Iran Nuclear Negotiations

[Lamplighter]

...If you choose to believe the lies coming out of the White House, you go right ahead.
<snip>
The ACTUAL terms of the treaty, have not been printed by any outlet I have found....

Adak, is there anything even slightly illogical between those two remarks ?
How do you know the White House is lying ?

You also say:

Take the Iran nuclear negotiations deal just reached. Iran's President is saying
the 5+1 nations agreement means that the world recognizes Iran's right to enrich nuclear material.
Which is stunning, because Obama says no such change in the
nuclear proliferation treaty has been made, and Iran has no such right.

NPR News uses similar words, but to different meanings:
Eyder Peralta
November 24, 2013

What You Should Know About The Iran Nuclear Deal
<snip>
— The Fine Print: As the White House explained the deal in a "fact sheet,"
Iran has agreed to halt any enrichment above 5 percent
and [to] neutralize any of its stockpile that is near-20 percent.

Iran has also agreed to "unprecedented transparency and intrusive monitoring" of its nuclear program.
In return, the U.S. and its partners have agreed to drop some of its sanctions, amounting to about $6 to $7 billion in relief.

— On Some Enrichment, They've Agreed To Disagree:
One of the toughest diplomatic dances that happened in this agreement is about Iran's "right to enrich."
Iran has insisted that the world recognize it has a right to enrich uranium for peaceful means.
The U.S. has insisted that it has never recognized that right for other countries and it would not do so for Iran.

In your opinion, what is "the White House lie" ?

[Adak]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Adak, is there anything even slightly illogical between those two remarks ?
How do you know the White House is lying ?

Do you believe the lie about the Benghazi attack that killed our Ambassador? You know, the one that Susan Rice was instructed to tell PERSONALLY by Obama?

Ever hear of anybody going to an anti-video demonstration with c4 explosives, RPG launchers, squad level machine guns, and mortars?

Naw, me neither!

The eye-witnesses who survived the attack have been forbidden by the President, to speak of it, with anyone, or face jail time. It's been over a year now. Why do you suppose Obama ordered that?

When the President has personally worked out some "Agreement" with a former enemy, but the full content is not revealed, do you really believe he's telling us ALL the facts about the agreement?

Or do you think he's NOT telling us all the facts? Just the facts that make him look good? You know, because the Democrats have a mid-term election in 2014, and his popularity in the polls, is as low as Bush's ever was. So low, that Democrats voted to change Obamacare, in the House last month. They want to be re-elected, and Obama is becoming radioactive with the voters.

Politicians have a LONG history of outrageous lies to the public, because a lot of what they lied about, wasn't known by the public. Now, we know, if we want to.

One example:
JFK, was a horrible womanizer, who used to bring along his current girl friend, on trips around the country. He infuriated Jackie Kennedy, by including the gf in the reception line, forcing Jackie to shake hands with her. In French, Jackie protested to the French Canadian Mayor of the City they were visiting - then dutifully shook her hand.

The press knew it, the secret service knew it (arranged for it in fact), but was it ever reported in the news?

NEVER!

You also say:


NPR News uses similar words, but to different meanings:
Eyder Peralta
November 24, 2013

In your opinion, what is "the White House lie" ?

The Iranian president announced to a cheering crowd, that the agreement supports Iran's right to have nuclear facilities. But Obama is telling us that Iran still has no right to have nuclear facilities which could create nuclear weapons fuel. But the Plutonium facility is not closing down, and it's not being dismantled either.

Also, the terms of the inspections. Sec. of State Kerry says everything in the agreement will be "verified, verified, verified". But others are saying inspections will be very limited, and never include the suspected nuclear weapons development facility.

And both can't be right.

If Obama had nothing to hide, why wouldn't the agreement be put out in full, to the media, or at least, to Congress, and then to the media?

When politicians hold back info, it's because it's embarrassing to them, or to their party, or both. They'd rather fall back to lying.

Like Clinton saying he "didn't have sex with that woman". His defense: "It depends what you definition of is (having sex), is".

And Republicans lie just as much, unfortunately. Look at Senator Edwards - his wife is dying of cancer, and still supporting him on his Presidential nomination campaign. Only to find out he's had a mistress for years, and one or two kids with the mistress.

Mostly, politicians don't lie. They "shave" the truth, to make themselves look good, and simply leave off the bad truths, and hope you won't find it.

The famous "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" that lead to our going into the Vietnam War, never happened - total fabrication to justify fighting the communist take over of a VERY corrupt and murderous, South Vietnam gov't.

Net result: 50,000 + American soldiers killed.

That's what I believe Obama and Kerry are doing here, with the Iran negotiations. They are shaving the truth, so they don't look bad, but it won't end well. It puts all of the Sunni Muslim countries around Iran (notably Saudi Arabia, etc.), and Israel, in a security nightmare.