Obama's So-Called Framework Agreement A Lie - No 'There' There (#Obamasurrendertoiran)

Clearly, in Obama’s mind it isn’t lying when he thinks something’s good for us … as was the case when he told us on numerous occasions that we could keep our previous health plan and doctor under Obamacare, and now in the case of the Iran so-called ‘Framework Agreement’. In Obama-logic he know’s best what’s good for us and if he had to lie about it … well, that’s exactly what he’ll do and in fact, has done.

As Roger Simon points out today at PJ Media, the fact that Obama is indeed once again lying to the American people is made abundantly clear via extensive comparisons between the Iranian, American and Europeans versions of what was supposedly agreed to by Iranian-born journalist Amir Taheri (bi-lingual in English and Farsi) whose writings focus on the Middle East affairs and topics related to Islamist terrorism. For example

The Iranian text opens by insisting that it has absolutely no “legal aspect” and is intended only as “a guideline for drafting future accords.”

The American text claims that Iran has agreed to do this or that, for example reducing the number of centrifuges from 19,000 to 6,500.

The Iranian text, however, says that Iran “shall be able to …” or “qader khahad boud” in Farsi to do such a thing. The same is true about enrichment in Fordow [underground reactor]. The Americans say Iran has agreed to stop enrichment there for 15 years. The Iranian text, however, refers to this as something that Iran “will be able to do,” if it so wished.

Sometimes the two texts are diametrically opposed.

The American statement claims that Iran has agreed not to use advanced centrifuges, each of which could do the work of 10 old ones. The Iranian text, however, insists that “on the basis of solutions found, work on advanced centrifuges shall continue on the basis of a 10-year plan.”

The American text claims that Iran has agreed to dismantle the core of the heavy water plutonium plant in Arak. The Iranian text says the opposite. The plant shall remain and be updated and modernized.As Taheri goes on to aptly suggest, Obama is playing a bizarre game that could endanger regional peace and threaten the national security of the US and its allies.

He insisted that Kerry secure “something, anything” before April 14 to forestall the US Congress’ planned moves on Iran.

He also wanted to stick it to Netanyahu, settle scores with Republicans, and please his faction within the Democratic Party; in other words, taking strategic risks with national security and international peace in the pursuit of dubious partisan gains.Read Taheri’s entire analysis here …

As Roger Simon writes in his commentary. what we have here is not “a failure to communicate,” but Obama’s moral narcissism gone berserk.

Forget his former proclaimed views on Iran. Driven by his need for legacy and his conviction that “he knows best” about world peace, the future, whatever, he has reversed course and powered through to what he thinks, or wants us to think, is the framework for a deal that would prevent Iran from fabricating nuclear weapons. Only — as in Gertrude Stein’s Oakland and Amir Taheri’s translations — there’s no there there.

Read Simon’s entire piece here …

Meanwhile, as has now long been the case due to Barack Obama’s disastropus foreign policy, our enemies continue to no longer fear us and our allies don’t feel they can trust us … the latest example of the later being the fact that America’s other key allies across the Middle East — such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates — are just as distraught as Israel over Obama’s ‘submission’ and ‘surrender’ to Iran.