there are no 'secret side deals' in iran agreement

[spanone]

congress got everything

per Ambassador Wendy Sherman

U.S. state department.

so here's the shocker....REPUBLICANS ARE LYING

[geek tragedy]

1. the Harvard-educated lawyer on their side who came up with this

kinda overlooked the fact that side agreements are between the parties to the agreement.

If the US isn't party to an agreement, then it's neither a side agreement nor something of which the US would be in possession.

[randys1]

2. Of course. I have a rule, ANYTHING they EVER say I assume is a complete and total

falsehood, and if it is important enough for me to know, I research it, otherwise if they say it, it is a lie.

Or factually incorrect, sometimes they think they are telling the truth when all they are is dumb.

[spanone]

4. what's dangerous is that the media doesn't expose the truth or the lies

as chuck todd told us, it's not the media's job

[Mosby]

3. The secret side deals are with the IAEA

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/248856-white-house-acknowledges-side-deals-between-iran-iaea

[spanone]

5. White House acknowledges ‘side’ deals between Iran, IAEA

National security adviser Susan Rice on Wednesday acknowledged the existence of side agreements between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Rice said the deals involve Iran accounting for past military uses of its nuclear program, but rejected GOP assertions that this represented “secret” side deals to the Iranian nuclear agreement.

Rice said the documents between Iran and the IAEA are not public, but that the administration has been informed of their contents and will share details with members of Congress in a classified briefing on Capitol Hill.

“We’re satisfied with them and we will share the contents of those briefings in full in a classified session with the Congress,” she told reporters. “So there's nothing in that regard that we know that they won't know.”

She said it was “no secret” that Iran and the IAEA were negotiating an agreement on possible military-related nuclear activities.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/248856-white-house-acknowledges-side-deals-between-iran-iaea

[Mosby]

6. So when you say: "congress got everything"

That's not, you know, actually accurate.

[spanone]

7. the ambassador said that. this was not between the coalition & iran

this was negotiated by the IAEA and iran

[Mosby]

8. Sure, and Rice admits the side deals are secret

otherwise why would congress be getting briefed "in full in a classified session".

Why the secrecy spanone?

[geek tragedy]

9. Why are you on a progressive, Democratic website when every single thing you post

is (a) rightwing and often (b) sourced to extreme rightwing sources?

The IAEA agreements with Iran are NOT 'side deals' as they relate to the JCPOA. "Side deals" in the legal sense are separate agreements between the same parties as the primary agreement.

In this case, the US DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO VIEW THE IAEA AGREEMENTS WITH IRAN.

They are secret BECAUSE THE US GOVERNMENT ISN'T ALLOWED BY THE PARTIES TO SEE THEM.

So, only a dissembling rightwing hack would claim that the Congressional legislation required the President to turn over documents (which the US government could not legally possess) memorializing an agreement to which the United States was not a party and whose terms the United States was not legally allowed to know.

[Mosby]

12. putting aside your personal attacks for a moment

The IAEA reports to the UN security council so the U.S. most certainly has the right to view the secret agreements between Iran and the IAEA.

Rice admitted that there are "side deals" that's her terminology not mine.

Regarding your personal attacks, I'm pretty much past caring what some people think about me here. I'm a liberal Zionist Jew, don't like it tough shit.

[geek tragedy]

15. It's not a personal attack to note that everything you post is Republican horseshit

Take, for example, this steaming pile you just dropped:

The IAEA reports to the UN security council so the U.S. most certainly has the right to view the secret agreements between Iran and the IAEA.

As I noted, this is Republican horseshit that only Republicans believe.

The US has agreements with the IAEA for inspections inside the US. China and Russia do not get to see them.

DUH.

http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/251660-no-iran-is-not-allowed-to-inspect-itself

Iran is a non-nuclear weapon state party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and, consequently, it has a so-called safeguards agreement with the IAEA. That agreement commits Iran to declare all its nuclear material and activities to the IAEA. The IAEA is required to verify that Iran’s declarations are correct and complete. In doing so, it is also required to protect the confidentiality of Iran’s data about its nuclear program.

The IAEA has safeguards agreement with 180 countries. All have similar information protection provisions. Without these, governments would not open their nuclear programs for multilateral oversight. So IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano was acting by the book on August 5 when he told members of Congress that he couldn’t share with them the details of a verification protocol the IAEA had negotiated with Iran as part of a bilateral “roadmap” to address unresolved allegations about Iran’s nuclear behavior.

Like Iran, the United States has a safeguards agreement with the IAEA. Were lawmakers from Iran’s Majlis to ask the IAEA to see documents concerning its negotiations with the United States, members of Congress would presumably be pleased to hear that Amano’s answer would also be no. Of course, Iran may choose to share its information with other parties and, in this case, Iran provided details of the roadmap to negotiators from the U.S. Department of State. Congress may not be happy that it is not in the loop, but it is not up to the IAEA to decide whether to share information about where and how its personnel do their work in Iran.

The entire argument you and your fellow travelers in the Republican party are advancing is born of (a) a willingness to believe whatever the rightwing noise machine belches out and (b) a complete ignorance and unfamiliarity of how the IAEA operates.

[Mosby]

16. I post all kinds of stuff here, saying that all I post is "republican horseshit" is simply not true.

I should probably not admit this but I find accusations like this very hurtful.

I think for myself, always have and I'm not going to apologize for it.

