SECURE FREEDOM MINUTE
It’s been apparent for some time that the Obama administration will say ANYTHING to implement its disastrous nuclear deal with Iran. For example, the President has claimed it closes all “pathways to an Iranian nuclear weapons.” As Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer has noted, that’s not so.
Team Obama asserts we know about everything that Iran’s secretive program has done in closed sites. As former Clinton Director of Central Intelligence James Woolsey has written, that not true.
The President insists his deal is the only way to avoid war with Iran. Democratic Senator Bob Menendez disagrees.
Now, administration spokesmen are signaling that the deal will provide useful targeting information for a future attack on Iran’s nuclear program, instead of making it effectively impossible.
Is there really a Democrat – or anybody else – who buys that fraud?
Family Security Matters
George Jahn, a respected reporter who covers the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna for The Associated Press, published an important story yesterday on details of a secret side agreement to the Iran nuclear deal in which Iran will collect samples of possible nuclear-weapons-related activity for the IAEA. He wrote his story after an unnamed diplomat allowed him to read a draft of one of the side deals. The side-deal documents reportedly have only been briefed to U.S. officials and will not be shared with the U.S. Congress.
I wrote on this website on July 22 that Senator Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) and Representative Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.) learned about the existence of two secret side deals to the Iran agreement when they met with IAEA officials in Vienna on July 17. The congressmen were told these agreements concerned resolving the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program and the issue of access to the Parchin military base, where explosive testing related to nuclear-warhead development reportedly has taken place.
This story attracted more attention on July 23, when Senator James Risch (R., Idaho) revealed during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing that one of the side deals allows Iran to collect samples for the IAEA. Risch learned about this from Obama-administration officials during a classified briefing the previous day and indicated he was told that the IAEA would, by video, remotely monitor the Iranians taking samples. Risch’s remarks created quite a stir at the hearing and led Senator Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) to say that if this were true, it would amount to “the equivalent of the fox guarding the chicken coop.” Senator Bob Corker (R., Tenn.), the committee’s chairman, likened this arrangement to NFL players’ mailing in their own urine samples for drug testing.
Jahn’s story is important because it provides previously unknown details of how Iran will collect samples for the IAEA. These details include the following:
Family Security Matters
When Obama took office, his first phone call to a foreign leader was to the head of a terrorist group.
“This is my first phone call to a foreign leader,” Obama told the PLO’s Abbas. “And I’m making it only hours after I took office.”
Obama repeatedly bent, twisted and mutilated existing laws to keep the money flowing to the PLO’s
When Hamas and the PLO temporarily reconciled, Obama sent them money anyway. When Congress froze aid after the PLO defied the peace process by trying to join the UN, he signed a waiver claiming that aiding the terrorist network was “important to the security interests of the United States.” Earlier this year, when the PLO went after Israel at the International Criminal Court, Obama defied a Congressional law and bipartisan demands mandating a cutoff of aid.
The Obama administration’s lax immigration policies have allowed a large number of terrorists with documented ties to ISIS and other radical Islamic groups into the United States, including individuals from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Uzbekistan who have been criminally charged in recent years.
Examples include a naturalized U.S. citizen from Somalia (Hinda Osman Dhirane) charged with conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, a lawful permanent resident (Akhror Saidakhmetov) from Kazakhstan charged with conspiracy to provide material support to Al Qaeda in Iraq, a Yemeni national named Mufid A. Elfgeeh who also supported a foreign terrorist organization, possessed illegal firearms and attempted to kill U.S. government officers and a Syrian national named Mohamad Saeed Kodaimati who knowingly made false, fraudulently and fictitious statements to the FBI.
That’s just a snippet of a long list of foreigners with terrorist ties who have been granted U.S. entry by the Obama administration. The document was provided this month by a pair of federal lawmakers attempting to pinpoint the tragic consequences of Obama’s negligent immigration policies. The legislators, both U.S. senators, are asking Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Secretary of State John Kerry to provide details on the immigration history of the individuals-as well as their family-that appear on the chart. The list features 72 people involved with or sentenced for terrorist activity in the last year alone.
Barack Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s anti-West policies have reached their culmination in an Iranian deal that will give imperialistic terrorists in the Middle East hitherto unfathomable control. Iran is in an evil alliance with Russia and indirectly China and more directly North Korea as well as Cuba and other terrorist states. North Korea is threatening to destroy the United States with weapons that are unknown to us. They are likely referring to something along the lines of an EMP attack.
Senator Ted Cruz has been a powerful critic of the Iran deal as he has campaigned through the Southwest..
Doug Ross @ Journal
The Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs is more than a journal. It is a book commissioned by the house of Saud and published by the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA). The book contains plans for Muslim conquest and includes a blueprint for the infiltration of non-Muslim lands.
It all starts with the father of Huma Abedin, Sayed Zaynul Abedin, and this Journal paid for by the Al Saud dynasty in Saudi Arabia.
Huma Abedin served on the board of the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs for many years at the same time she worked for Hillary Clinton.
Family Security Matters
ANDREW C. MCCARTHY
Who cares if Hillary Clinton is convicted of a crime? What we ought to care about is if Ahmed Abu Khatallah is convicted of a crime.
Khatallah is the only person charged thus far in the attack on a shadowy U.S. government compound in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Dozens of jihadists participated in the attack, during which four Americans, including U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens, were slain. Yet Khatallah has been singled out for prosecution. As I’ve previously detailed (here and here), the Obama Justice Department has filed an indictment that infuses evidence with politics: Trying to prove the terrorist conspiracy that actually occurred without refuting the Obama/Clinton fiction that the attack was a spontaneous protest ignited by an anti-Muslim Internet video.
That’s why there are worse jobs to have right now than defense counsel for a murderous jihadist.
Mrs. Clinton has spent the last few weeks learning that federal court is not the mainstream media. Because of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits brought by Judicial Watch, she and her top aides are finally being asked tough questions about conducting government business over a private communications system – a system that Clinton designed in order to hide her communications from public inspections, congressional inquiries, and judicial proceedings. We’ve thus learned that Team Clinton may have concealed government records, stored and transmitted classified information on private e-mail systems, and erased tens of thousands of government files.
If Mrs. Clinton thinks FOIA is a headache, wait until she sees what happens when a top government official’s reckless mass deletion of e-mails takes center stage in a terrorism prosecution of intense national interest. Federal criminal court is not the nightly news. There, mass deletion of files is not gently described as “emails a government official chose not to retain”; it is described as “destruction of evidence” and “obstruction of justice.”