Israeli Mossad Goes Rogue, Warns U.S. on Iran Sanctions

[Jefferson23]

Jan 21, 2015 7:26 PM EST
By Josh Rogin & Eli Lake

The Israeli intelligence agency Mossad has broken ranks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, telling U.S. officials and lawmakers that a new Iran sanctions bill in the U.S. Congress would tank the Iran nuclear negotiations.

Already, the Barack Obama administration and some leading Republican senators are using the Israeli internal disagreement to undermine support for the bill, authored by Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Robert Menendez, which would enact new sanctions if current negotiations falter.

Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- supported by Republican Senators Lindsay Graham and John McCain -- is pushing for his own legislation on the Iran nuclear deal, which doesn't contain sanctions but would require that the Senate vote on any pact that is agreed upon in Geneva. The White House is opposed to both the Kirk-Menendez bill and the Corker bill; it doesn't want Congress to meddle at all in the delicate multilateral diplomacy with Iran.

Iran's Nuclear Program

Israeli intelligence officials have been briefing both Obama administration officials and visiting U.S. senators about their concerns on the Kirk-Menendez bill, which would increase sanctions on Iran only if the Iranian government can't strike a deal with the so-called P5+1 countries by a June 30 deadline or fails to live up to its commitments. Meanwhile, the Israeli prime minister’s office has been supporting the Kirk-Menendez bill, as does the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, ahead of what will be a major foreign policy confrontation between the executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government in coming weeks.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-01-22/netanyahu-mossad-split-divides-u-s-congress-on-iran-sanctions

[Fred Sanders]

1. Is Israel, in cooperation with leading American politicians, directly interfering with American politics?

What WAS said in the secret weeks of negotiations between the GOP Congress representatives and the government of Israel as they both set out to breach decades of American international diplomatic protocol that applied equally to all nations as national elections approached in the guest country?
Should future invitations be at the whim of Congress or should all international protocol be abandoned as was always heretobefore handled by the State Department of the government of the United States of America, in conjunction with Congress?

Is this intentional attempted sabotage of official American negotiations with Iran?

Like Obama, I "reserve judgment" on these questions until I hear what the full text of the foreign leaders's intended address to Congress, in breach of all these protocols.

We can begin with the names of the negotiators.

[Jefferson23]

2. You forgot the sarcasm thingie. n/t

[Fred Sanders]

3. Yes, yes I did, sorry about that.

[Jefferson23]

4. hee hee..no problem.

Kidding aside, I don't think I have ever seen anything quite like this.

Menendez has lost his mind, if you ask me. Maybe Americans will recall why Obama
said what he did during his state of the union and see how sick it would be to
let this fall apart.

The hawks are out in force and citizens should start asking Democrats like Menendez what
the fuck do you think you're doing?

[Fred Sanders]

7. Menendez has not lost his mind, he is afraid of losing his wallet. But the situation has changed.

We have flame throwers with bad aim and poor rhetorical skills on our side also.

[Jefferson23]

8. Throwing Obama under the bus is what he has done, I can't get past just yet the

manner in which he did it. We'll see what develops soon enough.

[Jefferson23]

5. You added quite a bit more after I responded earlier. Their interference is on steroids.

Why would any Democrat support Bibi's ideas?? Lobby influence is not different here as it is
from Wall Street. What is different, is that Obama is not on the same page as Bibi and
AIPAC. Menendez referring to statements made by this administration sounding like they
came out of Tehran....really? Never seen anything like it.

[Fred Sanders]

6. Bibi changed the Congress address date to March 3 from February 11.

Boehner and Bibi clearly wanted an early date to torpedo nuclear talks with Iran, but the obviousness of it all was too much.

Now it is obvious the GOP is trying to boost Bibi's chances with a boost 14 days before elections.

Which means Obama simply can not meet with Bibi at all, for obvious reasons.

The layers are fascinating.

[branford]

9. Easy on the conspiracies.

Bibi requested the change of date because he was already scheduled to speak at the 2015 AIPAC Policy Conference on March 1-3.

The original February date was suggested because it was the 36th anniversary of the Iranian revolution.

[Fred Sanders]

10. I think he could have fit it in to the schedule if he wanted to. Boehner sure had the time.

Easy on the conspiracy accusations.

[branford]

11. Why would Bibi want to?

The speech before Congress is now more convenient for his schedule and closer to the Israeli elections on March 17, and the couple of week delay will have no effect on the Iranian negotiations or sanctions legislation or upset the congressional calendar.

[Fred Sanders]

12. If the calander is correct it is 19 days and you know the answer. Is it a conspiracy though?

Is it OK for Congress, any Congress, with any nation, at any time to negotiate in secret with a foreign leader against all historical protocol?

Isn't that the bigger issue?

[branford]

13. Google the issue, but you might not like the results.

You might also find the Logan Act discussion in the other related thread of interest.

You make a big deal about "protocol." However, much of the protocol you cite is not law, but unenforceable custom.

Simply, it is apparent that your issue is not really with purported "secret negotiations," but rather that such negotiations are contrary to your own personal policy positions.

[Fred Sanders]

15. Ditto. Not that there is anything wrong with personal policy positions??

[branford]

18. Although I certainly disagree with your Israel and Iran positions (among others),

I've never suggested they were not sincere or that you could or should not advocate for them.

However, complaints about breaches of protocol or secret negotiations are just masks for substantive policy disagreements.

[Fred Sanders]

20. My positions are identical to my Presidents' positions at this time. There is no space.

[geek tragedy]

16. Every non-wingnut analyst has said this was

unprecedented and a slap in the face delivered by both Boehner and Bibi.

Since you obviously do approve of this policy while cheerleading extreme rightwingers engaging in such malfeasance against President Obama, the real question is whether you're really think anyone is buying your claim that you're a Democrat.

[branford]

22. Again, you seem to define "extreme rightwingers" as those who disagree with you.

Besides the numerous pro-Israel posters on DU, you simply cannot accept that the Democratic Party itself is so pro-Israel, and that the clear majority of elected Democrats oppose your viewpoints about the region, particularly the strong bipartisan consensus in support of Iran sanctions, the subject of Bibi's invite and speech. If elected senior Democrats like Menendez, Schumer, Gillibrand, etc., are now "wignuts," I will proudly join their ranks.

Your complaints about how Boehner or Bibi insulted the president ring hollow, particularly since you actually disagree with most of Obama's pro-Israel positions. You're not worried about breaches of protocol or political hardball (e.g., Obama's action concerning immigration relief and Cuba), you're just concerned that the usual pro-Israel / anti-Iran consensus might have politically outmaneuvered or damaged the president's position about Iran, a position he has already admitted is not supported by majorities of the American people or the Democratic Party, and the reasons why he discussed it in such stark terms in the State of the Union.

You're free to question my Democratic loyalty, but here in NY, like most of the country, you're the one espousing the fringe minority Democratic positions.

[geek tragedy]

27. I don't know of any Democrats who constantly bash Obama

using RNC talking points while agitating for war with Iran.

Your sleazy attempt to suggest that agitating for war and trying to sabotage multilateral diplomatic talks as the only "pro Israel/anti-Iran" position --and thus suggesting that Obama's position is anti-Israel--pretty much tells everyone here exactly what you are.

I guess the Iraq war didn't kill enough Arabs or American servicepeople to your liking. So here you are agitating for a war with Iran. (Because willfully destroying chances of a negotiated settlement is exactly that).

Go sit between Joe Lieberman and Dick Cheney where you belong.

[geek tragedy]

14. Spin, spin, spin.

The February invitation was accepted. Did Bibi not know about the AIPAC convention when he accepted?

[Fred Sanders]

17. Like the convention date was a big secret or something...unlike the negotiation agreements they now have

abandoned in haste.

[geek tragedy]

19. This person just happens to spew rightwing talking points

while pretending to be concerned.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=920894

[Fred Sanders]

21. Wow. Murthy, totally on the gun control side, is now SG so no matter.

[geek tragedy]

24. Pro-NRA, pro PBA, pro Boehner/Bibi and always

finds a way to bash Obama using rightwing talking points while concern trolling.

Totally transparent.

[Jefferson23]

23. Republican 'Bibi Surprise' Speaking Invitation Blasted as Political Stunt by ADL

Abe Foxman Slams John Boehner for One-Party Invite

JTA) — The invitation from Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio,) the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress appears to have been very personal, indeed – virtually no one outside the Boehner-Netanayhu circle had any idea it was coming until just before the announcement.

The Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman thinks it might also be ill-advised. “This looks like a political challenge to the White House and/or a campaign effort in Israel,” he told JTA.

Israeli elections are in March, and Boehner’s announcement came the day after President Obama said he would veto any new Iran sanctions legislation, something Republicans – backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee – hope to overcome with enough Democratic votes to override a veto.

“I certainly support the sanctions if the deal doesn’t come through but having said that, the invitation and acceptance is ill-advised for either side,” Foxman said. “It is too important an issue to politicize it.”

snip* Here’s the thing about that “Congress can decide” business: Boehner issued the invitation “on behalf of the bipartisan leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate.” Netanyahu’s office, which is telling media it has accepted the invitation, is emphasizing “bipartisan.”

But according to the office of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the minority leader: Pelosi was not consulted, a senior staffer in her office told JTA. We asked Boehner’s office to explain the discrepancy and have yet to hear a reply.

State Department Jen Psaki told reporters that the sequence of events seemed unorthodox.

“Traditionally we would learn about the plans of a leader to come to the United States separately from learning about it from the speaker of the House, which is how we learned about PM Netanyahu’s plans to speak to a joint session,” she said.

She made clear she did not expect Netanyahu’s speech would be a paean to Obama’s policies. “Its no secret that we have a different point of view as it relates to the benefit of ongoing negotiations with Iran and our effort to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, and Prime Minister Netanyahu has spoken to that extensively.” Still, Psaki said the Obama administration did not have “general objections” to Netanyahu addressing Congress.

Last word to Foxman, who suggests that Boehner uninvite and Netanyahu unaccept.

“I see the White House giving both parties a ladder to climb down by saying this is a protocol breach,” he said. “I hope they accept it.”

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/213251/republican-bibi-surprise-speaking-invitation-blast/#ixzz3PalZs5Sl

[Fred Sanders]

25. Oh, SNAP! Stand at ease, Bibi and Boehner, climb back down the ladder.

Does Foxman speak for the ADL is my only question?

[Jefferson23]

28. He retired, or plans to..not sure when. Regardless, it is interesting to me what he is

saying. This is not a good idea, don't piss off Obama, Bibi should not speak before the Congress...it's good advice.

[blm]

26. Obama and Kerry have the right course set - GOP wants to ruin ALL progress

because that is what they WANT do - - - -EVERY TIME.