What Nuclear Fatwa? (Daniel 8:4)

Rafsanjani revelation on Iran drive for nuclear bomb eludes alleged Khamenei fatwa

By ARIEL BEN SOLOMON
Sat, 31 Oct 2015, 05:44 PM

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, is investigating whether Iran’s nuclear program ever had a military application.

Former Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani’s revelation last week that Iran sought to build nuclear weapons touches on the ongoing debate over whether the fatwa issued by Iran’s leader banning nuclear weapons actually exists.

However, the alleged fatwa reportedly issued in 2005 by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei came after the period when Rafsanjani admits the nuclear option was explored.

Nonetheless, such an admission reveals the secretive and slippery nature of the regime. If, according to Khamenei, nuclear weapons were prohibited according to Islam since 2005, then how could they have been allowed a couple of decades earlier according to the same Islamic texts? Iran’s geopolitical situation is not much better than it was, as it still sees the West, Israel and Sunni states as its enemies.
The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, is investigating whether Iran’s nuclear program ever had a military application.

It is due to issue a report by December 15.

Throughout the negotiations, Iran insisted its program had only been for peaceful purposes.
“As I have said, when we started the [nuclear] work, we were at war, and we wanted to have such an option for the day our enemies wanted to use nuclear weapons. This was [our] state of mind, but things never become serious,” Rafsanjani, the head of Iran’s Expediency Council and the political rival of Khamenei, said in an interview to the Iranians’ Nuclear Hope website, according to a report by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).

“However, we took seriously the nonmilitary uses [of the nuclear project], and so we invested money and did a great deal of work. We worked in various areas and also taught a great deal. We dispatched students and invited scientists and many other things of this sort.”

Yigal Carmon, president of the Washington-based MEMRI, told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday that Rafsanjani refers to the period of the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War and Khamenei’s alleged fatwa was supposedly issued later in 2005. Hence it does not change the fundamentals of the fatwa debate.
Thus, Carmon says that the problem remains as it has always been: “Where is the alleged fatwa of 2005? Why can’t anyone in Iran or America show us this fatwa of 2005?” MEMRI stands by its previous reports and its statement to the Post last year, that Khamenei never issued an official fatwa against nuclear weapons, at least not one for which there is any official record.

Other experts had told the Post last year that, on the other hand, a fatwa can be oral and does not have to be written down.

However, Carmon points out that “the theoretical possibility of issuing an oral fatwa does not serve as a proof that one has been issued.”

MEMRI argues that the Iranians are lying about the fatwa and that the Obama administration in endorsing it, commits a grave mistake.

“There have been reports that Khamenei issued a fatwa prohibiting nuclear weapons, yet there is no agreed-upon date, place of where it was said, who heard him say it nor the exact phrase used,” Ayelet Savyon, head of the Iran desk at MEMRI, had told the Post last year.

Furthermore, she said MEMRI had searched through all the fatwas listed on all the official websites of Khamenei, including his fatwa website, and it was not listed anywhere.

Reuters contributed to this report.

There Is NO Nuclear Fatwa (Daniel 8:3)

 

Fatwa? What Fatwa? Does Ayatollah Khamenei’s Edict Exist?

The Washington Post (“Kerry seeks to assure Arab states over Iran deal,” March 6, 2015) casually referred to an unconfirmed religious ruling by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that the all-powerful supreme leader of Iran may not have made. Khamenei purportedly issued a fatwa (an Islamic sharia law edict) against nuclear weapons, yet questions about both its very existence and potential meaning go unmentioned in the article.

It’s hard to tell what the supposed fatwa says because there is no hard evidence of its publication nor is a clear date given for its issuance. According to a Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) paper, the fatwa was first reported in October 2003 by Tehran after August 2002 revelations that Iran was secretly building a centrifuge enrichment facility in Natanz.

The WINEP report notes the ayatollah’s ability to alter or override fatwas and his shifting rhetoric with regard to earlier declarations. These reportedly condemned the creation of nuclear weapons, but more recent pronouncements explicitly ruled out only their use.

The existence of the edict seems to be entirely of a self-referential nature—it is asserted to exist but no written evidence supports the claim. This is unusual for an order of such importance, as the WINEP report notes.

The Post referred to the supposed fatwa almost in passing: “Iran insists it does not seek nuclear arms, which the country’s supreme leader has declared are forbidden by Islam, but wants the capacity to make nuclear fuel for reactors that produce energy and medical isotopes.”

The Post’s article is not alone in claiming Khamenei declared nuclear weapons off-limits to Iran under Islamic rule. In a speech to the U.N. General Assembly on September 24, 2013 President Obama stated, “the Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons.”

In November, 2013 Secretary of State John Kerry made a similar claim while in Geneva, Switzerland noting, “the Supreme Leader has indicated there is a fatwa, which forbids them to do this [acquire nuclear weapons].”

Doubts about the fatwa’s existence recently appeared in an article by Andrew McCarthy (“The Khamenei Fatwa Hoax is absurd on its face,” National Review, April 16). McCarthy says that disbelief is warranted since fatwas must be written and accessible to be authoritative and the Iranian has a regime history of lying and reversing religious edicts for political expediency.—Sean Durns

God Allowed Obama To Do It (Ezekiel 17)

Who authorized Obama to kick over the nuclear balance?

By James Lewis

 

The whole world now understands President Obama’s caudillo style, his autocratic style of governance. We know about the abuse of the IRS, the Department of Justice and our immigration system. We see his contempt for the constitutional powers of Congress. Yet even the US Supreme Court has ducked any chance to restrain him.

American presidents have a lot more free rein in foreign affairs compared to the domestic side, and here Obama has done his worst. When NATO assaulted Libya in 2011 without provocation, Obama was asked whether Congress shouldn’t have a role under the War Powers Act. He just laughed.
As a result, we are now viewed with suspicion by our allies, and we’re laughed at by our enemies. Obama shows no compassion at all — especially to Muslims, who have died by the tens and hundreds of thousands in Syria, Libya, Egypt and now Yemen, following actions by this president. Al Qaida is stronger than ever, and ISIS receives direct support from Obama’s “friends” in Turkey and Qatar.

George W. Bush was witch-hunted for years by the media after the Iraq invasion, but no liberal newspaper can be heard complaining about Obama’s reckless interventions in the Middle East. There are no constraints on Obama.

