Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 16 Sep '15 11:24 / 1 edit
    http://www.investigativeproject.org/4929/congress-members-frustrated-by-secret-iran

    Crucial aspects of the Iran nuclear deal remain hidden from the public, and in some instances, from the American government, Bloomberg reports.

    In a closed-door session with House members Wednesday, Secretary of State John Kerry revealed that two side deals between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were reached. Kerry said he neither read nor possesses the secret agreements.

    According to U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., a member of the House Intelligence Committee who attended the closed-door session, Congress also is in the dark on these agreements.

    "Kerry told me directly that he has not read the secret side deals. He told us the State Department does not have possession of these documents," Pompeo told Bloomberg View columnists Josh Rogin and Eli Lake.

    Furthermore, other secret agreements kept from the public were presented to Congress on Monday – part of 18 documents the White House were required to disclose – including secret letters of understanding between the U.S., France, Germany , and the United Kingdom that outline some of the ambiguous aspects of the nuclear deal.

    Seventeen of these documents are unclassified, yet they are stored in ultra-secure facilities intended for top-secret information, the Daily Beast reports. These extraordinary precautions indicate that the Obama administration is seeking to keep unclassified documents from reaching the public.

    "A lot of both documents and discussion that have been held in a classified setting doesn't have classified characteristics to it... to the extent that many [documents aren't classified,] they should be made totally public, as far as I'm concerned, so that the public can evaluate for themselves," U.S. Sen Bob Menendez, D-N.J., told the Daily Beast.

    IAEA officials told Pompeo and U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., that the two side deals involve IAEA inspections of the Parchin military complex and how Iran and the IAEA would address concerns regarding the military dimensions of the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.

    The Obama Administration is only required to pass documents in its possession to Congress, therefore the side deals cannot be presented to Congress or the U.S. public.

    "Kerry gave no indications they are seeking these documents and there is no indication he is the least bit worried he doesn't have access to this. The Ayatollah [Khamenei] knows what's in the deal but we don't," Pompeo told Bloomberg.

    These elements of secrecy regarding unclassified documents hidden from the public and side agreements without U.S. knowledge seem to directly contradict Preside Obama's argument that the Iran nuclear deal is verifiable and transparent
  2. 16 Sep '15 11:27
    Why does Mr. Transparency always have to leave us all in the dark?

    It's like Nancy Pelosi getting up and saying that they need to pass Obamacare to find out what is actually in it.

    Disgusting.

    I suppose if Obama was really transparent, he would not find the need to lie and cheat and hide things from us, and he would probably be in jail as well.
  3. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    16 Sep '15 11:33 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://www.investigativeproject.org/4929/congress-members-frustrated-by-secret-iran

    Crucial aspects of the Iran nuclear deal remain hidden from the public, and in some instances, from the American government, Bloomberg reports.

    In a closed-door session with House members Wednesday, Secretary of State John Kerry revealed that two side deals between Iran ...[text shortened]... tly contradict Preside Obama's argument that the Iran nuclear deal is verifiable and transparent
    It is obvious that Kerry is lying. He knows all about the deals. I bet he just knows it would be hard to justify to the American people if they knew. So he is pretending he knows nothing about it and has nothing to do with it, just in case it does not work out.

    Why couldn't he have made a side deal to free our Americans held hostage by Iran? It may be too late now since their leader is reported to have said he is threw making deals with the USA.
  4. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    16 Sep '15 17:20
    Originally posted by whodey
    Why does Mr. Transparency always have to leave us all in the dark?

    It's like Nancy Pelosi getting up and saying that they need to pass Obamacare to find out what is actually in it.

    Disgusting.

    I suppose if Obama was really transparent, he would not find the need to lie and cheat and hide things from us, and he would probably be in jail as well.
    NEWS FLASH: Side deals with other countries have been going on for over 100 years. Stop acting like this is a brand new thing. It's possible Iran did not want to make some details public for fear their hard right wing would object, or to save face with their own people. Both sides had to give ground to get this deal signed. At least 6 countries are involved in this agreement, so don't try to pin everything on Obama, just because something looks out of place to you, RJ Hinds, or the other self appointed experts here.
  5. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    16 Sep '15 19:58
    Originally posted by bill718
    NEWS FLASH: Side deals with other countries have been going on for over 100 years. Stop acting like this is a brand new thing. It's possible Iran did not want to make some details public for fear their hard right wing would object, or to save face with their own people. Both sides had to give ground to get this deal signed. At least 6 countries are involved ...[text shortened]... because something looks out of place to you, RJ Hinds, or the other self appointed experts here.
    Well, you certainly are not an expert.
  6. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    16 Sep '15 20:52
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Well, you certainly are not an expert.
    Indeed I'm not...just more expert than you!
  7. 16 Sep '15 22:15
    Originally posted by bill718
    Indeed I'm not...just more expert than you!
    You aren't even an almost near genius.
  8. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Sep '15 00:15 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://www.investigativeproject.org/4929/congress-members-frustrated-by-secret-iran

