FreeSoul retweetet
“گThe resurgence of terrorism in the world again by Trump paying billions of dollars to the Iranian regime will be the biggest mistake in history!
#BloodyDeal
English
FreeSoul
18K posts
FreeSoul retweetet
Senior Iranian cleric Hassan Khomeini has issued a chilling threat:
“The Ramadan War (w/ the US and Israel) was the lesser jihad; from today, the greater jihad begins.”
Trump and Vance are ready to hand these bloodthirsty terrorist psychopaths $300 billion. Madness! Free Iran!
English
FreeSoul retweetet
FreeSoul retweetet
MORE ON THE MOU ...
This is the second part of my comments regarding the MOU. I post the first part this morning.
President Trump ordered this military operation to prevent Iran from getting and using nuclear weapons. And the early days of this war was a spectacular success. For some reason, an ceasefire was quickly ordered, and it lasted for over 2-months, despite the scores of violations by Iran and Hezbollah. Great damage has been done to Iran's military. And the president deserves enormous credit for having the courage to do what no other president did before him. My fear is that no other president after him will have the same courage to act should the terms of any agreement be violated.
The president ordered a 2-day return to military operations when the Iranian regime was dragging its feet. That was quickly ended on a promise by the regime that it would sign on to an MOU.
From day one, I have underscored that no deal will be honored by the Iranian regime. Its political-theocratic ideology fuels a revolution that compels the catastrophic destruction of the West. Presumably, the president knew this as he repeatedly warned it Iran got a nuclear weapon, it would use it against us. Moreover, Iran's pattern of conduct over the last 47-years makes clear that it uses negotiations as a tactic to further its aims. Yet, we abandoned the military destruction of Iran and did not use all of our capabilities to destroy the regime, including not arming the Iranian people due, in part to polling and gas prices. To be clear, there was never a plan to use ground forces or be involved in a "forever war." Indeed, in my view, if the MOU is not drastically altered during the 60-day negotiation period, a forever war -- a continuation of Iran's war on the West -- is not in doubt.
So, what does this MOU involve? I am working from the closest draft of the MOU publicly available, which I believe is fundamentally accurate.
Item 1. Upon the signing of the MOU there is an immediate and permanent end to the war, and that specifically includes Lebanon.
This doesn't even make any sense. There are 60-days (or more) to negotiate a deal. Therefore, before a deal is finalized, we just declared a cessation of military action -- permanently. And we committed to not even threatening force. Why would we agree to immediately drop the most important leverage we have over the regime in advance of it complying with MOU requirements and whatever else is decided in 60-days?
On top of this, we do the unthinkable. We capitulate to Iran's demand to protect Hezbollah. As I explained earlier: Hezbollah, which has brutally murdered hundreds of our fellow citizens, is essentially protected by our government in alliance with the Iranian regime, and free to continue to kill Americans, Israelis, and others as the most potent terror weapon of the Iranian regime not only survives but is immunized. And since Israel is the only country that actually fights this enemy with its soldiers and airmen, and whose citizens are in the direct line of fire from missile and drone attacks, nobody in their right mind will tolerate this. No amount of berating our ally or pressuring the PM, which is shocking, changes anything. I want to underscore Hezbollah has killed our people and we've done next to nothing to deal with it. In and of itself, that is shameful. Israel must not and will not adhere to such an egregious capitulation.
Item 2. We refrain from interfering in Iran's sovereignty and they will not interfere with ours. Who believes Iran won't interfere with our internal affairs. We spend tens of billions on counterterrorism against, among others, Iran. Does anyone believe Iran will drop out of its axis with China, Russia, and North Korea? And how do we enforce any deal against these other countries. And if we catch them, then what?
Item 4. We lift the naval blockade 30-days after the MOU, rather than after final negotiations for a deal. That removes another major leverage we have over the regime. And we agree to remove our forces around that area within 30-days after the final agreement. We can always send our forces back, they say. But in all likelihood, we would not.
Item 6. Incredibly, we commit to helping create a comprehensive plan for the rehabilitation and economic development of Iran, while ensuring financing of at least $300 billion. We are told it will not involve any of our tax money. That's a shiny object. Who would have dreamt that after we went to war with this regime because it was within days of having a nuclear weapon, that we would have any role in helping coordinate or raise one dime for this regime. The VP says they don't a dime if they don't meet certain conditions. That's not what it says. Moreover, let's say they meet all conditions, receive the billions, and then tell us to go to hell. And who among us believe any of this money will go to assisting or improving the lives of the Iranian people, who have no rights and are slaughtered by the tens of thousands? In fact, as I write this, they're executing innocent young people. Honestly, this is too absurd to comprehend. It was clearly proposed in lieu of the regime's demand for reparations, which should have been dismissed out of hand.
Regardless of how this slush fund is collected or distributed, here we are committing to helping reconstruct the terror regime we presumably just destroyed. Besides, I thought we hit military structures and targets, not civilian locations.
Item 7. Get this -- we commit, as a nation, to not only lifting all sanctions we have on the regime, but we commit to helping lift all other sanctions, including by the UN, the IAEA, and all other primary and secondary sanctions, on Iran. So, we are now working in the service of the regime with other countries and before international organizations in this regard.
Item 8. "[Iran] reiterates that it will never produce nuclear weapons." We "have agreed that the fate of enriched material and the fate of all other mutually agreed nuclear-related issues, including Iran's nuclear needs, will be ..." dealt with in the final issue. Shouldn't this issue have been the first item on this list? That said, this actually says nothing. All the relief and other commitments, some which is immediate or in 30-days, comes before any serious effort to lay out with details and specifics the manner in which nuclear program will be permanently ended and enriched uranium will be destroyed? Now they're talking about degrading the uranium? This was supposed to be the core of everything. At best, it does not go beyond broad slogans.
Item 9. We agree not to strengthen our forces in the region pending a final agreement, and we agree not to impose any new sanctions on Iran -- thereby surrendering yet more leverage over the regime.
Item 10. As I go through the points, I just keep shaking my head. Here, with the signing of the MOU, we agree to immediately issue waivers of exports of Iranian crude oil, petro products, all related services, banking, insurance, transportation, and the like. In other words, the Iranian regime is back in business -- immediately. Before any final deal. Billions and billions will now flow into the regime.
Item 11. In addition, "frozen or restricted funds and assets of [Iran] will be released and made fully available. ... " Again, billions more will be flowing into the regime -- immediately.
What is not in this arrangement:
1. Not a word about ballistic missiles, the single most destructive weapon Iran has and has used, and which have the capability of killing tens of thousands and destroying cities if launched in a wave. This is a grave capitulation to the regime.
2. Not a word about promoting and funding terrorism and terror groups. I've no illusions the regime's terrorism and terror-funding will not be curtailed under any circumstances.
3. Not a word about the Iranian people, who we promised to help at the outset. Apparently, they've been abandoned.
4. Not a word about the regime paying reparations to our country, Israel, or the Arab countries for the massive damage cause by their ballistic missiles and other missiles.
AGAIN, DURING THE NEXT 60-DAYS THIS MOU REQUIRES SERIOUS CHANGES IF NOT OUTRIGHT ABANDONMENT.
MORE THOUGHTS LATER
Mark R. Levin@marklevinshow
WHAT TO THINK OF THE MOU AND MORE ... I start from the proposition that this is among the worst places to have a reasoned and substantive discussion. It is one of the most uncivil places in our civil society. Not because of the platform itself, but because unbridled freedom, without some basic guiderails, attracts the good, the bad, and the ugly from all corners of the world, where the bad and the ugly are able to predominate. It's a form of hit-and-run anarchy. It's more French Revolution than American Revolution. From a governing perspective, that is why our Framers established a republic and not a pure democracy. Therefore, when it comes to discussing the MOU, there are some very good and thoughtful posts, including some I disagree with, but too much that has little to do with the substance of the MOU. I do not confuse legitimate criticism, even strongly worded criticism, with some of the vile bigotry and disinformation campaigns here, of which there is way too much. And the comment sections on many posts are of a kind that are truly hideous, and not all of it is from foreign bots. It is what it is. Further prefacing my thoughts on the MOU, I understand that the Democrat Party media and Democrat politicians, like the Woke Right and others, are less interested in the substance of the MOU and legitimate engagement than uninhibited political exploitation, opportunism, and ambition. The intent by some of these actors is to squelch open debate not promote it. As a practical matter, others undoubtedly feel somewhat hemmed in by concerns over friendships, alliances, social circumstances, connections in the administration, etc. Again, it is what it is. Understanding all of this, I urge those with serious and substantive opinions to keep at it. Don't be intimidated by any of it. I want to address some of the basics about the MOU from my perspective. I'll do so in parts, given the nature of the platform: 1. The roll out was unhelpful. I am not sure why the MOU was not released when signed, with the appropriate level of explanation and engagement with the public, but the result was too much debate about the debate and admonishment of those commenting on available public information, including from legitimate media sources and administration leaks, not to mention the vice president's ubiquitous public appearances. As it turns out, much of what was discussed by serious people was fairly accurate. And since the MOU would eventually be released anyway, it was a mistake to start with the bravado before its release. 