Still his most dangerous move has been to kick over the nuclear balance in the Middle East.

I’ve never met a liberal who understood how the balance of nuclear power kept the Cold War cold for six decades. The same balance of terror kept the peace between India and Pakistan after the 1970s, when both countries exploded nukes. In the Middle East, Israel’s never-used nuclear weapons helped to sustain the forty-year Peace Treaty with Egypt, because both sides knew that Israel would never be the first to use nuclear weapons. Before Obama, the United States also kept things under control in close coordination with our allies.

From Truman to Bush we had allies who understood and supported us to protect themselves. Today they are frantically arming up, because we have destroyed their trust. Obama has made the world more dangerous.

We are no longer the good cop in the Middle East.  Iran’s proxies now control nearly all of Lebanon, much of Iraq and Syria, and most recently Yemen. The mullahs have systematically driven a strategic pincer around Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. Yemen has closed the trap.

Liberals never seem to understand two basic points about nukes. 

1.  Rational powers never use nukes aggressively, for fear of being destroyed by a nuclear opponent. After Stalin’s death, the USSR became increasingly rational. China, Britain and France have had nuclear weapons without ever using them. The United States used nuclear weapons only once, against a non-nuclear Japan, to put an end to the Second World War. Since then no rational nation has ever used a nuclear weapon.  
2. Irrational powers are completely different. The Kim dynasty in Pyongyang and the Armageddon priesthood in Tehran can’t be relied on to play it safe. They sound delighted to use nuclear weapons even at mortal risk to themselves. It’s impossible to know if they are lying or not. Nobody knows, including the rogues themselves.

Every single day the mullahs make their school children and Basiji thugs chant Death to Israel! Death to America! The whole purpose of that exercise in fanatical hatred is to scare the world. Like the Kims of North Korea, the mullahs get off on sounding crazy about nukes.

Which is why Obama’s surrender to the mullahs does not mean peace in our time. It could mean the opposite. As Churchill said to Chamberlain, “You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war.” In the following year, 1939, the Nazis invaded Poland and Churchill’s prediction came true.  

Obama is now openly letting the mullahs threaten genocide against Israel and the Sunni Arabs. Iran is Shi’ite, and the Sunni Arabs are apostates. They deserve death. Israel is also subject to Armageddon. (So are Europe and America, unless we surrender first.)

Neither the Saudis nor the Israelis take the threat lightly, and if necessary they will strike first.

Obama has therefore significantly increased the risk of nuclear war. So much for that old Nobel Peace Prize.

A Sunni-Israel alliance is emerging. The Saudis are allied with Egypt, and Israel is secretly cooperating with them against the Iranian threat.

When the cop on the beat gets drunk, the neighborhood doesn’t suddenly become safer. Instead, the crooks take over, like some Chicago neighborhoods.

Obama’s has promised that Iran can now act like “a regional power,” and the United States won’t intervene. But Iran doesn’t want to be a regional power. Islam is a world-conquering faith, and they want it all.

The Jesuits used to say “give me a boy before he is seven, and we will have him for life.” Obama went to an Indonesian madrassa between age six and ten. Obama knows about jihad.

The mullahs have already used Hezb’allah to infiltrate South America. They have deep tentacles into Argentina. On the other extreme, ISIS was just reported to be running a training camp in Mexico, just 8 miles from the Texas border.

As bad as Obama is domestically, in foreign policy he is downright dangerous. That’s what happens when the Left falls in love with a radical leftist with lifelong anger problems.

Obama Bites The Bait (Ezekiel 17)

Obama: ‘Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei Has Issued Fatwa Against Development Of Nuclear Weapons’-Khamenei: ‘Death To America’

By Terence P. Jeffrey, CNS News

President Barack Obama said this week that the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, has isued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons.

“Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and President Rouhani has said that Iran would never develop a nuclear weapon,” Obama said.

Other administration officials–including Secretary of State John Kerry and Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes–have previously referred to the ayatollah’s reported fatwa in the context of the ongoing nuclear negotations with Iran.

Last month, in a speech to his air force commanders, the ayatollah boasted of Iran’s achievement in enriching uranium to the 20-percent level. Twice during the speech, according a transcript made by the BBC, the air force commanders chanted: “Death to America.”

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has testified in Congress that, as Iran’s supreme leader, the ayatollah will personally–“singly”–decide whether Iran builds a nuclear weapon.

Obama made his observation about the supreme leader’s fatwa in a video statement to the Iranian people about his and First Lady Michelle Obama’s observation of the Iranian new year’s holiday of “Nowruz.” The video was posted on the White House website with Farsi subtitles.

“To everyone celebrating Nowruz—across the United States and in countries around the world—Nowruz Mubarak,” Obama said at the beginning of his statement. “For thousands of years, this has been a time to gather with family and friends and welcome a new spring and a new year.  Last week, my wife Michelle helped mark Nowruz here at the White House.”

Obama called on the Iranians to help him overcome people in the United States and elsewhere who oppose the nuclear deal he is trying to negotiate with Iran.

“Our negotiations have made progress, but gaps remain,” he said. “And there are people, in both our countries and beyond, who oppose a diplomatic resolution. My message to you—the people of Iran—is that, together, we have to speak up for the future we seek.

“As I have said many times before, I believe that our countries should be able to resolve this issue peacefully, with diplomacy,” Obama said. “Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and President Rouhani has said that Iran would never develop a nuclear weapon.

“Together with the international community, the United States has said that Iran should have access to peaceful nuclear energy, consistent with Iran’s international obligations,” Obama said. “So there is a way for Iran—if it is willing to take meaningful, verifiable steps—to assure the world that its nuclear program is, in fact, for peaceful purposes only.”

On Sept. 25, 2009, the Obama White House sponsored a background briefing by “senior administration officials” who said that Iran had been discovered covertly building uranium enrichment facilities twice. One was at Natanz, another near Qom.

A “senior administration official” explained at that time why it was logical to conclude that the second secret facility was designed to produce enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon not for peaceful purposes.

“Our information is that the facility is designed to hold about 3,000 centrifuge machines,” said the official. “Now, that’s not a large enough number to make any sense from a commercial standpoint. It cannot produce a significant quantity of low-enriched uranium. But if you want to use the facility in order to produce a small amount of weapons-grade uranium, enough for a bomb or two a year, it’s the right size. And our information is that the Iranians began this with the intent that it be secret, and therefore giving them the option of producing weapons-grade uranium without the international community knowing about it.”