    Crucial aspects of the Iran nuclear deal remain hidden from the public, and in some instances, from the American government, Bloomberg reports.

    In a closed-door session with House members Wednesday, Secretary of State John Kerry revealed that two side deals between Iran ...[text shortened]... tly contradict Preside Obama's argument that the Iran nuclear deal is verifiable and transparent
    The IAEA agreements with Iran specifically involve sensitive details regarding the physical layout and other information regarding Iran's nuclear facilities that for rather obvious reasons Iran is not willing to divulge to a government that keeps threatening to attack such facilities. If the IAEA is dissatisfied with the level of Iranian cooperation it should promptly report that to the governments which are parties to the deal: if not, it should be allowed to do the job mandated by the overall agreement without obstruction from US politicians.
  9. 17 Sep '15 12:33 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by bill718
    NEWS FLASH: Side deals with other countries have been going on for over 100 years. Stop acting like this is a brand new thing. It's possible Iran did not want to make some details public for fear their hard right wing would object, or to save face with their own people. Both sides had to give ground to get this deal signed. At least 6 countries are involved ...[text shortened]... because something looks out of place to you, RJ Hinds, or the other self appointed experts here.
    I can't pen this on Obama? Don't be a fool bill, this is all Obama. This is an Executive Agreement that Obama pushed through, and without him, would have never taken place.

    So they don't want to let the public know all the side deals? Fine, but why not Kerry? Why not Congress who is voting on it? In fact, how can they vote for something they don't have all the details on?

    There is no good explanation for this bill, it really looks bad and sinister.
  10. 17 Sep '15 12:36
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    The IAEA agreements with Iran specifically involve sensitive details regarding the physical layout and other information regarding Iran's nuclear facilities that for rather obvious reasons Iran is not willing to divulge to a government that keeps threatening to attack such facilities. If the IAEA is dissatisfied with the level of Iranian cooperation it s ...[text shortened]... allowed to do the job mandated by the overall agreement without obstruction from US politicians.
    So they can't notify Kerry of all the details? They can't notify Congress so they can vote on it?

    BS.
  11. 17 Sep '15 14:00
    Originally posted by whodey
    I can't pen this on Obama? Don't be a fool bill, this is all Obama. This is an Executive Agreement that Obama pushed through, and without him, would have never taken place.

    So they don't want to let the public know all the side deals? Fine, but why not Kerry? Why not Congress who is voting on it? In fact, how can they vote for something they don't hav ...[text shortened]... the details on?

    There is no good explanation for this bill, it really looks bad and sinister.
    Everything looks bad and sinister to you, whodey.
  12. 17 Sep '15 14:52
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Everything looks bad and sinister to you, whodey.
    Those who hide in the shadows are suspect.

    Why not come out and be proud of who you are and what you are doing?
  13. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Sep '15 20:18
    Originally posted by whodey
    So they can't notify Kerry of all the details? They can't notify Congress so they can vote on it?

    BS.
    No, they can't pursuant to the agreement. That would be tantamount to handing the information over to the operational planners in the Pentagon.

    Try to use some common sense for once.
  14. 17 Sep '15 20:36
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    No, they can't pursuant to the agreement. That would be tantamount to handing the information over to the operational planners in the Pentagon.

    Try to use some common sense for once.
    Then why in the hell are they voting on something they don't know everything about?

    Intuition perhaps?
  15. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    17 Sep '15 21:01
    Originally posted by whodey
    Then why in the hell are they voting on something they don't know everything about?

    Intuition perhaps?
    It might be a shock to you, but countries often reach agreements without revealing every scrap of information that might be useful to military planners on the other side.

    Ridiculous I know, but what are ya gonna do?