2. I start from the premise that there is a stubborn disinterest, by too many officials and media commentators, in truly understanding the nature of this enemy, its political-theocratic ideology, its history of negotiating techniques and objectives, and decades of manipulation of Western leaders and diplomats, which has infected every diplomatic engagement and outcome with it, in small ways and large, for nearly half a century. There is an abundance of publicly available information, including books, essays, speeches, and the like, explaining in detail the cause, revolution, and mindset of this enemy -- produced and circulated by the enemy itself as well as those who have studied its behavior in earnest. The enemy repeatedly defines itself. But beyond the usual sloganeering in the media about how bad the enemy is, I hear few explanations to the public with any depth. I draw at least three conclusions from this (I'm sure more will come to mind as the day goes on): a) too few understand precisely what we are dealing with, and that is/was by choice; b) it is thought to be, or may well be, too difficult politically to, in the end, effectively tackle what is an existential threat once it is fully understood; c). few of those who do see clearly what is ahead understand what Winston Churchill meant by his wilderness years and choose to avoid it. This goes to a bigger issue of much greater concern: Do we, as a people, have the will to destroy an enemy that exists to annihilate us and do our politicians and diplomats simply reflect this. Polling suggests we do not and most of our ruling class lives and dies by polling. 3. Before commenting directly on the MOU, context here is critical. When President Trump decided to go to war with the Iranian regime, it was a courageous decision by every measure. He has known and made clear for decades that Iran poses a grave threat to our country and criticized the failure of presidents to deal with it. Indeed, I first met President Trump in September 2015 at a rally of the Tea Party Patriots on the steps of the Capitol Building. Several of us spoke that day to a crowd of many thousands against the Obama nuclear deal and urged Congress to defeat it. The most eloquent and inspiring speech was delivered by Donald Trump. He made the moral and national security case for defeating the Iranian regime and against Obama's sellout. He knew intuitively and by watching what the Iranian regime was doing and had done that it must be denied nuclear weapons no matter the cost. Despite the knowingly false allegations of very evil propagandists, the president has never wavered from this position and was not convinced or pulled dragging and kicking by Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, or "the Jews" to fight this war. MORE TO COME ...
English
FreeSoul retweetet
FreeSoul retweetet
Congrats America! We are now the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism -- specifically, of terrorists and states pledged to our destruction.
Adam Kredo@Kredo0
Notably, Iran decides how they use unfrozen funds: "Such funds, whether retained in the original account or transferred, shall be made fully usable for payment to any ultimate beneficiary designated by the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States of America undertakes to issue all necessary licenses and authorizations accordingly"
English
QAM
FreeSoul retweetet
Dear America,
This murderous S.O.B. Ghalibaf who Vance wants to sign a "deal with" was one of leaders of the mullah regime's leaders who claimed he was proud to slaughter 40K+ innocent Iranian protestors in January.
There's nothing nice, smart or not radical about this clown!
English
FreeSoul retweetet
Do you feel no shame acting 180 degrees against your own words?
@realDonaldTrump
#BloodyDeal
English
FreeSoul retweetet
Reporter embarrasses Donald Trump by quoting Donald Trump!
English
FreeSoul retweetet
Gowdy: I read this MOU about 48 hours ago and I didn't believe it. I thought somebody was spoofing me when I saw it.
English
FreeSoul retweetet
FreeSoul retweetet
Why shouldn’t the regime get ballistic missiles? Listen to Rubio.
English
FreeSoul retweetet
The deal is public now.
One sentence says it all:
“America First” just became “Ayatollahs First.”
English
FreeSoul retweetet
FreeSoul retweetet
No terrorists should have ballistic missiles. Except the ones Trump likes.
English
FreeSoul retweetet
@JDVance We're not naive as to think that you give a shit about the Iranian ppl being murdered and raped by the same regime you're appeasing.
But know this...The Islamic Republic will build up its strength and come after U.S. and its allies (if you'd have any left).
English
FreeSoul retweetet
Trump completely capitulated to the Iranians.
I did not have a big enough imagination to believe we would sign a deal respecting theocratic dictatorship and then giving those killers billions and billions to strengthen their autocratic repression.
English
FreeSoul retweetet
برای #پرستو_احمدی به خاطر کنسرت «کاروانسرا» ۷۴ ضربه شلاق بریدند
-۷۴ ضربه شلاق به تن هنر و زیبایی و زندگی؛ همه چیزهایی که ج ا باهاش بیگانه است
فارسی
FreeSoul retweetet