Ayatollah Khamenei, who as Iran’s supreme leader is commander in chief of the Iranian military, gave a speech on Feb. 8 to the commanders of the Iranian Air Force. In this speech, the ayatollah boasted about Iran’s technical accomplishment in enriching uranium to the 20-percent level–which is beyond what is needed for peaceful power production.

“Those who are experts on this matter know that producing 20 percent from 5 percent is much more significant than producing uranium which is higher than 20 percent,” he said. “However, our youth and our committed scientists did so.”

The Congressional Research Service has explained why this is a problem. “LEU used in nuclear power reactors typically contains less than 5% uranium-235,” said CRS, “research reactor fuel can be made using 20% uranium-235; HEU used in nuclear weapons typically contains about 90% uranium-235.”

“Iran’s production of LEU enriched to the 20% level has caused concern because such production requires approximately 90% of the effort necessary to produce weapons-grade HEU, which, as noted, contains approximately 90% uranium-235,” said CRS.

During the speech in which he boasted about Iran’s enrichment of uranium to the 20-percent level, according to a BBC transcript, the ayatollah’s air force commanders chanted: “Allah Akbar. Khamenei is the leader. Death to the enemies of the leadership. Death to America. Death to England. Death to hypocrites. Death to Israel.”

There Will Soon Be A Fatwa Against The Prophecy (Rev 11)

A question for Obama: what about the Rushdie fatwa?


Posted by neo-neocon    Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 10:00am

In a previous post at Legal Insurrection, I suggested that the terrorist attacks in Paris and Copenhagen and the Salman Rushdie fatwa issued in 1989 by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran are analogous. In the case of the fatwa, a Muslim leader and cleric called on Muslims to kill a Western author deemed to be guilty of blasphemy towards Islam, more or less the same action the modern-day terrorists have taken on themselves against Western cartoonists who lampoon Mohammed.

In light of Obama’s repeated insistence that terrorists do not act as agents of Islam, doesn’t he need to answer some questions about the Rushdie fatwa? The questions appear in an essay of mine in the Weekly Standard, and whether or not Obama ever addresses them (please do not sit on a hot stove until he does), they point out the absurdity of his denial of the connection between such killings and Islam.

Here’s an excerpt:

The fatwa Khomeini issued makes chilling reading even today. Here’s a translation:

“I would like to inform all the intrepid Muslims in the world that the author of the book entitled ‘Satanic Verses’. . . as well as those publishers who were aware of its contents, are hereby sentenced to death. I call on all zealous Moslems to execute them quickly, wherever they find them, so that no one will dare to insult Islamic sanctity. Whoever is killed doing this will be regarded as a martyr and will go directly to heaven.”

Nothing to do with Islam? I would remind Obama, as he ponders that question, that at the time of the Rushdie fatwa Khomeini had not only been “Supreme Leader” of Iran — a country that has the seventh-largest Muslim population in the world — for almost a decade, but he also had long been considered an expert in Islamic law and had written many books on the subject.

Then in 1991, when Rushdie’s book’s Japanese translator was stabbed to death in Tokyo, and when in 1993 his Italian translator was attacked in Milan but survived, and when the same thing happened to his Norwegian publisher in Oslo, did those murders and attempted murders have nothing to do with Islam?

The Iranian government officially supported the Rushdie fatwa for almost ten more years, until 1998, but that year did not mark the end of the trouble for Rushdie emanating from Iran. In 2012 a state-linked religious foundation increased the bounty that was still on Rushdie’s head. The reward for killing Rushdie now stands at a cool $3.3 million, and the leader of the foundation involved in the bounty money, Hassan Sanei, is also the group’s representative to the current Supreme Leader of Iran, Khomeini’s successor Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

It is a common misconception that the Rushdie fatwa is no longer in place, but that’s only because Iran’s non-clerical leaders appeared to disavow it after nine years. Its highly influential religious leaders did not. Supreme Leader Khamenei reaffirmed it in 2005, as have Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, who “confirmed the Rushdie fatwa and stated its conformance with Muslim thought throughout history.”

Khomeini was no fringe figure in the religion he spent most of his life studying, and in which he rose to such a high position. Although it is certainly true that not every Muslim agrees with the views he espoused and Khameini still espouses, universal assent would be an impossible standard to meet. Obama would not have to be making a judgment about which sect is the true one in order to acknowledge that the official Iranian wing of Islam is accepted as bona fide by many millions in Iran, the seventh largest Muslim country in the world, and that Islamic scholars there consider both Khomeini and Khamenei to be highly respected figures within Islam, possessed of the authority to order “all the intrepid Muslims in the world” to kill writers deemed to have blasphemed.

[Neo-neocon is a writer with degrees in law and family therapy, who blogs at neo-neocon.]

Khamenei Is Encouraged To Lie For Islam’s Cause (Qur’an 3:54)

Ignoring Leader’s nuclear Fatwa

 

 

TEHRAN, Mar. 02 (MNA) – While Iran’s Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has in several occasions reiterated his Fatwa on banning WMDs and nuclear weapons, some western media and officials try to devalue the significant verdict.

One of the most important guarantees the Islamic Republic of Iran provides to prove its nuclear program is peaceful, is the Fatwa issued by the Leader Ayatollah Khamenei which considers WMDs and nuclear weapons not only ‘illegal’, but also ‘illegitimate and Haraam’ (Arabic term used for deeds totally forbidden in Islam). Meanwhile, the significance of this religious-legal decree is tried to be distorted by some media and officials in west. In a latest of such efforts, senior fellow in national security affairs at the American Foreign Policy Council James S. Robbins has written in US News that “the Fatwa may not exist at all. Although Iranian officials have referred to it repeatedly, it has not been published. By contrast, all of Khamenei’s other Fatwas have been. Moreover, Iran has given conflicting dates for its issue, including 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2012. The nearest thing to an official text can be found on the web page of Iran’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations.”

