 17 2016 4:19 utc | 52

@48 JS

Cut me some slack, Jack. Voting for Bernie in a primary is not voting for Bernie in the general. This business about Bernie picking Stein as vp is over my head. Do the greens even have a primary? Sounds like Stein's been appointed/annointed already. You've been paying too much attention to the elephant/donkey/green show. I regard Stein as a female Bernie. I'll surely end up writing in a candidate in the general. All of us should, imho. Put the write-in total over that of the "winners'". That'll wake us up to the reality of our sovereign power. The elephant/donkey/green show is a sideshow, cf. the imperialist greens in Germany, for example.

Back on topic ... I think the US will try to monkeywrench Iran's return to world commerce and will fail. Will succeed in isolating itself. Even Israel is pretending not to know us. Every bit of commerce not conducted with the US - from soup to cloud, the now official privatized-'nsa' internet - is another vote for independence. The rest of the world has seen/is seeing as we speak the US for what we are at this point. BDS USA to the extent possible is surely the movement of the day among all of the US' victims, who count most of the rest of the earth's population among their number. The US is sinking, but will continue to cause as much death, devastation, destruction and impoverishment as it can on the way down.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 4:41 utc | 53

@40 les.. thanks for that. i like what piotr @44 says to that in his 2nd paragraph!! well said piotr..

@ 41 debs is dead.. thanks for saying all that.. like i suggested earlier, the iranians would have to be nuts to trust the usa!

Posted by: james | Jan 17 2016 4:57 utc | 54

As dh says at 14, sanctions don't work if only the US abides by them. This is the end of sanctions as far as Europe is concerned. This means that Europe has succeeded in forcing the US back onto the common sense track of 'Western finance borg' world domination through neoliberal institutions and soft power. (Soft power exerted on and through the economic elites of the still sovereign countries.)

When the neocons arrive in force back in Washington in 2017, I don't think they will be able to generate arms sales and military conflict with the Iran card. They'll have to work with their Russia and China cards only. Those are way more serious, and they can make themselves into major league fools attempting to play them.

Soft power is all. Huge chunks of the Chinese and probably Iranian economic elites have been bamboozled by bad Western neoliberal/libertarian educations and are BEGGING the West to economically screw over their countries (but not themselves personally). The failure of anti-borg soft power makes this 'corruption from within' still the winning track for Western finance. But, as we have seen, the neocon (Israel and arms sales uber alles) idiots are very capable still of handing victory to the Russian-Iranian-Chinese sovereignty side.

Posted by: fairleft | Jan 17 2016 5:53 utc | 55

Hillary Clinton calls for new sanctions on Iran

“Iran is still violating UN Security Council resolutions with its ballistic missile program, which should be met with new sanctions designations and firm resolve,” she said.

Clinton said if elected president her policy toward Iran would be to “distrust and verify.”

Clinton made the remarks in a statement issued shortly after President Barack Obama signed an executive order lifting US economic sanctions on Iran on Saturday.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 6:29 utc | 56

Regarding the Libyan War:

Apparently, you have believed what you heard in Western media. For as much of the truth as you like, go to & search for Libyan War. Here are two samples:

"The pre-planned invasion of Libya is a case in point. Prior to the invasion — ironically billed as a “humanitarian Intervention” — Libya’s government, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, boasted significant achievements, including the following:

*The highest standard of living in Africa

*Human Development Index (HDI), a measure of health, education, and income, ranked above the regional average

* Free public health care, and free public education

* 89% adult literacy rate (with girls outnumbering boys by 10% in secondary and tertiary education)

* Subsidized, affordable food

* Homelessness all but wiped out

"Given these very positive metrics, how did the West sell its so-called “humanitarian intervention”? Simple. It created a false narrative that demonized Gadaffi as it promulgated lies and media fabrications."

"It was Muammar Gaddafi’s dream to provide fresh water for all Libyans and to make Libya self-sufficient in food production. In 1953, the search for new oilfields in the deserts of southern Libya led to the discovery not just of significant oil reserves, but also of vast quantities of fresh water trapped in the underlying strata. The four ancient water aquifers that were discovered, each had estimated capacities ranging between 4,800 and 20,000 cubic kilometers. Most of this water was collected between 38,000 and 14,000 years ago, though some pockets are believed to be only 7,000 years old.

"After Gaddafi and the Free Unitary Officers seized power in a bloodless coup from the corrupt King Idris during the Al-Fateh Revolution in 1969, the Jamahiriya government nationalized the oil companies and spent much of the oil revenues to harness the supply of fresh water from the desert aquifers by putting in hundreds of bore wells. Large farms were established in southern Libya to encourage the people to move to the desert. It turned out that the majority of the people however preferred life in the northern coastal areas.

