It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama “Systematically Disbanded” U. S. Terror Investigations To Protect Iran Deal

page: 1
22

log in

join
share:
+3 more 
posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Looking more and more like former President Obama was apparently interfering with some anti terrorism efforts.

Somebody outlined the details in front of a Congressional Committee this week.

Now why would Obama want to do that ?

The whole Iran deal seems like a big hoodwink.

No wonder they keep trying to bash Trump for "interfering" !!

Report: Obama “Systematically Disbanded” U. S. Terror Investigations To Protect Iran Deal

Just when you thought Obama’s disastrous Iran deal couldn’t get any worse, we learn that in order to protect the bad deal, Obama systematically disbanded units investigating Iran’s terror-funding networks. Not only that, but he also disbanded units investigating the state funding of terrorists by Syria and Venezuela.



The Washington Free Beacon reports:

The Obama administration “systematically disbanded” law enforcement investigative units across the federal government focused on disrupting Iranian, Syrian, and Venezuelan terrorism financing networks out of concern the work could cause friction with Iranian officials and scuttle the nuclear deal with Iran, according to a former U.S. official who spent decades dismantling terrorist financial networks.


David Asher, who previously served as an adviser to Gen. John Allen at the Defense and State Departments, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee Thursday that top officials across several key law enforcement and intelligence agencies in the Obama administration “systematically disbanded” law enforcement activities targeting the terrorism financing operations of Iran, Hezbollah, and Venezuela in the lead-up to and during the nuclear negotiations with Tehran.

“Senior leadership, presiding, directing, and overseeing various sections [of these agencies] and portions of the U.S. intelligence community systematically disbanded any internal or external stakeholder action that threatened to derail the administration’s policy agenda focused on Iran,” he testified.


Hmmmm




posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I wonder if Obama didn't personally shut down the investigation into Omar Mateen back in 2012 & 2013.



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 06:15 PM
link   
The Obama administration. The gift that keeps on giving. Just like herpes.



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Another betrayal.

It seems that Mr.Obama really believes the Constitution is just a piece of paper.

We can understand Mrs.Clinton is just a corrupt person who would sell to the highest bidder.

Mr.Obama looks to be an ideological traitor.

It's incomprehensible how these people found their way to power.

The nut job Republicans should feel equally ashamed.

Obamas election success was due to their failure.

Hopefully they might learn from the last election.




posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Ok, so Obama tried to protect the Iran deal.

Can you explain why the Iran deal is bad? Furthermore, can you explain what other options the US had given world opinion towards the previous sanctions plan?



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 07:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: xuenchen

Ok, so Obama tried to protect the Iran deal.

Can you explain why the Iran deal is bad? Furthermore, can you explain what other options the US had given world opinion towards the previous sanctions plan?


Nice deflection.

What about this testimony under oath ?








posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Nice deflection.

What about this testimony under oath ?


What deflection? The US had no choice but to let the Iran deal go through. Our international deals on sanctioning Iran were set to expire, and the rest of the world had no interest in renewing them. Furthermore, sanctions have proven to not really affect them. The current deal got the rest of the world on board, and while it doesn't outright prevent Iran from assembling a nuclear weapon, it does give us enough of a lead time to use military action if that's the path they go down. It also provides an incentive to not go down that path. Perhaps more importantly it forces China and Russia into war against Iran (alongside the rest of the world) if necessary. Where as under the old "deals" China and Russia would have backed Iran.

The deal was a huge win for the US. And that's good because we had virtually no say in how it went down.



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 07:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: xuenchen

Ok, so Obama tried to protect the Iran deal.

Can you explain why the Iran deal is bad? Furthermore, can you explain what other options the US had given world opinion towards the previous sanctions plan?


Nice deflection.

What about this testimony under oath ?





Well, yer man was giving his opinion...same as Comey was...or is there a difference. I like it that Breitbart is not the source though, at least the Beacon has some journalistic skills there...as well as their take on on it of course.



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: xuenchen

Ok, so Obama tried to protect the Iran deal.

Can you explain why the Iran deal is bad? Furthermore, can you explain what other options the US had given world opinion towards the previous sanctions plan?


We are at the point, manufactured or otherwise, where it is us versus them. Them equals Russia, Iran, Syria, Iraq (marginally), Lebanon (marginally), Palestine and I guess we can add Qatar (?). Against the whities.

They bad. We good.
edit on 10-6-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   

edit on 10-6-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:57 PM
link   
When you're there leader of a rogue government hell bent on collapsing itself into the arms of the new world order, you can't get caught supplying the enemy you claim to fight.



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 12:28 AM
link   
WTF is with you Trumpers who have such a hard-on for Iran but totally support Assad and Russia? You do realize they're part of a nexus, correct?

I'm no fan of Iran but I feel like all the antagonism is stuff we've had a hand in. The Shah, the Iran-Iraq war, the Iraq war. Yes they chant "death to America", yes we don't want them to get a nuclear bomb.
But you know who has a nuclear bomb that's even shadier? Pakistan.
You know who sends its citizens to attack America? Saudi Arabia.
You know who is funding ISIS? The gulf states.
You know who hasn't been part of Al Qaeda and ISIS and has actively been trying to fight them? Iran.
You know whose citizens aren't bat# crazy fundamentalists? Iran.
edit on 11-6-2017 by WhateverYouSay because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: WhateverYouSay




(who Julian Assange just said also have a nuclear bomb)
Everyone is missing what Julian said. He was speaking metaphorically, that Al Jazeera itself is the nuclear weapon. Read the tweet again. You missed it the first time...
edit on 11-6-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 12:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: WhateverYouSay




(who Julian Assange just said also have a nuclear bomb)
Everyone is missing what Julian said. He was speaking metaphorically, that Al Jazeera itself is the nuclear weapon. Read the tweet again. You missed it the first time...


True enough, I just heard it second hand. I'll edit it out.
Though I will add the idea of gulf states with a nuclear weapon (Saudi Arabia) isn't far fetched as they've talked about getting one from Pakistan and they helped fund Pakistans program.
edit on 11-6-2017 by WhateverYouSay because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 01:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay
WTF is with you Trumpers who have such a hard-on for Iran but totally support Assad and Russia? You do realize they're part of a nexus, correct?


Not all Trumpers are the same. I don't like Iran, Assad or Russia.

Many people who voted for Trump do not like Russia either.



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Obama's legacy will include being a terrorist sympathizer and apologist.

He was the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st Century.



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 02:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Obama's legacy will include being a terrorist sympathizer and apologist.

He was the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st Century.


:p Your current prez just sold weapons to the #1 terrorist country in the world,
but Obama is a terrorist sympathizer and apologist for making a deal with Iran, Iran the country that is fighting #1 terrorist threat to world peace ?

American logic



posted on Jun, 11 2017 @ 03:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Obama's legacy will include being a terrorist sympathizer and apologist.

He was the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st Century.


:p Your current prez just sold weapons to the #1 terrorist country in the world,
but Obama is a terrorist sympathizer and apologist for making a deal with Iran, Iran the country that is fighting #1 terrorist threat to world peace ?

American logic




Actually you make a good point.. America's love affair with the Saudi regime is a sickening distasteful state of affairs that goes all the way back to Nixon and taking the USD off the gold standard. The nation (USA) can throw them to the dogs or continue to support them and their Wahhabi B.S. while trying to protect the dollar for oil scheme. Talk about being in bed with the devil who has a goal of Wahhabi world domination.

Stupid and sickening on many different levels.




top topics



 
22

log in

join