The claim is despite the fact that a special section for Fatwas by Ayatollah Khamenei on the official website of the Leader’s office has published the Leader’s Message to International Conference on Nuclear Disarmament on April 17, 2010 which includes the Fatwa in four languages: “We believe that besides nuclear weapons, other types of weapons of mass destruction such as chemical and biological weapons also pose a serious threat to humanity. The Iranian nation which is itself a victim of chemical weapons feels more than any other nation the danger that is caused by the production and stockpiling of such weapons and is prepared to make use of all its facilities to counter such threats. We consider the use of such weapons as Haraam and believe that it is everyone’s duty to make efforts to secure humanity against this great disaster.”

Meanwhile, US News article alleges that Iran has made “no reference to the Quran or any other Islamic text or tradition, as other religious edicts traditionally do.” That’s while another article on Khamenei.ir website “Jurisprudential Reasons Why Nuclear Weapons are Haraam” has elaborated on the roots and grounds of this decree in Islamic resources.

The attempt to undervalue Ayatollah Khamenei’s Fatwa banning Nukes comes amid last week report by AlJazeera and The Guardian revealing part of spy cables on Mossad’s assessment of Iran’s nuclear program.

According to AlJazeera, the documents reveal that short after the Israeli PM Netanyahu address to UN General Assembly in 2012 showing a cartoon-like drawing of a bomb and warning that Iran was 70 percent of the way to obtain a nuclear weapon, the Israeli spy agency Mossad reported that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.” The Guardian has also reported of US, Israeli and British covert global campaigns to stem the spread of Iranian influence, tighten sanctions and block its nuclear programme.”

The classified documents were jointly released by AlJazeera and The Guardian last week amid ongoing nuclear talks and drastic rise in tensions among US politicians over Netanyahu’s visit to the US and speech to the Congress this week.

Impossible: Iran Has A Fatwa Against Nukes ;) (Daniel 8:3)

Inspectors Say Iran Is Evading Questions as Nuclear Talks Enter a Crucial Stage

By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD

FEB. 19, 2015

WASHINGTON — With only five weeks remaining for a basic agreement to be reached with Iran on the fate of its nuclear program, the world’s nuclear inspectors reported on Thursday that Iran was still refusing to answer their longstanding questions about suspected work on nuclear weapons and designs.

The report, by the International Atomic Energy Agency, was issued just as an American negotiating team heads to Geneva for four days of talks that will, by Sunday, include Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif. Most of those negotiations focus on the future, particularly on the question of how much nuclear fuel Iran would be permitted to produce and stockpile.

But a lurking issue has been whether, as part of any final accord, Iran will be compelled to answer all questions that the I.A.E.A. has put to it about evidence of past work on designing weapons. For more than three years Iran has refused, maintaining the evidence was fabricated and insisting its nuclear intentions are peaceful. But Iran has also, at various times, agreed to provide some answers, especially after the agency detailed, in November 2011, a dozen areas in which it suspected weapons-related work may have taken place.

American officials have cloaked the details of the negotiations in secrecy, and have not been specific about how an agreement would compel compliance with the international inspectors, who are part of the United Nations. Iranian demands for an agreement include a lifting of all United Nations resolutions and sanctions against Iran, many based on I.A.E.A. reports.

A senior American official, who declined to speak on the record about the negotiations, said the United States and its five negotiating partners — Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia — “are working to support the work of the I.A.E.A. by gaining I.A.E.A. access to information and locations that it has been seeking as appropriate.”

The agency’s report reaffirmed that Iran had complied with its responsibilities under an interim agreement during the negotiations to suspend production of nuclear fuel that could be quickly converted to bomb-grade, and limit production of reactor-grade fuel. Inspectors have been able to visit the main fuel-production sites. President Obama has cited that finding in recent interviews to assert that the Iranian program is now far more constrained — an argument for playing out the negotiations to conclusion. Even so, opinions in the Obama administration about the prospects for final accord are mixed.

The report said the agency “remains concerned about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed nuclear-related activities involving military-related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile.”

Because Iran has not provided explanations for the agency’s questions about all nuclear-related work, the report said, “the agency is not in a position 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.”

The report, which was not released publicly, was obtained by The New York Times and other news organizations.

American intelligence agencies concluded toward the end of the Bush administration that Iran had ceased what they described as an effort to pursue a weapon in late 2003, though they found evidence of sporadic work since. But there has never been a precise accounting of what kind of work they say Iran pursued, especially in laboratories and test areas overseen by Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the Iranian scientist believed to be leading the military research.

In 2011, the I.A.E.A. published a list of a dozen technologies, most of them necessary to build a nuclear weapon, that inspectors said Iran had tried to master, based in part on evidence supplied by the United States and Israel.

But on a cooperative note, the inspectors narrowed that list of 12 to three, and announced plans in November 2013 to get those answered first.

More than a year later, the report said, Iran has engaged the inspectors on only one topic — whether its engineers developed detonators that could be used to initiate a nuclear explosion. The report Thursday said Iran had not provided “any explanations” that would go beyond that cursory engagement, or clarify the two outstanding questions.

For example, it said, Iran had avoided answering why it conducted studies of experiments with conventional explosives. In a bomb, those explosives could be used to create highly focused shock waves that compress the core of a nuclear device, starting the chain reaction that leads to a nuclear blast. But there are other uses for such explosives.

The other outstanding question centers on computer modeling studies of how the subatomic neutrons released in a chain reaction move and multiply.

In their 2011 report, the inspectors argued that the evidence behind their dozen questions had made a credible case that “Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device” and that a clandestine effort might still be underway.

The report said inspectors had amassed “over a thousand pages” of documents, presumably spirited out of Iran by spies or defectors. It said they showed “research, development and testing activities” on technologies needed to develop a nuclear weapon; the details filled 14 pages.

Obama Drinks The Purple Cool Aid (Ezekiel 17)

Obama takes a stupid pill: Don’t be afraid of Iran, Nukes are ‘contrary to their faith’


February 10, 2015 by Michael Dorstewitz

At a Monday news conference in the White House with visiting German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Barack Obama said we have nothing to fear from a nuclear Iran because nuclear weapons are against Islam.

It’s a good thing Merkel wasn’t sipping a beverage at the time or she may have either choked or performed a classic spit-reaction.

Here’s the setup:

“We are presenting to them [Iran] … a deal that allows them to have peaceful nuclear power but gives us the absolute assurance that is verifiable that they are not pursuing a nuclear weapon,” the president said.