"Therefore Gaddafi subsequently conceived a plan to bring the water to the people instead. The Libyan Jamahiriya government conducted the initial feasibility studies in 1974, and in 1983 the Great Man-Made River Authority was set up. This fully government funded project was designed in five phases, each of them largely separate in itself, but which eventually would combine to form an integrated system. As water in Gaddafi’s Libya was regarded to be a human right, there has not been any charge on the people, nor were any international loans needed for the almost $30 billion cost of the project.

"In 1996, during the opening of Phase II of the Great Man-Made River Project, Gaddafi said:

"This is the biggest answer to America and all the evil forces who accuse us of being concerned with terrorism. We are only concerned with peace and progress. America is against life and progress; it pushes the world toward darkness."

PS: The water mentioned in this desert land is an example of Primary Water, an unlimited amount of water created under the earth's mantle and trapped within rock, sometimes quite close to the surface.

Posted by: Penelope | Jan 17 2016 6:30 utc | 57

There's some language in this deal that seems purposefully vague.

Posted by: Cresty | Jan 17 2016 6:31 utc | 58


I agree with Jack. We've seen this movie before. Bernie is warmed-over "Change You Can Believe In". IMO the major Party duopoly (Democrats+Republicans) are irredeemable bastions of the neolibcon circle-jerk orthodoxy.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jan 17 2016 8:05 utc | 59

Jackrabbit | Jan 17, 2016 3:05:39 AM | 58

Indeed and right on!!

Posted by: V. Arnold | Jan 17 2016 8:24 utc | 60

During the Kerry presidential campaign in 2004 I was down and out, homeless and psychotic in the relative social nirvana of Baltimore where decrepit institutions were so overburdened one could live with relative autonomy for less than five dollars a day.

I ritually read the New York Times as a way to maintain psycho-social integrity while mired in decompensatory emotional isolation. That summer my chief concern was the r2p hawkish left obsession with Darfur, Sudan.

I noticed that in the genteel diction of the Times the euphemistic intellectualizion "West Sudan" was used to frame the more propagandist "Darfur." A detail that "West Sudan" reversed could be read as "N.A. Dust Sew." This buttressed my picayune freak-out about the establishment African-American split over US neocolonialism and the much more immediate gauche split between philanthropic Jews and their inner city beneficiaries.

Hillary's hysterical humor ex-Qadafi was real relief over a class and gender divide in the Black electorate that President Bush's progressives had been trying to exploit in the mid-oughts.

Because I was so disgusted by this ancient thread of US no-nothingism I sought solace in my own banal-marxist interpretation, that this was a strategic replacement of oil by water. So I remonstrated with my demons by shouting in public that "the next war" would be fought over water under the Maghreb.

Several years later I saw two East German movies circa 1990 at a film festival that framed bottled water similar to the way alcohol and branded products appear.

Posted by: Ralph Reed | Jan 17 2016 10:51 utc | 61

@58 Jack Rabbit and Jack Straw

You two Jacks have somehow assumed that I am going to vote for Bernie in the general election. I don't think he is even going to be there. I wouldn't vote for him if he were. I am voting against Maw Clinton in the Democratic primary. Probably an empty gesture, its cost to me is zero. I am going to write-in my vote for president, and I think every other American ought to do the same. I believe that having the total number of write-ins exceed the total of any donkey/elephant/green is the best result we can reasonably hope for this year.

The best result would be to organize nationwide on the name to write-in and have that person be elected/be denied election. It is not impossible for that to happen, but not likely in November, in my opinion. So let's vote - in our atomized, disorganized state - for the best result we can hope for and build on that.

There will be life after the 2016 elections. Having a massive write-in total in November can enliven us and embolden us to follow through, and to be victorious in district elections in 2018 and in the general in 2020. We have to start somewhere. If we had started in 2004 we might be in position to prevail by now.

Representative government is a muddle-through solution, practicible in 'good times' - although not in the model we have now in the USA. Structural changes are necessary - I suggest the Open election amendment, the Recall, referendum and initiative amendment, and the Campaign finance amendment. In any case our political salvation requires hands-on work and our continuing involvement. We need to organize ourselves at the precinct level. No one is going to do it for us, in fact all present political organizations will oppose our autonomous organization. We just have to focus on and accomplish what must be done. That's the only way I can see democracy arising in the USA, spontaneously. Bottom up. I'm open to suggestions.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 12:36 utc | 62

@35 jfl Re: S-300s

Iran has cancelled the legal action against Russia over failure to meet contract and has made the first payment for the customised S-300 upgrade (base S-300 is effectively obsolete now).

