SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/24/obama-iran-nuclear-deal-prisoner-release-236966
When President Barack Obama announced the "one-time gesture" of releasing Iranian-born prisoners who "were not charged with terrorism or any violent offenses" last year, his administration presented the move as a modest trade-off for the greater good of the Iran nuclear agreement and Tehran's pledge to free five Americans.
[...] But Obama, the senior official and other administration representatives weren't telling the whole story on Jan. 17, 2016, in their highly choreographed rollout of the prisoner swap and simultaneous implementation of the six-party nuclear deal, according to a POLITICO investigation.
[...] The biggest fish, though, was Seyed Abolfazl Shahab Jamili, who had been charged with being part of a conspiracy that from 2005 to 2012 procured thousands of parts with nuclear applications for Iran via China. That included hundreds of U.S.-made sensors for the uranium enrichment centrifuges in Iran whose progress had prompted the nuclear deal talks in the first place.
When federal prosecutors and agents learned the true extent of the releases, many were shocked and angry. [...] Through action in some cases and inaction in others, the White House derailed its own much-touted National Counterproliferation Initiative at a time when it was making unprecedented headway in thwarting Iran's proliferation networks. In addition, the POLITICO investigation found that Justice and State Department officials denied or delayed requests from prosecutors and agents to lure some key Iranian fugitives to friendly countries so they could be arrested. Similarly, Justice and State, at times in consultation with the White House, slowed down efforts to extradite some suspects already in custody overseas, according to current and former officials and others involved in the counterproliferation effort.
And as far back as the fall of 2014, Obama administration officials began slow-walking some significant investigations and prosecutions of Iranian procurement networks operating in the U.S. These previously undisclosed findings are based on interviews with key participants at all levels of government and an extensive review of court records and other documents. "Clearly, there was an embargo on any Iranian cases," according to the former federal supervisor. "Of course it pissed people off, but it's more significant that these guys were freed, and that people were killed because of the actions of one of them," the supervisor added, in reference to [Amin] Ravan and the IED network.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 25 2017, @03:34PM (10 children)
A: You make it wildly profitable for them not to bomb you.
Profitable interaction is the only way to bring peace to this world.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday April 25 2017, @03:57PM
But if you make it too profitable, they'll engage in leisure bombings. Like bin Laden.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday April 25 2017, @04:42PM
Not if the profit is at your expense, you don't. Paying someone not to threaten you is no way to go through life or to run a nation.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Lester on Tuesday April 25 2017, @06:23PM
A: Being stronger than they. Or at least strong enough to deter them from bombing you.
That is why North Corea and Iran want nukes, to deter USA from bombing them. And that is why USA don't want them to have nukes, so USA can bomb them whenever USA's geostrategic agenda demands it, or just because USA's administration wants to divert attention from any domestic issue (like president caught with a intern [wikipedia.org]).
They will not bomb anybody (let alone bomb USA) the retaliation would be terrible for them. They have a strong instinct of survival and nuking anyone would be a political suicide, and probably a physical suicide as well. Think of it, USA and USSR have been without nuking one each other for years. Pakistan and India also.
Nukes are here to stay. We must live with it. It is a danger, but the knowledge is out there. The policy of "I'm entitled to have the bomb, but you aren't" can be maintained only by force, and even in that case you won't get many allies. Most countries only approved sanctions against Iran because of USA's pressure, the truth is that most countries were more interested in trading with Iran than in Iran's nuclear power.
(Score: 1, Troll) by KiloByte on Tuesday April 25 2017, @06:59PM (6 children)
Profitable interaction is the only way to bring peace to this world.
You're assuming they're thinking rationally. You're forgetting that their holy book commands them to murder all of us, with any truce allowed being strictly temporary.
Unlike the Bible which is not possible to follow without a massive deal of cherry-picking and doublethink, with contradictions even within the same chapter, the Koran is remarkably consistent. Thus, it is drastically harder for a honest person to ignore its demands if they worship it in the first place.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by linkdude64 on Wednesday April 26 2017, @01:16AM (5 children)
As a blasphemer of abolutely everything, I laugh at how Jesus and Mohammed are equated because they are simply "religious figureheads."
Nobody realizes that in the Bible, Jesus does not kill anyone, because they have not read it. Even the fucking Christians (who defend Muslims) do not know what is in their books.
Nobody realizes that in the fucking Koran, Mohammed has a child wife (who is herself a warlord) and that Mohammed himself is an extremely fucking violent person. Even the fucking Muslims (who defend themselves) do not know what is in their books.
Or, the more likely case is that they are lying. Taquiyya (sp?) is "not practiced in all sects" they say, but fail to acknowledge that ISIS has explicitly stated that they intend to re-create Mohammed's crusade against the pagans in the middle east, which is why they destroyed all of those priceless historic artifacts in the surrounding areas.
It is just hysterical.
(Score: 2) by infodragon on Wednesday April 26 2017, @11:54AM (4 children)
In the same line the only people, group of people, Jesus had anything "negative" to say about were the religious leaders at the time. Not all of them but every time Jesus is "coming down" on someone are the religious leaders. He even called them vipers, which is quite a descriptive analogy. A viper stays coiled, not moving and unnoticed until an opportune moment in which it strikes out leaving whomever poisoned. Take for instance the prostitute brought before him by the religious leaders. They stated she should be stoned because she was caught in the act; After making the statement "He who has not sinned cast the first stone," Jesus began writing in the dirt with his finger. It's not clear what he wrote but they all left but the prostitute. He sends her on her way with the admonition not to sin anymore.
The only time Jesus got violent was with the money changers at the temple. They had imposed a temple currency which had to be bought before an animal for sacrifice could be bought. They were manipulating the currency and effectively stealing from those coming to worship. However nobody died and it's clear from the bible that there was only property damage. They had turned his Father's house of worship into a den of thieves.
Compare that to most modern Christians who so quickly condemn the "flavor of the month" sin. Christ never did this publicly except for the religious leaders. Even though "Christianity" as a whole, nor in any significant part, is at war; they are still guilty of the same type of behavior; the only difference is the Christians who engage in this are not killing (except a minor few and it's not organized and consistently condemned by every Christian denomination.)
I'll leave you with this... Jesus said "Strait is the way and narrow is the gate; few there be that find it!" The Greek for few is a very tiny percentage. Jesus himself stated that most who call them selves Christian are not Christian. Later it's said "We will know them by their fruit." The results of peoples actions allow us to know, but we should NOT JUDGE!
Don't settle for shampoo, demand real poo!
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Wednesday April 26 2017, @09:54PM (3 children)
"The results of peoples actions allow us to know, but we should NOT JUDGE!"
I understand your desire to have sympathy for murderers, but how many Christian truck/gun/knife/IED attacks have you heard of recently? A grand total of zero.
You can stand by while innocents are killed, and believe yourself virtuous for not passing judgement on the murderers. Presuming you are a beliver, your god will sort everyone out in the end - the unprovoked murderers, the defenders of the innocent, and the bystanders who said and did nothing to prevent evil.
(Score: 2) by infodragon on Thursday April 27 2017, @12:23PM (1 child)
I didn't clarify. The following is still very limited as I don't have the time to go into further detail.
Judgement in the context above is passing sentence in spiritual matters. A lot of meaning is lost in translation from Greek to English.
When Christ said "Judge not lest ye be judged" he was referring to a human judging spiritual consequences for another's sin. We are not to judge matters of spiritual consequence.
I have no problem judging the acts of a murder and condemning them to prison or death; if that's my responsibility (it is not, however I will turn them over to the authorities. In imminent threat I have no moral qualms about stopping a murder from their despicable acts by lethal force, if necessary) However, judgement or passing sentence for his actions in regards to his spiritual final destination is out of my hands and I have no place judging that!
For example if I were to tell a person committing (insert "sin" here) that they're going to hell for their sin, I am in the wrong. However if I am telling the person that what they are doing is wrong then I'm in a moral grey zone; context is extremely important. Jesus didn't address the prostitutes adultery, he just said go and sin no more.
Hope that helps and again my apologies for not clarifying that point.
Don't settle for shampoo, demand real poo!
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Thursday April 27 2017, @09:02PM
Point well taken. Thank you for the explanation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 27 2017, @06:31PM
You can definitely kill murderers without getting all 'judgey' about it.