Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif warned Monday that Tehran is “completely ready” to restart its nuclear program if the US fails to live up to its commitments under the July 2015 nuclear deal.
“If [the] US creates a situation that continuation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action would damage Tehran’s national interest, then Iran is completely ready to come back to the situation it had prior to the JCPOA even more powerfully than before,” Zarif was quoted by Iranian state media as saying.
The foreign minister spoke to reporters in Isfahan in central Iran.
On the campaign trail during last year’s election, US President Donald Trump and many Republican lawmakers vowed to gut the deal once in office. But since the election, the Trump administration has signaled a gentler approach, though it has not provided details of its new policy.
Earlier this month, IAEA chief Yukiya Amano said “the new administration of the United States just started and they are looking at this issue,” but “it is very early for them to give their assessment.”
“During the past couple of months, with the efforts made by skilled Iranian scientists and experts, we have succeeded [in making] operational the most advanced centrifuges, that were just an idea at the time of approving the JCPOA,” Zarif is quoted as saying.
The Mehr News Agency quoted him saying the new centrifuges “would enrich uranium 20 times faster and more efficiently,” and that “the technical know-how has now been indigenized.”
US Navy commanders are claiming Iranian forces “harassed" American warships as they passed through the Strait of Hormuz. The claims come as tensions are on the rise between the two countries.
The incident occurred on Tuesday as a US-led, five-vessel flotilla, which included the aircraft carrier ‘USS George H.W. Bush’, passed through the waters on its way to the Arabian Gulf.
According to the commanders, the flotilla was approached by two sets of Iranian Navy fast-attack boats, some of which came as close as 870 meters (950 yards) from the aircraft carrier.
"What I don't like about that is they (Iranian boats) were in the middle of international transit waters (while) we had a right to be there as we were exercising freedom of navigation on our way into the Arabian Gulf," Rear Admiral Kenneth Whitesell, commander of the Carrier Strike Group 2, told journalists aboard the aircraft carrier, as quoted by Reuters.
"They also had weapons uncovered as some of the cameras were able to tell. They had some of the weapons manned. We also have aerial data that they were arming all of these weapons."
The EU 27 leaders recommitted their vows to European integration in Rome on Saturday (25 March) amid warnings that the bloc's unity remains fragile.
The heads of state and government met in the same Renaissance-era palace where the six founding countries signed the Treaty of Rome on 25 March, 1957, to establish the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom).
The treaty is now officially celebrated as the birth of today's EU.
The mood was downbeat, as the EU's 60th anniversary was celebrated just four days before the UK notifies its withdrawal request, the first member ever to leave the union.
The symbolism of EU leaders gathering among the ruins of the ancient Roman empire could not be more telling, as the union struggles to renew itself in the face of rising populism, nationalism, the shock of Brexit, the US’s increasingly unpredictable policy, and renewed Russian threats.
The celebrations concentrated on reminders of the EU’s main achievement of securing peace and prosperity for 60 years after the destruction of the Second World War.
Leaders signed a declaration that is designed to set out the path for European integration in the next 10 years.
In the so-called Rome declaration, EU leaders claim that "Europe is our common future”. They stress unity, which they say is the only way for the EU to be able drive "global dynamics”.
The Rome Declarations’s wording has been the centre of contention, with Poland and Greece making last minute objections, highlighting the deep divisions that marred the anniversary.
It remains to be seen if the Rome summit can give a boost to reforming and revitalising the EU that has come under fire from a rise in anti-establishment and nationalist forces across the continent.
According to reports, French far-right presidential hopeful Marine Le Pen said that she would restore border control and fight against Islamic fundamentalism if elected to curb terrorism threat in France.
French far-right presidential hopeful Marine Le Pen said that she would restore border control and fight against Islamic fundamentalism if elected to curb terrorism threat in France, in an interview with Le Parisien newspaper on Sunday.
"To begin with, I will restore our national borders. Secondly, I will deport all foreign nationals with [threat to national security] fiche S indicator, who are linked to fundamentalism, in compliance with precautionary principle. I will also fight against Islamic fundamentalism by closing salafist mosques or even by banning the Union of Islamic Organizations of France (UOIF)," Le Pen said answering the question on how she was going to prevent terrorist attacks in France.
France has repeatedly been targeted by terrorists. On March 18, a French national Ziyed Ben Belgacem attacked police in the northern Paris suburb of Garges-les-Gonesse and later arrived at the Paris Orly Airport where he tried to grab a female soldier's weapon, saying he was ready to die for Allah.
Le Pen is known for harsh rhetoric toward French immigration policy. According to recent polls, she is likely to make the second round of French presidential election together with independent candidate Emmanuel Macron, but unlikely to win against him.
