Iran houdt zich aan de nucleaire deal dit in tegenstelling tot de VS........

In het hieronder opgenomen artikel, geschreven door Darius Shahtahmasebi, betoogt hij dat niet Iran de nucleaire deal schendt maar de VS! Dezelfde VS, die sinds de Trump administratie aan het bewind is, deze deal van tafel wil hebben, zoals o.a. Trump zelf meermaals op een meer dan belachelijke manier heeft gesteld.

Echter als je de bepalingen in deze deal, de 'Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) leest en deze goed analyseert, is het juist de VS die dit JCPOA schendt!

Voorts hebben zelfs de psychopaten Pompeo, Tillerson, Mattis en het State Department (het VS ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken) gesteld dat Iran zich wel degelijk aan deze overeenkomst houdt. Naast deze spelers heeft ook de IAEA (het internationaal atoomagentschap) gesteld dat Iran zich aan de deal hield en houdt, een vaststelling die de IAEA maar liefst 9 keer heeft gedaan....... Ook EU partners in de IAEA en de EU hebben dit meermaals vastgesteld.....

Lees het volgende verhelderende relaas van Shahtahmasebi (en zegt het voort, de reguliere media beginnen meer en meer de leugens van de Trump administratie in deze te herhalen en te verdedigen, niet in de laatste plaats te danken aan de belachelijke 'openbaringen' van Palestijnenslachter Netanyahu en zijn psychopathische collega Lieberman*):

Iran Isn’t Violating the Nuclear Agreement — America Is

May 2, 2018 at 3:21 pm

Written by Darius Shahtahmasebi

(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) — On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave his most grandiose anti-Iranian performance to date, revealing what he believed was direct proof that Iran “lied” about its nuclear program. This isn’t the first time Netanyahu has overhyped the threat of Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons program. He has been crying wolf over Iran since as far back as 1992.

The aim of this performance is to cast doubt on the efficacy of the Iranian nuclear accord signed in 2015, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which U.S. President Donald Trump has long intended to completely derail. Netanyahu, of course, is totally on board with this goal.

Following Netanyahu’s speech, the White House released a statement of its own, saying Israel’s intelligence confirms what the U.S. had already known — that “Iran has a robust, clandestine nuclear weapons program that it has tried and failed to hide from the world.” Not long after, the White House issued a second statement that changed the word “has” to “had,” appearing to suggest that Iran no longer possesses a nuclear weapons program. However, a White House official later explained to NBC News that the wrong tense was the result of a “clerical error.”

Either way, despite the uncompromising anti-Iranian narrative, the prevailing truth appears to be that Iran is in full compliance with the JCPOA, and the main officials involved — including Trump and Netanyahu — are well aware of this. In his April 12 Senate confirmation hearing, then-CIA director Mike Pompeo (who this week began his tenure as secretary of state) said he has “seen no evidence that they [Iran] are not in compliance today.”

Just last month, the State Department once again issued a report declaring that “Iran continued to fulfill its nuclear-related commitments” under the JCPOA following an ongoing pattern of the State Department even under the watch of Rex Tillerson, who essentially forced Trump to certify Iran’s compliance. Secretary of Defense James “Mad Dog” Mattis has also said Iran is “fundamentally” in compliance with the nuclear agreement.

Further, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has also confirmed Iran’s compliance at least nine times, as have the European partners to the JCPOA and practically the entire EU.

“The deal is working, it is delivering on its main goal which means keeping the Iranian nuclear programme in check,” said Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign policy chief, before acknowledging that the JCPOA is “making the world safer and … preventing a potential nuclear arms race in the region.”

In fact, as the Atlantic’s Peter Beinart has explained, it is Donald Trump’s administration that is most likely violating the JCPOA — not Iran.

According to Beinart:

“The more interesting question isn’t whether Iran has been complying with the nuclear deal. It’s whether America has. American journalists often describe the agreement as a trade. In the words of one CNN report, it ‘obliges Iran to limit its nuclear program in exchange for the suspension of economic sanctions.’ 

But there’s more to it than that. The deal doesn’t only require the United States to lift nuclear sanctions. It requires the United States not to inhibit Iran’s reintegration into the global economy. Section 26 commits the U.S. (and its allies) ‘to prevent interference with the realisation of the full benefit by Iran of the sanctions lifting specified’ in the deal. Section 29 commits the U.S. and Europe to ‘refrain from any policy specifically intended to directly and adversely affect the normalisation of trade and economic relations with Iran.’ Section 33 commits them to ‘agree on steps to ensure Iran’s access in areas of trade, technology, finance and energy.’”

This is the interesting part. According to those sections, the U.S. has been violating the JCPOA for some time now.