Posted by: Yonatan | Jan 17 2016 13:08 utc | 63

jfl says:

There will be life after the 2016 elections

yeah, imagine The Tale That Might Be Told

Posted by: john | Jan 17 2016 13:32 utc | 64

Heard an interesting discussion yesterday on C-Span, driving back from a luncheon. Some Congressional hearing chaired by Texas rep., Thornton I think his name was. (Tuned in middle.) Retired high MIC officials giving opinions, including one Morrel (?), ex deputy head of CIA, and one-time acting head; a Dr. Vick (or Vickers), who seems to have been high up in DoD; plus another high ex-official whose name was not given. All retired, so all could speak their minds freely. Topic was what to do about Syria. They thought the best approach would be a large Sunni army from somewhere that could overthrow Assad (the assumption throughout was that was the key to a solution), but the Saudis and Gulf States didn't have the manpower, while the Turks, who did, were not Arab, so would be rejected. The consensus at the end was Iran had to be pressured into pressuring Assad to leave, and that to do that "enough pain had to be inflicted on Russia, for it to pressure Iran." The pain was't elucidated, but I'd guess they meant economic, plus TOW missiles, and Singers as in Afghanistan. It was all rather frightening, in that these retired officials, high enough up to know what's really happening, were all echoing the US party line (both parties, except maybe The Donald). The congressmen, in contrast, were very sensible, asking skeptical questions, and may be the only hope, at least during the present administration. They'd likely go along with one of their own.

Posted by: Seward | Jan 17 2016 13:57 utc | 65

35;Actually,Jews used to own and drive Cadillacs,hence the term Jew Canoes.
The word on Ziostreet is oil glut,from Iranian perfidious dumping.sheesh,they never sleep.

Posted by: dahoit | Jan 17 2016 14:16 utc | 66

A troll on another website commented that the Deep State's greatest concern is about making money, which is a factual admission despite the context surrounding the statement being wrong. Of the many trails of terrorist support, more than a few lead back to support for the failed Vision 2020 policy proving the ingrained Outlaw nature of the US Empire that will be hard to escape the consequences since the protection provided by the Propaganda System has vanished. It's hard to read Deep State tea leaves, but the failure of the dominant policy since 1990 means it will be replaced by another within a much changed context. These are the factors driving my very limited optimism, overcoming my usual cynicism.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jan 17 2016 14:24 utc | 67

Heartbreaking photo from Yemen

Posted by: Manolo | Jan 17 2016 15:14 utc | 68

I'm sorry I doubted your headline, b. (O ye of little faith).

This absolutely floors me this morning:

The brief article claims the Treasury - the Treasury!? - has imposed sanctions on Iran's ballistic missiles. My question - can they DO that?! And what on earth does it mean to label this a TREASURY action?! I know money is speech now but this seems ludicrous to me - but perhaps all one can do at this point is point the finger and laugh (I'm thinking of hauling a truckload of megaphones to DC and passing them out to the homeless.

Let's hear it for the Gipper Imitators, everyone!

(Boy, b, you really have an inside track on how these imbeciles think - be careful now; I'd hate for it to become a permanent tic - go out and smell the roses once in a while - they're out there, and they do have thorns; I can vouch for that!) Very much thanks, though; forewarned is forearmed.)

Posted by: juliania | Jan 17 2016 15:28 utc | 69

Sorry about my misplaced parentheses. Just consider them laugh lines.

Posted by: juliania | Jan 17 2016 15:29 utc | 70

Wow, that didn't take long. Isn't Obama in charge of Treasury?

Posted by: guest77 | Jan 17 2016 15:36 utc | 71

PressTV's brief write-up:

Posted by: guest77 | Jan 17 2016 15:38 utc | 72

Looks like it could be the opening scene of The Godfather V:

Posted by: guest77 | Jan 17 2016 15:41 utc | 73

^ Its the very same sanctions Obama promised to delay after getting prisoners swap deal. I know Obama is a lying piece of sh**, but sanctions only one day later? And even after Iran just released 10 marines?

Its possible these sanctions wont be activated, at least for now. Obama wouldnt be so stupid.

Posted by: Harry | Jan 17 2016 15:58 utc | 74

Posted by: juliania | Jan 17, 2016 10:28:03 AM | 68

Gosh! Fair dinkum?
I can't begin to tell you how surprised I'm not...

However, judging by the bullshit smear at the end of this par...

“We have consistently made clear that the United States will vigorously press sanctions against Iranian activities outside of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – including those related to Iran’s support for terrorism, regional destabilization, human rights abuses, and ballistic missile program.”

... I suspect the Yankees will let themselves be talked out of imposing these surprisingly unsurprising sanctions, having drawn attention to their mendacity. The last thing Obama needs right now is for Iran's friends and allies to tell the Yankees to Go F**k Yourselves (and grow a brain).