Now for the zinger:

“And if in fact what they claim is true, which is they have no aspiration to get a nuclear weapon, that in fact, according to their Supreme Leader, it would be contrary to their faith to obtain a nuclear weapon….”

And what part of the Quran did that come from? Is it in the “don’t eat bacon” section, or the “beat your wives daily” part?

And here’s another question: If nukes are so against their religion, what’s with all the testing of delivery systems and nuclear talks with North Korea?

Even more to the point, neighboring Pakistan is just as Islamic as Iran. In fact, it’s official name is “Islamic Republic of Pakistan.” It’s been a nuclear power since 1998.

In an interview published Monday, Obama faulted media hype for ramping up the public’s fear of terrorism, and said the real danger was global warming.

It all makes one wonder if he’s living in the same world as the rest of us.

Read more: http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/02/10/obama-takes-a-stupid-pill-dont-be-afraid-of-iran-nukes-are-contrary-to-their-faith-178739#ixzz3RPCGcDQV

It All Began At The First Horn (Daniel 8:3)

Paris Attack: Jihadi Cancer Has Its Roots in Tehran

“The spread of violent jihad across the world was the inspiration of Ayatollah Khomenei.”

By Struan Stevenson

January 09, 2015

 

The horror assassination of ten journalists and two policemen in Paris is simply the latest manifestation of the spread of Islamic fundamentalism whose genesis can be traced directly back to the Iranian revolution and the coming to power of Grand Ayatollah Ruholla Khomenei, who made Iran the world’s first Islamic Republic. His medieval belief that his authority came directly from God enabled him to rule over a fascist theocracy that could imprison, torture, maim and execute at will, ruling by fear and violence and defending these excesses by stating they were the will of God. Similar to the “divine right of Kings” which bathed Europe in blood for centuries, this discredited anachronism plunged the 74 million forward-looking and highly civilized Iranians back to the Middle Ages, where women could be stoned to death and men hanged from cranes in town squares because they were guilty of “waging war on God.”

After executing 130,000 members of the People’s Mojahedin Opposition Group in the 1980s, Khomenei set about spreading his fundamentalist cancer across the Middle East. His successor Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has internationalized this obscene distortion of Islam by funding, training and equipping terrorist organizations across the Middle East. Iran is now extending its hegemony across the entire region and it is worth remembering that ISIS is not the only organization intent on using violence and bloodshed to create a worldwide Islamic caliphate; it is a core principle of the Iranian Constitution, drawn up by Ayatollah Khomenei, that they will export the Islamic revolution with the clear intention of creating an Islamic caliphate. Tehran regards ISIS as direct Sunni competitors in this struggle to enslave the world in a medieval corruption of the Muslim faith.
Iran now funds not only the brutal Shiia militias in neighboring Iraq, but Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, Bashir al-Assad in Syria and the Shiite Houthi militia who seized Sanaa, the Yemeni capital last September. The so-called “moderate” President Hassan Rouhani also finances Iran’s hugely expensive program of uranium enrichment, the construction of nuclear weapons and the purchase of sophisticated missile delivery systems.

The plummeting oil price has caused a massive problem for the mullahs. Their future budget was predicated on oil prices rising from $112 to $130 a barrel. Today it has fallen to below $50 and experts predict it will fall to $45. This, combined with Western sanctions, is catastrophic for Tehran. Rouhani has found himself in an impossible trap. He was elected on a pledge to improve the Iranian economy and to improve living conditions for ordinary Iranians. But the hardliners in Tehran corruptly live off the back of the billions poured into the terrorist Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Despite the collapsing oil price, Rouhani last month announced a 50 percent increase in the IRGC budget, taking their total annual spend to over €5 billion, which is more than half of Iran’s total defense budget which itself was increased by 33 percent last month. Buried in the small print of the budget was a further €2.5 billion that will go directly to the IRGC’s construction and engineering wing known as Khatam al-Anbia, a crooked vehicle for distributing largesse to the IRGC hierarchy.
Iran simply cannot afford this. The 74 million Iranians are facing economic meltdown. The people are fed up. They don’t want to be international pariahs. There is a seething undercurrent of protest in the air. Bread prices rose by 30 percent last month and the likelihood of another popular uprising is looming. Sanctions and the collapsing oil price are biting hard. Now is the time for the West to support the Iranian opposition and foment regime-change. The West must help the Iranian people overthrow the tyrannical mullahs and restore freedom, peace and democracy to Iran.

The spread of violent jihad across the world was the inspiration of Ayatollah Khomenei. The way to tackle this obscenity cannot simply rely on advanced intelligence and sporadic arrests. The primary cancer must be surgically removed at its core in Tehran and replaced by a modern and benign vision of Islam as espoused by Mrs. Maryam Rajavi and her National Council for Resistance in Iran.
Struan Stevenson was a Member of the European Parliament from 1999 to 2014. He was President of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Iraq from 2009 to 2014 and is currently President of the European Iraq Freedom Association (EIFA).

Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr calls for jihad in Iraq

Turkish Weekly
11 December 2014

Muqtada al-Sadr, a leading Iraqi Shiite political figure, ordered his Peace Brigade militia on Thursday to prepare for jihad within 48 hours, according to a statement released by Sadr’s deputy, Abu Dua El-Isawi.

The decision was “due to the dangerous situation of the holy city Samarra from terrorists,” El-Islawi said. The militia will wait for Sadr’s orders before taking further steps.

Iraq has been gripped by a security vacuum since June, when the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL, stormed the northern province of Mosul and declared what it calls a caliphate in Iraq and Syria.

Sadr’s armed militias have previously been sent to Samarra to protect Shiite holy shrines.
11 December 2014

A Hitlerian Big Lie: THERE IS NO NUCLEAR FATWA

Op-Ed: Khamenei’s No Nukes Promise is a Hitlerian “Big Lie”

Published: Saturday, November 22, 2014 5:56 PM

Mark Langfan

Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei is running his propaganda-machine on warp-speed.  Non-stop, Khamenei’s twitter feed is posting claims like “#Iran considers the use of WMDs as an unforgivable sin. Nuclear energy for all and nukes for none.”

Khamenei has never published an actual ‘no-nuke’ fatwa, or religious edict.  Nevertheless, US President Obama has touted Khamenei’s “no-nukes”

Obama has touted Khamenei’s “no-nukes” claims as real and sincere, because he believes anything coming from the Iranian government.claims as real and sincere, because he believes anything coming from the Iranian government.

Two-years ago, I wrote about a hypothetical, but quite possible, Iranian EMP nuclear attack on Saudi Arabia that would be low-casualty and “sharia compliant.”  Others have written clearly that Khamenei’s fatwa doesn’t exist.

Now, I have decided to make my point with an uncomplicated analysis, the gist of which is that Khamenei is telling a Hitlerian “Big Lie”.

Adolf Hitler was the megalomaniacal German leader who master-minded World War II.  Hitler called his propaganda theory “The Big Lie”. It was easy enough, he explained, just make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually the world will believe it.

Hitler successfully deployed the Big Lie theory during England’s Munich 1938 “appeasement” and his subsequent betrayal of Czechoslovakia.  On September 26, 1938, several days before Neville Chamberlain, Britain’s Prime Minister, forced Czechoslovakia to cede the protective mountains of the Sudetenland, Hitler ‘earnestly’ told a huge crowd in Berlin that:

“It [the Sudetenland] is the final territorial demand which I shall make of Europe, but it is the demand which shall not give up and which with God’s help I shall ensure is fulfilled.

“… I am grateful to Mr. Chamberlain for all his efforts.  I have assured him [Chamberlain] that the German people desire nothing but peace.  I have also assured him, and I repeat this assurance here, that, once this problem is solved, there exist no further territorial problems for Germany in Europe.”

Hitler lied the Big Lie and Chamberlain bought it. Hitler came close to winning the war, and 80 Million people were slaughtered throughout Europe.  Chamberlain had this to say about his own catastrophic idiocy, “Everything would have been all right if Hitler hadn’t lied to me.”

What if there had been nuclear weapons in 1938. What if Hitler had promised, like Khamenei is promising today, “No nuclear weapons for Nazi Germany.”  Chamberlain, a war-weary England, and far-away Roosevelt in America, would have likely swallowed that Big Lie.  Had the free-world believed a Hitler “Big Lie” on nuclear weapons, there wouldn’t be a free world today.  And in 2014, if the free-world believes Khamenei’s Big Lie, there will be no free-world at all.

Even without a nuclear-bomb, Iran has propped up Alawite Shi’ite Bashar Assad of Syria with Iranian Shi’ite militias who have mass-murdered close to 300,000 Syrian Sunni Muslims.  If Iran is more than willing to murder 300,000 Sunni Muslims to entrench Syria’s minority-dictator Assad, what would Teheran be capable of doing to the Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia, if Iran possessed nuclear weapons?

If it is “legally permissible,” or halal, under Khamenei’s religious view, to sanction Iran’s conventional mass-murder of 300,000 Sunni Muslims in Syria, why wouldn’t it be “permissible,” or haraam, to for Iran to unconventionally mass-murder another 300,000 Sunnis Muslims anywhere else?

And how about Khamenei’s incessant calls to annihilate Israel?  Even without a nuclear bomb, Khamenei recently tweeted regarding Israel, “This barbaric, wolflike & infanticidal regime of #Israel which spares no crime has no cure but to be annihilated. #HandsOffAlAqsa. ” Khamenei added, the “only means to confront a barbaric regime like Israel is arming the West Bank.”

For an Iran lacking a nuclear bomb, for the time being, the “only means” to annihilate Israel is to “arm the West Bank just like Gaza.”  If Iran had nukes, Iran would have “other means” to confront “a barbaric regime like Israel.”

To Obama’s mind, it may seem proper foreign policy to ignore Iran murder hundreds of thousands, or even millions of Sunnis and/or Israelis on its way to a Shi’ite Imanate.

But the real problem for the continental USA is that Iran likely has whatever nuclear technology North Korea already possesses.   In this regard, Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti, the senior U.S. Commander on the Korean Peninsula, recently stated that, “They’ve [North Korea] had the right connections [with Iran and Pakistan] and so I believe have the capability to have miniaturized a [nuclear] device at this point, and they have the technology to potentially actually deliver what they say they have [and] I think they have a launcher that will carry it at this point.”

Therefore, one day we may hear Obama say, “Everything would have been all right if Khamenei hadn’t lied to me.”

But knowing Obama, he will more likely, say, “It’s Bush’s fault.”

Obama Relying On Khamenei’s Islamic Lies

Administration Relying on Purported Iranian Nuclear ‘Fatwa’ to Get Deal Done

November 14, 2014 – 4:50 AM

 

By Patrick Goodenough

 

Subscribe to Patrick Goodenough RSS

(CNSNews.com) – As the clock winds down on negotiations for a final nuclear deal with Iran, Obama administration officials again are citing a purported fatwa by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei prohibiting nuclear weapons. “We respect it enormously,” Secretary of State John Kerry said on Thursday.Speaking in Amman, Jordan, Kerry spoke of the administration’s hopes to achieve a strong agreement over Iran’s nuclear programs, and its hope that “Iran will work in the same way that we are.”

“Obviously, the fatwa of the leader is a very important instrument, and we respect it enormously as a matter of religious edict,” he said. “But that has to be translated into a lay person’s regular document, a legal one, if you will, with all of the things that are necessary for an agreement regarding potential nuclear programs.”

Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes also invoked the alleged religious ruling on Thursday, telling reporters traveling with President Obama in Asia that if the fatwa’s prohibition on developing nuclear weapons was “their stated policy, there should be an opening” to secure an agreement.

“I think with respect to our engagement with Iran, the supreme leader has said that there’s a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons inside of Iran, that their program is peaceful,” he said in Naypyidaw, Burma.

“The purpose of the nuclear negotiation is to arrive at a resolution which Iran can demonstrate to the confidence of the international community that that is the case. If that is their stated policy, there should be an opening to get this done,” Rhodes said. “That’s been our message in negotiations with the Iranians; that will continue to be our message going forward.”

Some skeptics, Muslims among them, have questioned whether the nuclear fatwa – as opposed to Iranian reports about it or other written references to it – actually exists, and if it does, whether it holds any weight.

Iranian officials have pointed to different documents, carrying different dates and using differing wording. A fatwa outlawing nuclear weapons cannot be found among those catalogued on Khamenei’s official website.

When Iran’s mission to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and other international organizations in Vienna was asked to provide a copy of the fatwa, it sent CNSNews a transcript of an April 2010 speech by Khamenei to a nuclear disarmament conference in Iran, in which he said that the “use” of nuclear weapons was forbidden.

Other versions of the supposed fatwa, dated Nov. 2004 and Aug. 2005, refer to the “production, storage, and use” of nuclear weapons being prohibited, while another dated Feb. 2012 only mentions their “possession.”

Khamenei’s Nuclear Fatwa Is A Pure Lie

Iran- Ayatollah Ganje’i: “Supreme Leader’s Nuclear Fatwa a Lie”

NCRI

In an article published on October 15th on Townhall.com, a political commentary website in U.S., Ayatollah Jalal Ganje’i a well-known religious figure and Chairman of the NCRI’s Committee on Freedom of Religions and Denominations denounced Khamenei’s Nuclear Fatwa as an irrefutable lie.

Referring to the Iranian regime’s vocabulary for expansion of regional influence – “Eqtedar” [might] he wrote: “On September 4, mullahs’ Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei declared that the way forward for his regime is to ramp up its “eqtedar” [might].”

“ ‘Eqtedar’ is achieved by one of two ways. One is to expand regional influence through the export of terrorism, officially described as ‘export of revolution.’ It is this policy that has led to the establishment of Lebanese Hezbollah, propped up the Assad regime, and most recently contributed to the rise of Islamic State. The other is development of nuclear weapons to obtain international leverage.”

Referring to the Tehran’s clandestine nuclear program that was exposed by the main Iranian opposition group, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), Ganje’i said: “The Iranian regime has claimed that a religious decree (fatwa) by its Supreme Leader had previously declared the use of WMDs as “haraam” [religiously forbidden]. Just prior to the UN General Assembly, Hassan Rouhani once again cited this as proof of the peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear program. However, a bit of scrutiny shows that such a fatwa likely does not exist and that even if it did, foreign powers cannot rely on it as evidence of peaceful intentions. In either case, the regime knows the truth and uses tales of this fatwa purely for purposes of propaganda and deceit.”

Ayatollah Ganje’i continued: “It is a fact that there was no such fatwa until May 1998, when the first Pakistani nuclear bomb was revealed. At the time, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, former president of Iran and second in command only to the Supreme Leader, welcomed Pakistan’s weapon, saying that Muslims have a greater chance to overcome Israel and other enemies when they have such weapons.”

“At the time, Khamenei did not contradict these statements, and there has never been any written document against nuclear arms in Khamenei’s handwriting and carrying his stamp. It is standard practice for all fatwas to be produced in this way and distributed via the press or official websites. Furthermore, not all prohibitory fatwas are binding for the government or officials.”

The Chair of the NCRI’s Committee on Freedom of Religions and Denominations, analyzing the religious value of the regime’s supreme leader’s Fatwa said: “(…) even if taken as face value, (The Fatwa) is just a political gimmick and not a fatwa. A fatwa never refers to one’s personal understanding of the Quran or another text. Here, Khamenei states that destroying mankind has been condemned by Quran. Even in referring to Quran, we see that this verse has no such meaning and Khamenei’s interpretation of the verse in question is simply inaccurate. No reputable religious scholar or interpreter of Quran has interpreted this verse in this manner.”

“The credibility of a fatwa may be assessed on three grounds: its correctness, utility, and the competence of the one who issues it. The solidity of the reasoning behind a fatwa largely hinges on the religious expertise of the one issuing it, and Ali Khamenei is not considered a jurisprudent in Iranian and Shiite religious centers.”

He continued: “As the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ruhollah Khomeini declared the Jawaher al Kalam (a 50-volume collection written by Sheikh Mohammad Hassan Najafi in 1850) to be the only credible source of Islamic jurisprudence.”

“As the leader of the regime, Ali Khamenei must adhere to this text in his own pronouncements, but Jawaher al Kalam quite clearly contradicts him: ‘In the battle with the enemy it is permitted to stage a siege, prevent anyone from entering or leaving; use catapults, guns, gunpowder; rain down deadly and poisonous snakes, scorpions and other deadly animals; destroy walls and houses; cut off trees; rain down fire and guide floods [to the enemy site]; and anything else that would increase the chance of overcoming the enemy’.”

The author in Townhall’s article goes on to say, ‘In these matters there is no difference between the scholars.’ (…) ‘Poisoning of the enemy water or food is considered ‘haram’ by some… and is reluctantly accepted by some… But if this is the only way to defeat the enemy, it is permitted without qualification.’

“In this logic, the essence is victory over enemy and as such, even mass killings that some would consider “haraam” in normal circumstances are “permitted without qualification” if it would be the only way to defeat the enemy. Now, is it that in his hypothetical fatwa, Ali Khamenei is saying that “what matters the most is not victory”? Neither he nor any of his cohorts dare to say so.”

Ayatollah Ganje’i who was known as a religious expert and had held many speeches both during the time of the Shah and after the 1979 revolution, revealed that “even if Khamenei was serious about issuing a contrary fatwa, it would not matter for two reasons.”

“First, a fatwa is only binding for the followers of the religious scholar who issues it, and any officer or commander who follows another religious scholar or considers himself to not need the fatwa, is not required to follow it. In addition, there is no punishment for failing to adhere to a fatwa.”

“Second, and more importantly, any fatwa issued by anyone may be declared void by “secondary decrees.” The most imperative cases of “secondary decrees” are “emergency circumstances.” Moreover, any decision about the need to use the “poison” namely a nuclear bomb is not up to the scholar who has issued the fatwa.”

Townhall concluded the article with: “It is more than evident that there is no fatwa to back up the regime’s senior officials when they claim that Iran has only honorable intentions for its nuclear program. And certainly, there is nothing to back up any decision by the international community to appease the criminals ruling Tehran. The only value that the supposed fatwa has in the Islamic Republic is as grounds for such appeasement. And the mullahs are counting on it.”

“As such, President Obama and other Western leaders cannot set policy according to non-binding and easily reversible remarks by Khamenei. Doing so would put the world in great peril on the basis of a fantasy.”

Khamenei’s Fatwa Show The Way To The End

Khameneis’ Nuclear Fatwa Shows the Way Forward

The New Iranian Fatwa

Since reaching an interim nuclear deal last November, Iran and the world powers have been attempting to finalize a comprehensive nuclear deal by late July.