As Beinart explains further:

“The Trump administration has likely been violating these clauses. The Washington Post reported that at a NATO summit last May, ‘Trump tried to persuade European partners to stop making trade and business deals with Iran.’ Then, in July, Trump’s director of legislative affairs boasted that at a G20 summit in Germany, Trump had ‘underscored the need for nations … to stop doing business with nations that sponsor terrorism, especially Iran.’ Both of these lobbying efforts appear to violate America’s pledge to ‘refrain from any policy specifically intended to directly and adversely affect the normalisation of trade and economic relations with Iran.’”

Or, take for example, sanctions imposed on Iran by the Trump administration in July of last year that targeted “procurement of advanced military hardware, such as fast attack boats and unmanned aerial vehicles, and send a strong signal that the United States cannot and will not tolerate Iran’s provocative and destabilizing behaviour,” according to a statement released by U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin.

Beinart also explains how that 22 of the deal specifically requires the U.S. to allow for the sale of commercial passenger aircraft and related parts and services to Iran,” which, as Al-Monitor revealed, “requests concerning permits to export planes to Iran have been piling up … OFAC** has not responded to aircraft sales licensing requests since the first of such licenses were issued during the Barack Obama administration.”

In other words, Iran is in compliance with the JCPOA but the U.S. isn’t. Does the U.S. abide by its own rules, or should it be held to the same standards that the world has held Iran ransom to for decades?

It is nothing short of extraordinary that the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons can be the one violating an international agreement all while it consistently demonizes another state for allegedly violating the very same agreement. Why is it that the U.S. can violate the JCPOA with no consequence but Iran is demonized even as it continues to comply with it?

The problem with the JCPOA isn’t that it isn’t working; the problem for people like Trump and Netanyahu is that it is working too well.

Op-ed / Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo

============================================

*  Zie: 'Iran moet hangen en Iran-deal moet van tafel....... Israël speelt wolf in schaapskleren'

** OFAC: Office of Foreign Assets Control.

Zie ook: 'Israël laat alweer haar ware terreur gezicht zien: IS kan tijdelijke 'geallieerde worden' in de strijd tegen Iran en Hezbollah.........'

       en: 'Rex Tillerson (VS BuZA) geeft toe dat de VS een staatsgreep wil uitvoeren in Iran........ Het is nog 'iets te rustig' in dat gebied........'

      en: 'VS liegt schaamteloos om het westen verder op te zetten tegen Iran........'

      en: 'Iraanse protesten allesbehalve compleet spontaan (zoals VS ambassadeur bij de VN Haley durfde te stellen...)....'

       en: 'Protesten Iran opgezet door de VS en Israël'

       en: 'Iran, de protesten en wat de media je niet vertellen.........'

       en: 'De VS gaf meer dan 1 miljoen dollar uit om protesten tegen Iraans bewind uit te buiten (en te organiseren)'

       en: 'Het verborgen motief achter de Israëlische agressie tegen Iran en Syrië'

       en: 'VS bewandelt dezelfde weg richting Iran, als die voor de illegale oorlog tegen Irak in 2003, aldus één van de verantwoordelijken voor die oorlog........'

       en: 'VS, de werelddictator: Iran-deal is van nul en generlei waarde (op basis van leugens en achterklap).......'

       en: 'Netanyahu vergelijkt Iran met nazi-Duitsland en stelt dat Iran een bedreiging is voor de wereldvrede..... ha! ha! ha! ha!'

       en: 'Washington uit op oorlog met Iran......'

       en: 'Oliemaatschappijen weigeren n.a.v. VS sancties de jet van Iraanse minister af te tanken'

       en: 'Israël bezig met voorbereiding op meerdere fronten oorlog........ (met hulp van de VS)'

       en: 'John Bolton heeft beloofd dat Iran voor 2019 onder een ander regime zal leven.......'

       en: 'Saoedi-Arabië dreigt Iran aan te vallen voor vanuit Jemen afgevuurde 'raketten' op Saoedische 'doelen..........''

       en: 'VS rechter gelast Iran miljarden te betalen aan de families van 911 slachtoffers.....'

       en: 'VS ambtenaren: Israël zoekt steun VS voor oorlog tegen Iran.......'

       en: 'VS, de werelddictator: Iran-deal is van nul en generlei waarde (op basis van leugens en achterklap).......'

        en: 'Syrian ‘Rebels’ Used Sarin Nerve Gas Sold By Britain'

        en: 'VS en GB brengen propaganda die moet verdoezelen wat er echt gebeurt in Syrië........ Door VS gebombardeerde 'gifgasfabriek' niet bestaand....'

        en: 'Israël laat er geen twijfel over bestaan: met het uit de Iran-deal stappen van de VS is definitief de oorlog verklaard aan Iran.........'

        en: 'Iran-deal: de echte reden waarom Trump deze deal de nek heeft omgedraaid'

        en: 'Netanyahu en Bolton stoken het vuur in het Midden-Oosten verder op: Iran moet en zal vallen.....'

       en: 'Trump beloofde geen extra oorlog in het Midden-Oosten >> toch heeft hij het pad vrijgemaakt voor oorlog tegen Iran......'

       en: 'VS 'laat zien op vrede uit te zijn' door dreiging Iran te vermorzelen......'

Anti-Russische propaganda, waarin Rusland verantwoordelijk wordt gesteld voor de protesten tegen VS pijpleiding projecten, ook al als onzin doorgeprikt

Niets weerhoudt een groot deel van de VS ervan Rusland verantwoordelijk te houden voor alles wat niet lukt, dan wel volkomen fout gaat en voor protesten in de VS tegen pijpleidingen en het fracken voor schalie-olie- en schaliegaswinning..... Dat laatste: protesten tegen smerige projecten, is de laatste zaak die toegevoegd wordt aan de algemene westerse anti-Russische propaganda leugencarrousel..... 

Het wachten is op een volgend onderwerp dat wordt toegevoegd aan deze propaganda, te denken valt aan protesten tegen de algehele vernieuwde kernwapendoctrine, de inzet van het kernwapen als eerste aanvalswapen, althans als je daar nog mensen voor op straat krijgt...... (waar de VS zelfs een cyberaanval als reden voor die inzet ziet....)  De situatie nu is veel ernstiger dan die in de 70er en 80er jaren van de vorige eeuw, terwijl er toen miljoenen mensen de straat op gingen tegen kernwapens, is er nu zelfs geen aanzet tot het organiseren van (wereldwijde) demonstraties.....

Nu worden dus ook de anti-pijpleiding protesten van de laatste paar jaar in de VS toegeschreven aan Rusland......... Zelfs hare kwaadaardigheid Hillary Clinton, die het gore lef heeft zich af te schilderen als milieubewust, durfde Rusland als verantwoordelijke voor de protesten aan te wijzen........

Lees het volgende hoofdstuk van de Russiagate soap en zie hoe door en door verrot de VS politiek is:

No, Russia Didn’t Use Propaganda on Social Media to Incite US Pipeline Protests

March 6, 2018 at 6:21 am

Written by Kevin Gosztola

(SP Op-ed) — A “staff report” from Republicans on the United States House Science, Space, and Technology Committee offers little evidence to prove allegations of Russian efforts to influence U.S. energy markets through “social media propaganda” to incite pipeline protests.

Nonetheless, the report, pushed by Republican chairman Representative Lamar Smith, went virtually unquestioned when it was covered by U.S. media.

What the report reveals are several Twitter and Instagram posts that Republicans claim were posted by “Russian agents” linked to the Internet Research Agency (IRA), the troll farm which has become a focus of narratives that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

The report recycles unsubstantiated news reporting that strongly suggested the Russian government was behind anti-fracking activism in the U.S. It contends these posts and tweets demonstrate the “broad nature of Russia’s meddling and to reveal Russia’s attempts to deceive and influence the American public, especially as related to domestic energy issues.”

“Between 2015 and 2017, there were an estimated 9,097 Russian posts or tweets regarding U.S. energy policy or a current energy event on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram,” according to the report. “Between 2015 and 2017, there were an estimated 4,334 IRA accounts across Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.”

To understand how these numbers are incredibly minuscule, there are about 95 million posts to Instagram per day and 800 million or more users, as of September 2017. About 500,000 comments, 293,000 status updates, and 136,000 photos are posted to Facebook daily. There are over 2 billion active users on Facebook. On Twitter, about 500 million or more tweets are posted each day. There are 330 million active monthly users.

House Republicans did not break down the number of IRA accounts by platform. But if the 4,334 accounts were all Twitter accounts, it would mean the number of active Russian accounts represented less than 0.0013 percent of Twitter users. That percentage would be much smaller for Facebook and Instagram.

As for reported posts and tweets, because Republicans are pulling from contents that appeared between 2015 and 2017, they are essentially revealing an average of 3,000 or so posts and tweets appeared each year.

What is 3,000 out of the 95 million posts to Instagram? What is 3,000 out of the hundreds of thousands of comments and updates to Facebook? What is 3,000 out of 500 million or more tweets?

These are smaller than microscopic numbers. They barely can be said to represent a broad influence campaign by Russia to undermine U.S. fossil fuel industries and incite opposition to American “energy independence.”

The “Russian tweets” are not even disinformation. They mostly appear to be messages containing advocacy from Senator Bernie Sanders, presidential candidate in the 2016 election, and his supporters. For example:

These tweets reference the health impact of natural gas fracking. They mention the link between earthquakes and fracking. They note political efforts to ban fracking through state ballot initiatives. What they do not do is promote disinformation, such as falsehoods about the fossil fuel industry.

The report continues a blatant agenda by Republicans to discredit climate activism against oil and gas pipelines. It even argues Russians are trying to make “useful idiots” of “unwitting environmental groups and activists in furtherance of its energy influence operations.”

In July 2017, Smith and Republican Representative Randy Weber urged Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to “investigate whether the Kremlin [was] bankrolling green campaigns against the fracking technology that helped the U.S. overtake Russia in gas production.”

But as POLITICO noted, “Allegations have circulated for years that Moscow has sought to discourage European countries from developing their own natural gas supplies as an alternative to Russian fuel. And conservatives have sought to extend those concerns to the U.S.—though there’s little but innuendo to base them on.”

A surge in activism against pipeline projects, especially as the impacts of climate change intensify, has brought pressure to fossil fuel industry interests. Smith is one of the industry’s most ardent defenders. He even publicly contends climate change is still subject to debate when it is settled science.

An Inside Climate News report details how the fossil fuel industry is a major contributor to science committee members. It donated $8 million from 2006 to 2016, making it the leading source of “industry political action committee money.” The oil and gas industry  is one of Smith’s biggest contributors, “with $764,000 in donations over the course of his career in Congress.”

Smith frequently alleges charges of “secret science” against government agencies that seek to regulate coal-fired power plants, oil refineries, and energy pollution in general. He engages in the very kind of efforts to provoke discord and disruption that the House science committee report condemns. It is all to manufacture doubt in order to tie up policy deliberations in debate so they do not affect companies’ profits.

While this report is clearly rubbish, Democrats have not said anything to challenge the allegations. Perhaps, this is because they are fully invested in the narrative that Russia is meddling in all parts of American discourse on social media.

Smith invokes the bipartisan consensus on “Russian manipulation.” Democratic Senator Ben Cardin recently published a report that stated, “According to NATO officials, Russian intelligence agencies also reportedly provide covert support to European environmental groups to campaign against fracking for natural gas, thereby keeping the EU more dependent on Russian supplies. A study by the Wilfried Martens Center for European Studies reports that the Russian government has invested $95 million in NGOs that seek to persuade EU governments to end shale gas exploration.”

During a tinePublic speech in 2014, former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton accused “phony environmental groups” that she believes are funded by the Russians of being responsible for the opposition to oil pipelines and natural gas fracking. “I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.”

Much of the notion among conservatives that U.S. climate activism is funded by Russia stems from a report by a front group, the Environmental Policy Alliance, operated by Berman & Co., which is run by Rick Berman.

Berman is known for attacks against Mothers Against Drunk Driving. He also has defended Big Tobacco from anti-smoking campaigns. He previously boasted, “If the oil and gas industry wants to prevent its opponents from slowing its efforts to drill in more places, it must be prepared to employ tactics like digging up embarrassing tidbits about environmentalists and liberal celebrities” and urged industry executives “to exploit emotions like fear, greed and anger and turn them against the environmental groups.”

Part of Berman’s efforts to exploit emotions involved accusing U.S. environmental organization of accepting money from the Sea Change Foundation, which allegedly accepted funds from a Bermuda-based company called Klein Limited with executives tied to Russian oil and gas companies.

“We double-check confirmed that the origin of the funds we’re getting from Sea Change is through a donor, not from Russia,” Melinda Pierce, Sierra Club’s legislative director, declared. “It’s a private U.S. citizen who cares about climate change and has invested in the kind of work that the Sierra Club does to move us off dirty energy to clean energy.”

This campaign to smear U.S. environmental organizations as agents of the Russian oil and gas industry was picked up by Republicans. It influenced a 2014 report, “The Chain of Environmental Command: How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA.”

Back then, it was innuendo and unsubstantiated claims intended to help the industry defend itself against pipeline activists. It remains industry-driven propaganda.

The only difference now is that the current political climate embraces a bipartisan consensus that Russians will stop at nothing to sow discord. Democrats do not see conservative political action committees and right-wing industry front groups as responsible for political turmoil over issues mired in contentious debate. They see Russians, and even if they do not deny the reality of climate change, that leaves U.S. policy vulnerable to actions that are aimed at protecting fossil fuel companies and drowning out protest from citizens concerned about climate change.

Op-ed Kevin Gosztola / Republished with permission / Shadow Proof / Report a typo

==============================

Zie voor de hiervoor genoemde corruptie van Lamar Smith: 'Exxon lobbyist (politicus) dagvaardt milieugroepen voor kennis bij Exxon over klimaatverandering.......'

VS hulp aan orkaanslachtoffers Houston en het verschil met hulp aan Israël.........

De volgende voor zichzelf sprekende collage, vond ik op het blog van Stan van Houcke:




De hoogste tijd voor een revolutie in de VS, waardoor de wereld eindelijk kan ademhalen zonder de terreur van dit land, het land dat men 'verkreeg' (gestolen) middels een enorme genocide op de oorspronkelijke bevolking......