Back to the topic:

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is an international organization that seeks to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and to inhibit its use for any military purpose, including nuclear weapons. The IAEA was established as an autonomous organization on 29 July 1957. Though established independently of the United Nations through its own international treaty, the IAEA Statute,[1] the IAEA reports to both the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Energy_Agency

[geek tragedy]

17. No one is disputing that the IAEA is a UN body that reports to the UN Security Council.

The problem is that from there you pulled an incredibly absurd argument out of your ass, namely that members of the Security Council get to review every piece of information the IAEA possesses.

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/iaea-director-general-yukiya-amano%E2%80%99s-statement-media-after-meeting-us-senators-iran

Good afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen.

I am pleased I had this opportunity to talk with members of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations about the IAEA’s important role in monitoring and verifying nuclear-related measures under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

We also discussed the separate Road-map to resolve past issues which the Agency and Iran agreed on 14 July.

I received many questions.

I was asked about the separate arrangements to the Road-map. I explained that my legal obligation is to protect safeguards confidentiality and this is an essential element of the international safeguards regime.

Agreements are not confidential if China, Russia, the UK, France, the United States, Angola, Chad, Chile, Jordan, Lithuania, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Spain and Venezuela all get to see their full contents.

Are you ready to abandon your idiotic argument now?

P.S. If you want people to not think you're a wingnut, stop talking like a wingnut.

[Mosby]

19. you're the one trying desperately to defend secrecy.

That doesn't sound very progressive to me but by all means carry on.

Me I'm all for transparency.

[geek tragedy]

22. "that doesn't sound very progressive to me."

That's because you have no understanding what progressives/liberals actually believe or how we think. All you have is your imagination.

Here is a fact:

The IAEA inspects nuclear facilities.

NUCLEAR FACILITIES.

Without confidentiality, there would be no IAEA inspections and safeguard program. Because no one would expose every detail of their nuclear facilities to the public, which would include hostile powers and terrorists.

Your glib, uninformed snark about transparency and secrecy is not an adequate substitute for understanding the policy issues.

The chair of the IAEA won a Nobel Prize for his efforts. He has ten quadrillion times the credibility you all in the Netanyahu/Cheney camp have.

When he says he needs to respect the confidentiality agreements his agency has with 180 different nations there's a very good reason for it.

Now, do you have anything else besides idiotic arguments in defense of this week's rightwing talking point?

[geek tragedy]

24. P.S. The House of Representatives just voted on this issue.

NOT A SINGLE DEMOCRAT VOTED IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT YOU'RE POSTING HERE.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll492.xml

Even the Democrats who oppose the deal voted to reject the horseshit you and the Republicans are peddling.

You are not fooling anyone here.

[Mosby]

25. so every republican and democrat in the house voted party line

What a shock.

Because I'm that kind of guy, I will concede that the IAEA can keep it's agreements secret, I was not aware of that.

[geek tragedy]

29. And you, as usual, are taking the Republican

side of the argument.

Give it up already. Not fooling anyone.

[Mosby]

31. You are wrong

I do not take the republican side of things.

I think for myself.

[geek tragedy]

33. Yes, and you think like a Republican nt

[Mosby]

35. And you agree with far right wing fascists like the Ayatollah

If Israel continues expanding settlements and the occupation, he'll be right.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1203704

And when Oberliner calls you on it what do you do?

Accuse Oberliner of thinking like Bill Kristol.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1203720

Your shtick is getting old.

[Yupster]

32. She's a witch. Burn her.

With apologies to Monty Python.

[geek tragedy]

34. People talk like Dick Cheney at their own peril nt

[spanone]

11. obviously you are not in favor of the deal. that is your perogative.

why do you favor war Mosby?

[Mosby]

13. I support the agreement but I think the p5 plus one could have done better.

[spanone]

14. i believe we need to support it. the alternatives appear disastrous.

[Cali_Democrat]

18. "I support the agreement"

[Mosby]

20. let me know when you have something substantive to say.

[geek tragedy]

23. let us know when you have something accurate and intelligent

to say about this, or something to the left of Shelly Adelson's viewpoint.

And please, the old "I support the deal but agree with everything the Republicans say about it" is really not a very persuasive line.

[karynnj]

36. They got everything the US has

What they are speaking of is that the IAEA and Iran have worked out the details - INCLUDING ALL DETAILS on facilities that will be monitored. Moniz was involved in defining the methodology for each part of the uranium infrastructure.

No country has ever made public its entire SECRET military facilities to the point needed to design the monitoring. Can you imagine WHY Iran does not want this in the public domain or shared with enemies? That is why Sherman, Moniz, and Kerry all say they were briefed on the process and know what will be monitored and how - they don't have the detailed implementation plan of this which was done by the IAEA and Iran.

Congress got everything the US and the rest of the p5 + 1 got.

[rufus dog]

10. Define "Iran Ageement"

Because the deal under Reagan was nothing but a secret deal.

I refuse to even discuss this with Republicans, just give them a curt shut the fuck up and list the Cheney dealings and Iran Contra, end with another, in all due respect, shut the fuck up.

This is one of those issues that deserves zero political discourse.

[Stellar]

21. " so here's the shocker....REPUBLICANS ARE LYING"

Republic0ns are 'Still' lying!

[DCBob]

26. I was hearing this on RW kook radio today.

I suspected it was bogus.

[roamer65]

27. The Iranians aren't helping much on this deal.

Comments like "Israel won't exist 25 years from now" do not help on getting it ratified.

[spanone]

28. they've got their wingnuts just like we do

[geek tragedy]

30. It's a done deal now. nt

[Scurrilous]

37. Hilarious Hasbara Fail Boink