The Iranian stance on the prohibition of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction was clearly expressed through a fatwa issued by the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Addressing more than 120 heads of state and officials at the 16th Non-Aligned Movement summit in Tehran on August 30, 2012, he stated: “The Islamic Republic—logically, religiously and theoretically—considers the possession of nuclear weapons a grave sin and believes the proliferation of such weapons is senseless, destructive and dangerous.” Ayatollah Khamenei added that Iran “proposed the idea of a Middle East free of nuclear weapons, and we are committed to it.”

Iran has already declared its willingness to secularize that fatwa. Such a move would facilitate and expedite a final nuclear deal between Iran and the world powers. However, the fatwa, with its strong roots in Islamic belief, could also play a constructive role far beyond resolving the Iranian nuclear crisis.

As a first step, there could be concerted efforts to have prominent Islamic leaders from both the Sunni and Shi’a sects speak in unison on the issue of banning weapons of mass destruction. Iran could facilitate the process by inviting thinkers and community leaders from across the world to convene, discuss and collectively endorse a ban on all WMDs.

As a next step, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation could approve and submit the decree to the UN General Assembly. Such a move would create a historic opportunity for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to propose the creation of a forum where religious leaders from all Abrahamic faiths could endorse the ban on the production, stockpiling and use of WMDs. The endorsement from religious leaders representing billions of the faithful would go a long way towards creating harmony and unity among the leading world faiths and accelerate efforts to end WMD proliferation.

Following the endorsement of the ban of all WMDs by the world’s religious leaders, the UN General Assembly could pass a resolution on non-proliferation. Once the General Assembly passes that resolution, it could be further strengthened by convening a committee of experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency—the UN nuclear watchdog—to address loopholes and shortcomings in current WMD treaties.

More than four decades of WMD conventions and a decade of nuclear negotiations between Iran and world powers have brought the limitations of non-proliferation treaties into view. Further measures to internationalize the fatwa against WMDs and address current challenges and shortcomings of nuclear safeguards could include the universalization of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’s (NPT) Additional Protocol, further intrusive monitoring mechanisms, additional transparency measures with robust verification practices, the introduction of mechanisms for the multilateralization of uranium enrichment facilities, and, finally, placing a 5-percent cap on uranium enrichment levels, which safeguards against possible weaponization.

The sequence of steps outlined above could be a path to use the fatwa to generate renewed impetus for a comprehensive international initiative addressing current and future WMD challenges. It would also pave the way for the UN Security Council to take multilateral measures to introduce new international and national arrangements to strengthen and expand current WMD conventions. Not only would internationalizing the fatwa provide leverage for Iran to contribute immensely to non-proliferation, it would also have positive ramifications on multiple regional and international fronts.

The implementation of NPT by Iran’s government and the upholding of the fatwa by religious figures inside Iran can and would pursue the current objective of ensuring Iran’s peaceful use of nuclear technology. However, transforming efforts to internationalize the fatwa into a legally binding document through international venues such as the UN would bring several major benefits.

First, it would strengthen the NPT and assist in efforts towards the eradication of all nuclear weapons worldwide. Second, it would advance efforts towards the creation of a WMD-free zone in the Middle East. Third, with the religious, social and international endorsements of the concept, all Muslim countries in the region would be obliged to implement national legislation banning all WMDs, which would place added pressure on Israel to join the movement. Finally, it would shed light on WMD proliferation by Western countries, members and non-members of the NPT, as in the case of the provision of technology and know-how for Israel’s construction of nuclear weapons and Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons, which were used against Iran in the 1980s.

Such a new international movement towards the dream of a world without nuclear weapons would place additional and specific pressure on all governments to take robust measures backed by national legislation to prevent any form of WMD proliferation.

The significance of the recent nuclear interim deal indicates the world powers have finally given up resisting Iran’s right to uranium enrichment within the framework of the NPT—and given up threatening it with further sanctions. Therefore, it is an opportune moment for the world powers to utilize the huge potential of Ayatollah Khamenei’s fatwa and the possible comprehensive deal with Iran as a model for contributing to non-proliferation. Such a step would bring us a little closer to the goal President Barack Obama outlined during a speech at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin: “Peace with justice means pursuing the security of a world without nuclear weapons.”

Iran (Large Horn) vs United States (Babylon the Great)

Senior Cleric Reiterates Iranian Nation’s Rigid Stance on N. Rights

 

Great Babylon vs. First Horn

 

TEHRAN (FNA)- Tehran’s Provisional Friday prayers leader Ayatollah Mohammad Ali Movahedi Kermani once again underlined the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program, and stressed that the Iranian nation will never give up its inalienable right to access and use the civilian nuclear technology.

Addressing a large and fervent congregation of the people on Tehran University campus on Friday, Ayatollah Movahedi Kermani said, “Sanctions cannot change Iran’s decision to continue its peaceful nuclear program in every aspect. “

He pointed to the ongoing talks between Iran and the Group 5+1 (the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany), and said, “As the Supreme Leader has said on different occasions we are not optimistic about the talks.”

The senior Iranian cleric reiterated that the Iranian nation will not withdraw from the achievements of its nuclear scientists.

Meantime, he urged the world powers not to insist on their illogical stance regarding Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.

Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei in his recent remarks underlined the necessity for keeping vigilant against the enemies’ display of superficial and unreal moderation, stressing that their true hostile nature was shown in the recent talks between Tehran and the world powers.

Ayatollah Khamenei said the nuclear talks proved the US hostility towards Iran and Islam, and added, “The enemy’s smile shouldn’t be taken seriously.”

Addressing thousands of people from the Central province of Qom, Ayatollah Khamenei said victory will be surely achieved through resistance.

“The enemies thought in vain that they could compel Iran to hold talks under sanctions,” he said, and added that Iran has not come to the negotiating table due to the pressure of the sanctions as Iranians are a resistant nation.

The leader said the enemies think that they have come to know the Iranian nation, but they are wrong.

The leader said Iran is negotiating with the West only because it has discerned it to be necessary, and stressed that Tehran has accepted to negotiate with the US only on the nuclear issue and not on bilateral ties, reminding that Tehran and Washington are still enemies at the end of the day.

“… we have already expressed our readiness to negotiate with the Satan (the US) on specific issues if necessary.”