Posted on 03/04/2015 4:33:50 AM PST by SJackson
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
I doubt it
Depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.
They are totally bonkers..... they just can’t let go.
Bibi was to Obama as Pearl Harbor was to Roosevelt and 9/11 was to Bush
If Iran has 190,000 centrifuges (whatever the aich that is) it can easily change their purpose
Kerry: Straining gnats while swallowing camels.
The media are the team and BO is only their current quarterback.
So the White House lied when they said there was nothing new in Bibi’s speech.
Netanyahu probably repeated Kerry’s words fairly verbatim, perhaps saying that “Kerry was against Iran having nuclear weapons, before Kerry was for it.”
A centrifuge is a centrifuge. I don’t think they care whether they’re spinning for peaceful purposes or to make bombs.
“FactCheck” is desperately straining at gnats. That Kerry referred to a “peaceful program” is irrelevant .... the same centrifuges can just as easily spin for a “nonpeaceful” program.
I think Mr. N had Kerry dead on.
Giving the world’s largest terror supporter the go-ahead to use a large number of nuclear subterfuges...but only if they use them in approved ways could be argued as a suicide pact by a person with a basic level of historical understanding.
The administration that constantly avoids meeting with Netanyahu - so they could speak WITH each other instead of ABOUT each other - now complains when something they claim something they said was misrepresented.
Boo f’n hoo - even if it’s true, it’s your own fault, a’holes.
Kerry, Feb. 25: [T]he purpose of the negotiations we’re in now with Iran is to ensure that their nuclear program is exclusively for civilian purposes. That’s the key here. They can have a civilian peaceful program. So when you get into the number of centrifuges and this and that, if — if you have a civilian power plant that’s producing power legitimately and not a threat to proliferation, you could have as many as 190,000 or more centrifuges. And there are millions of centrifuges involved, ultimately, power plants that are producing power. So the key here is, is this a peaceful program, and are the measures in place capable of making sure you know it’s peaceful? That’s the standard we’re trying to apply."State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told us in an email that Kerry’s reference to 190,000 centrifuges at the House hearing wasn’t about Iran or the number of centrifuges that it could possess “under or after a deal.” “Secretary Kerry was not speaking to what Iran could or would have under or after a deal — he wasn’t talking specifically about Iran at all,” Harf said. “He was arguing that ensuring the nuclear program is peaceful through measures like transparency and monitoring can be as important [as] the number of centrifuges, which can get quite high even in countries that peacefully enrich uranium only to produce electrical power.”
He wasn't talking specifically about Iran at all?
If he wasn't talking specifically about Iran at all in the context according to genius Marie Harf, and Netanyahu was twisting Kerry's words out of context then why the proper noun, the pronouns and the definite articles referring to Iran in red above in the SAME PARAGRAPH?
Maybe it is easy to misconstrue Kerry's double-talk.
Psaki is unclear on what “twisted” means, versus “pointing out logical implications”. She confirms that Kerry says Iran could operate “190,000 or more” centrifuges, in a peaceful nuclear program” under a deal he would apparently endorse.
Netanyahu inconveniently pointed out that those centrifuges concentrate uranium isotopes without regard to what it is used for. Today it might be used as reactor fuel for generating electricity. Tomorrow, it, or the reactor fuel, can be reprocessed into weapons-grade material. The centrifuges make a future “breakout” to nuclear weapons much more dangerous and likely.
Nancy Pelosi was driven to tears that Netanyahu was so condescending, speaking as if Congress and the Obama administration were stupid children. Nancy, meet Jen and John.
Bibi is the perfect example of what free speech and press does to the radical leftist cause.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.