| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Kerry has financial ties to backers of mullah regime |
| 2004-10-04 |
| Money trail behind Kerry's Iran stance Sen. John Kerry's call for providing Iran with the nuclear fuel it seeks, even while the regime is believed to be only months away from developing nuclear weapons, is being linked to his campaign contributions from backers of the mullah government in Tehran. During last Thursday's nationally televised debate between the Democratic presidential candidate and President Bush, Kerry insisted as president he would provide Tehran with the nuclear fuel it wants for a pledge to use it for peaceful purposes only. "I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel, test them, see whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes," Kerry said in a critique of the Bush administration's handling of Tehran's nuclear program, which the Iranians claim is only for civilian purposes. The comments came in response to a question about whether diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the "nuclear problems" with North Korea and Iran. "If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together," Kerry said of Tehran. "The president did nothing." Among Kerry's top fund-raisers are three Iranian-Americans who have been pushing for dramatic changes in U.S. policy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran. Most prominent among them is Hassan Nemazee, 54, an investment banker based in New York. Nominated to become U.S. ambassador to Argentina by President Clinton in 1999, Nemazee eventually withdrew his nomination after a former partner raised allegations of business improprieties, WND previously reported. Nemazee was a major Clinton donor, giving $80,000 to the Democratic National Committee during the 1996 election cycle and attending at least one of the famous White House fund-raising coffees. In 2001, at the invitation of Mobil Oil Chairman Lucio Noto, whom he counts as a "personal friend," Nemazee joined the board of the American-Iranian Council, a U.S. lobbying group that consistently has supported lifting U.S. sanctions on Iran and accommodating the Tehran regime. The Kerry camp has identified Nemazee as having raised more than $100,000 for the senator's campaign, WND reported last spring. |
| Posted by:Mark Espinola |
| #8 ahhh. yes, sniglet...all is well, Kerry has a plan! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-10-08 2:57:57 PM |
| #7 The author of this article has as much credibility as the current President of the USA... none! Who are these bozos and what pathetic publication publishes them??? Kerry will determine foreign policy for $200,000 in campaign fundraising? What a joke! Finally, to refer to Iran as a blanket "mullah regime" just shows how misinformed and ignorant the writer truly is. |
| Posted by: Snolulet Omeating8644 2004-10-08 2:39:56 PM |
| #6 Yes, he wouldn't do it only for contributors' sake. K's proposal fits the "global test" scheme. Work with UK, Fr., and Ger. and IAEA. doing the same all went so swimmingly well re NK, so it has to be a winner. |
| Posted by: Chicago Mike 2004-10-04 2:03:39 PM |
| #5 This article doesnât pass the stink test. Kerry supposedly advocates an Iran policy because of at most a few hundred thousand dollar contributions? Give me a break. To the Kerry campaign that is chump change. Here is a more likely reason: Kerry sees the Iranian confrontation as a Bush weakness. So Kerry offers an âalternativeâ. Sure the alternative sucks, but the people who know that arenât likely to vote for Kerry anyway. Kerry is trying to appeal to the âinternationalâ constituency. These are people who view the US as an arrogant bully. Why should the US be able to dictate Iranian âenergyâ policy? Kerry covers his pandering for the âinternationalâ vote by focusing on the US controlling the uranium fuel cycle. (Basically that is how anti-proliferation is supposed to work. Nuclear countries provide technology and fuel for peaceful energy generation in exchange for international monitoring and controlling the fuel cycle to prevent bomb development.) Bush voters know that nuclear power generation by Iran makes no economic sense and that the Iranian program is a poorly disguised weapons program. They arenât amused by Kerryâs ânuanceâ. But they werenât going to vote for Kerry anyway. (Personally, I believe Kerry got this wrong. People will move toward Bush because of Kerryâs Iran position.) John: âSoooo, are the Iranians just saying they are rejecting Kerry's nuke proprosal while backdoor deals are going on?â I doubt it. If the mullahs accepted nuclear fuel from the US, they would have no justification for the centrifuges that they use to make enriched uranium for their âenergyâ program. So the international community might demand that enrichment equipment be destroyed. Iâm surprised that Iran publicly denounced the plan. I would have expected Iran to give mixed signals while continuing bomb development. (Iâm guessing that the mullahâs statement was motivated by internal politics rather than international politics.) |
| Posted by: Anonymous5032 2004-10-04 11:20:59 AM |
| #4 Soooo, are the Iranians just saying they are rejecting Kerry's nuke proprosal while backdoor deals are going on? |
| Posted by: John (Q. Citizen) 2004-10-04 9:55:15 AM |
| #3 "..provide the nuclear fuel, test them,..".That would be like giving a known rapist a rape kit to see if he use' it. |
| Posted by: Raptor 2004-10-04 8:50:08 AM |
| #2 That would be free healthcare in the 'free lunch' sense of the word 'free'? Ain't no such thing. Surgeons and scalpels don't grow on trees, either. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-10-04 7:57:32 AM |
| #1 I cannot get over the fact that Americans (my mother inlaw is one of them) after hearing Kerry's position on Iran Nuclear Program would still vote for him. They really live in a bubble where, to them, the most pressing issue is free health care. |
| Posted by: Anonymous4724 2004-10-04 7:53:44 AM |