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 17 2016 16:08 utc | 75

@jfl #55

Hilary is getting her wishes:

I guess she needs those Zionists money and votes

Posted by: Yul | Jan 17 2016 16:10 utc | 76

@ 69 and @71

You have your answer:

David S Cohen : from Treasury to CIA.
Most probably will get higher should Hilary win :(

Posted by: Yul | Jan 17 2016 16:22 utc | 77

-Correction for post #35:

- In his 1st term of president, Obama has sent then US army chief of staff Mike Mullen to Israel with one very clear message. Tell Netanjahu that he even SHOULD NOT think about of making any provocative moves (e.g. towards Iran) that could lead to an escalation of tensions in the Middle East and could lead to new war in that region.

Posted by: Willy2 | Jan 17 2016 16:41 utc | 78

I thought, at the time the text of the document Iran signed was released, that it was too vague to be taken seriously, and certainly too vague to expect it to be anything other than the beginning, rather than the end of Iran's USrael problems. The Iranians shouldn't have signed it. And the fact that they did suggests that they were prepared to treat it with the same seriousness, or contempt, as the Yankees displayed toward the so-called agreement.
This story is definitely NOT over.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 17 2016 16:42 utc | 79

There was nothing in the agreement Iran signed, which granted Yankees the right to pull whimsical excuses for further sanctions out of their asses.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 17 2016 17:06 utc | 80

It seems "irregular" to put it mildly, for the US Treasury to be making statements about ANY perceived breaches by Iran of the agreement. In theory, at least, if the US wanted Treasury to be a separate party to the agreement, with executive powers different from those of the USG itself, then Treasury, and its separate (and relevant) role should have been defined in the preamble. Otherwise, Treasury Talk is just noise, with about the same legal standing as ... a fart.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 17 2016 18:04 utc | 81

Oops, I should have waited. CCTV is covering the 'successful' Iran deal now (live). No mention at all of US trying to wriggle out of anything.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 17 2016 18:07 utc | 82

Posted by: Penelope | Jan 17, 2016 1:30:16 AM | 56

Penelope, thank you ever so much for the link to the interview [1985] of Stephan Riess on 'Primary Water'.


While the interview at the link you provide was charming and 'informal', fyi there's a second interview conducted with Riess in 1985 which I find covers more comprehensively and completely Riess's scientific background and research:

What is Primary Water? 1985 Interview with Dr. Stephan Riess [1:11:17]

Cheers and many thanks for the introduction to this vital subject.

Posted by: dana | Jan 17 2016 20:43 utc | 83

US imposes sanctions on Iran for ballistic missile program

The statement said five Iranian citizens and a network of companies based in the United Arab Emirates and China were added to a US blacklist.

Well, it's the US and no one else. The festival of open markets should be otherwise progressing in Iran. Perhaps the Iranians can sanction right back, Boeing would seem an appropriate target. The US us applying ever weaker sanctions and isolating itself ... holding the gun to its own head.

Maybe the Iranians and Chinese will announce a deal on ballistic missile parts when Xi blows into town.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 17 2016 21:17 utc | 84


Penelope, you can't exonerate a dictatorship with a laundry list of achievements of making the trains run on time.

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jan 17 2016 21:57 utc | 85

@81 It is not surprising given the same Treasury crew did nothing about the trafficking of oil by ISIS, in spite of their remit supposedly aiming at interdicting funding supporting terrorists.

Posted by: Yonatan | Jan 17 2016 21:58 utc | 86

@57 Penelope
So tough reading about this hard earned nation, Libya. Painful really painful.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Jan 18 2016 2:33 utc | 87

Re HW @ #82.
As it turns out, that's HW not yet realising that CCTV's midnight, Beijing Time, NewsDesk broadcasts are merely (pre-assembled) scheduled bulletins and not Breaking News.
CCTV NewsDesk initially regurgitated BBC's amateurish Madaya theatrics and didn't report its own perspective until more than 24 hrs after its BBC-based report. When CCTV did produce a report of its own, it laid all of the blame for any starvation in Madaya at the feet of the "rebels" for abusing their control over food supplies.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 18 2016 5:06 utc | 88

Penelope, you can't exonerate a dictatorship with a laundry list of achievements of making the trains run on time.
Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jan 17, 2016 4:57:08 PM | 85

Well, not without being 'corrected' by Inkan, who is STILL oblivious to the fact that the only "dictating" Saddam, Ghadaffi, and Assad were guilty of was reminding Yankees, Brits and French that their resources were going to be reserved for the benefit of the citizens of their SECULAR societies, and not as a cheap source of profits for amoral Corporate (Christian) vampires and their equally amoral vampire 'investors' and 'shareholders'.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 18 2016 5:44 utc | 89

@35, from youtube comments. Sounds plausible:
ButIDontWantaGooglePlusPage 4 days ago
Maybe they were trying to setup another Iranian hostage situation so Hillary could swoop in as POTUS and save the day like Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: ruralito | Jan 18 2016 5:57 utc | 90

The comments to this entry are closed.