The first round of the French presidential election is scheduled for April 23, while the run-off between the top two contenders will take place on May 7.
As the EU leaders discussed the future of the bloc at the summit in Rome, it becomes increasingly apparent that the union needs to undergo significant changes in order to become a place of “peace and dignity” and to avoid “chaos and disintegration.”
On March 25, leaders of 27 EU member states signed the Rome Declaration on the challenges and priorities of the post-Brexit European Union. This document became the main highlight of the Rome Summit, held on the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome which laid the foundations of the European Union back in 1957.
The participants of the summit also discussed the possible scenarios of further European integration presented by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.
The concepts presented during the meeting basically come down to five options: maintaining the current status quo; maintaining the single market only; the multi-speed Europe; a less extensive but more effective cooperation; and federalization.
The concepts presented during the meeting basically come down to five options: maintaining the current status quo; maintaining the single market only; the multi-speed Europe; a less extensive but more effective cooperation; and federalization.
Lubos Blaha, Slovak political scientist and MP for the left-wing Direction – Social Democracy (Smer-SD) party, told Sputnik that the first three scenarios are extremely unlikely to succeed, with only the latter two warranting closer examination.
"The fifth scenario, which implies federalization, isn’t very attractive for the majority of Europeans, and not particularly realistic. Federation should be created when the countries are economically equal, not when federalization serves merely as a pretext for colonization. And during the last few years this model suffered a number of setbacks in the form of the Greek, Ukrainian and migrant crises," Blaha said.
Therefore, he continued, it is the fourth scenario that looks the most viable out of all the options presented at the summit.
"It offers a greater European influence in areas where it could make all nations stronger, like in the social and economic spheres where only together we can oppose the neoliberal globalization. And greater national autonomy should be retained in areas like migration, foreign policy and culture. At this point this scenario looks like the only viable option," Blaha explained.
Ban all the things, and when we all live in padded prison cells, we will be safe from terrorists!
That is the plan. Because access to information is really the problem, according to the British government. As soon as people don’t have access to extremist material online, all this madness will surely stop!
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “The fight against terrorism and hate speech has to be a joint one. The government and security services are doing everything they can and it is clear that social media companies can and must do more.
“Social media companies have a responsibility when it comes to making sure this material is not disseminated and we have been clear repeatedly that we think that they can and must do more. We are always talking with them on how to achieve that.
“The ball is now in their court. We will see how they respond.”
How laughable that the government claims to be doing everything they can. We all know that is not true.
But even more ridiculous is attempting to put all the blame on websites that host content. With massive amount of content on Youtube, how can they be expected to police every single video? They already review 98% of flagged content within 24 hours, and also within 24 hours they usually remove content that the government asks them to take down.
It sounds like Youtube is already on board with government censorship, but the British authorities want to go further. What we need is new laws, new fines, and punishment for companies who host extremist content, they say.
Damian Collins, who heads the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, said bosses should face a new offence of failing to act to remove terrorist videos and manuals from their sites.
He was backed by former terror tsar Lord Alex Carlile who said: “We need to reinforce the attack on internet radicalisation.
If a new law is necessary to compel internet service providers to co-operate with these efforts, it must be made.”
And what about failing to remove terrorists from the country? Should governmentofficials face a new offence for that crime?
It’s not like these terrorists are carrying out precision attacks which require training and special knowledge. They are driving cars through crowds of people. They are opening fire in public.
Videos surely can lead to extremism. The government should know, they run the media which leads to widespread support of bombing the hell out of anything that moves in the middle east. While handfuls of westerners were killed in terror attacks, hundreds of innocent Iraqis were bombed to death by America.
So governments can literally fund all the terrorism they want, but if Youtube allows a video promoting terrorism to remain on their sharing platform, they are the ones causing the extremism that leaks violently back into the west.
As governments cry about the splinter in their neighbor’s eye–how advertisements were shown next to extremist videos, saying that Youtube was profiting off of extremism–they are blind to the log in their own.
Oh and how convenient that when governments are able to force Youtube to take down extremist content online, they may just have given themselves the power to regulate any free speech on the internet, whether it is truly extremist or not.
And that is what this all comes down to. The government wants control over the internet, control over what we say, and how we communicate.
The terrorists which the government supports and creates will be the excuse for government censorship and oppression of citizens under their control.
And that is why the government needs to make social media platforms the enemy. It both distracts from the government’s own role in supporting terrorism, and gives them more power to police any opposition on social media to their oppressive rule.
The people are creating their own media, and it is cutting into the government’s propaganda business.
It’s always the same: right now they will use their power of censorship against “the terrorists,” and then they will use the hammer of the law against anyone who speaks out against their murderous, oppressive policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment