Iran’s parliament questioning Iran nuclear deal

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Democracy in action! Iran’s parliament is likely to demand changes to Iran deal before voting for its approval.

The ironies here are tragic. While their parliament stands up for its constitutional rights, our Congress, run by Republicans, has ceded its power to the President, with the Senate giving up its constitutional right to only approve treaties with a two-third majority. Instead, they got down on their knees and handed Obama the power to make this very bad treaty without their full consent. What idiots.


  • Cotour

    What irony, a bad deal for America and the world gets worse because our own president and Secretary of State are either just not up to the job, which we knew from the start. (You never allow a Leftist to negotiate anything other than whether there should be mustard or mayonnaise on a sandwich) Or they fully intended from the start to further empower Iran by design, which is highly believable to me. I would be curious what roll Valarie Jarrett had to play in this treaty, we do not hear much about her these days. She may be at her summer home in Shiraz at this very moment?

    We can only hope that the Iranians new demands queer the entire thing and we come at the problem from a whole new direction under a new administration (not Democrat). But its also good to know that the U.N. has unanimously passed the agreement, what else would they do? That should give everyone comfort. And I heard before that there seems to be enough votes in the Congress to get it passed. You could not make this up in a movie script, you just could not sell it.

  • Cotour

    Listening to Secretary Of State John Kerry commenting on the Iran “deal” this morning, FOOL. A fool just like his boss who believes that his confabulated version of what reality “should” be is what will be.

    Moral literalist = Fool, and maybe more than just a fool, maybe a psychopath who finds himself in a position of power over something that he despises and intends to destroy what is for what “should” be.

    One man threatens to kill another mans brother, then that man demands that the first man buys him bullets and the first man endeavors to to so because he believes that the second man does not really mean what he says.

    I would be a little uncomfortable about the mental health and the motives of my brother and really question whether he loved me as much as he professed he loved me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *