Epstein Secrets

ul, we can't be sure that Israeli prime minister Bibi Netanyahu was right to dismiss the powwow as a "

sides, and also there will be a time limit. [Asharq Al-Awsat] But rather than doing this, the PA has addressed a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Binjamin Netanyahu. Have you seen it? [Quray] Not at all, I heard about it the same as you have. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Are you in favor of sending it? [Quray] God willin

it the same as you have. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Are you in favor of sending it? [Quray] God willing, it will lead to a result. Our stance is known, and Netanyahu's stance has become known. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Netanyahu has said that he will reply with a letter. In your opinion, will this lead to negotiations t

anium enrichment to 20 percent purity, which is near bomb-grade; (2) ship abroad the entire stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium; (3) close the Fordow enrichment facility, which is buried under a mountain near the clerical city of Qom; (4) allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agen

est.org/profile/thomas-saether> EFTA_R1_01401465 EFTA02384038 October 21, 2013 -- In the UN General Assembly on October 1, Israeli prime =inister Benjamin Netanyahu described Iran's strategy as to retain "suffi=ient nuclear material and sufficient nuclear infrastructure to race to the=bomb at a time it chooses

bly on October 1, Israeli prime =inister Benjamin Netanyahu described Iran's strategy as to retain "suffi=ie

military inte=vention seems probable. In particular, a negotiated agreement where Iran i= required to suspend its enrichment activity in Natanz and Fordow might be.acceptable for the regime as long as the construction of the heavy water r=actor in Arak is allowed to continue. An agreement of this kind

r would be quite large. If a military operation would leave the Arak =eactor intact and only focus on the three other critical facilities in Nat=nz, Fordow and Isfahan, Iran could use the reactor for producing material =or a nuclear bomb in the aftermath of the attack. In practice, this means =hat if a

Benjamin Netanyahu's consideration of a military strike. Despite this internal Israeli split, Republican candidate Mitt Romney has strongly endorsed Netanyahu and chided President Obama for taking an independent U.S. position, saying at a campaign rally Monday: "The president throwing Bibi Netanyahu unde

y endorsed Netanyahu and chided President Obama for taking an independent U.S. position, saying at a campaign rally Monday: "The president throwing Bibi Netanyahu under the bus was totally unacceptable. Him negotiating for Israel, our friend, totally unacceptable, in my view." Here's the situation

nging markets? Don't be -- at least not yet. Think 2013. If Israel can't get assurances that the U.S. is prepared to use force, then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak will act later this year or early next. But for now, there will be no war and certainly no deal over the nuclear i

tiated outcome is far more desirable, and then state that any acceptable negotiated deal must require immediate closing the underground facility at Fordow, freezing of all enrichment above five percent and exporting of all of Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched above that level, and imposing intrusiv

en more likely. Because of such risks, many leaders of Israel's national-security establishment, past and present, appear to oppose Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's consideration of a military strike. Despite this internal Israeli split, Republican candidate Mitt Romney has strongly endorsed Netanyahu and chi

enjamin Netanyahu's consideration of a military strike. Despite this internal Israeli split, Republican candidate Mitt Romney has strongly endorsed Netanyahu and chided President Obama for taking an independent U.S. position, saying at a campaign rally Monday: "The president throwing Bibi Netanyahu unde

a campaign rally Monday: "The president throwing Bibi Netanyahu under the bus was totally unacceptable.

tiated outcome is far more desirable, and then state that any acceptable negotiated deal must require immediate closing the underground facility at Fordow, freezing of all enrichment above five percent and exporting of all of Iran's stockpile of uranium enriched above that level, and imposing intrusi

gainst it. The third fact — and this one is hard for many to swallow — is that neither a negotiated settlement nor the air strikes long favoured by Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, can offer the rest of the world a watertight insurance policy. It should be possible to construct a deal that acts as a p

statements from those involved in the talks (Iran and the P5+1) indicating that the obstacles to an interim accord are being overcome have incensed Netanyahu. And he has made his displeasure known—publicly and without pulling punches—even though the first-step agreement with Iran couldn't be reached in t

, which consists of many facilities, widely dispersed and well protected. The most critical one, nestled deep underground within a mountain, is the Fordow site, and its -three thousand-plus centrifuges have enabled Iran to spin out enriched uranium from uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) to a level of 19.

00719596 Three decades later, eerily similar arguments can be heard regarding the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. Last May, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahutold a joint session of the U.S. Congress that "the hinge of history may soon turn, for the greatest danger of all could soon be upon us: a militant Isl

politics, a deepening nuclear showdown and the often-fraught relationship between the president and the Israeli prime minister. Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu will both speak to the group, known as Aipac, as will the three leading Republican presidential candidates, who will appear via satellite from the

would then have to circumvent Iranian air defenses and drop hundreds of precision-guided munitions on the hardened Natanz enrichment facility, the Fordow enrichment site deep in a mountain near Q(n, the Isfahan uranium-conversion facility, the heavy-water production plant and plutonium reactor under

ons with the unfreezing of certain Iranian assets held in Western banks. This would cause an uproar among hardliners -- the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, would certainly be unhappy -- but the White House could state, truthfully, that it has not tampered with the sanctions. A one-time transfer of cas

n nuclear apparatus -- 15 or 20 or 30 different facilities, spread throughout the country -- would make it much harder for Obama (to say nothing of Netanyahu) to credibly threaten military force. It is the all-options-are-on-the-table threat that, with sanctions, is bringing Iran to the table. Al Jazeer

of an Iranian commitment to dismantle its nuclear program. Tehran would stop enrichment at all levels—even for nonmilitary purposes. It would close Fordow, its underground enrichment facility, and the Arak reactor, which is capable of producing plutonium for a bomb. Iran would also have to ship out it

people." Three decades later, eerily similar arguments can be heard regarding the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. Last May, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahutold a joint session of the U.S. Congress that "the hinge of history may soon turn, for the greatest danger of all could soon be upon us: a militant Isl

politics, a deepening nuclear showdown and the often-fraught relationship between the president and the Israeli prime minister. Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu will both speak to the group, known as Aipac, as will the three leading Republican presidential candidates, who will appear via satellite from the

would then have to circumvent Iranian air defenses and drop hundreds of precision-guided munitions on the hardened Natanz enrichment facility, the Fordow enrichment site deep in a mountain near Qom, the Isfahan uranium- conversion facility, the heavy-water production plant and plutonium reactor under

as been able to gradually squeeze the Iranian economy. By insisting that "containment" is not an option, Obama has persuaded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he need not launch an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities -- at least not any time soon. Obama has done everything right, and yet his Iran pol

ma has persuaded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he need not launch an attack on Iran's nucl

weapons-grade material -- transfer its existing stock of such fuel to a third country, and shut down one of its two enrichment facilities, known as Fordow. In exchange, the parties will help Iran produce such fuel for medical purposes, which the regime claims is its actual goal. Iran has refused, sayi

ama has persuaded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he need not launch an attack on Iran's nucle

o weapons-grade material -- transfer its existing stock of such fuel to a third country, and shut down one of its two enrichment facilities, known as Fordow. In exchange, the parties will help Iran produce such fuel for medical purposes, which the regime claims is its actual goal. Iran has refused, saying