An ATP Report Production – On This Episode Barry Nussbaum explains how Iran continues to violate the deal that paid them billions of dollars.
Welcome to The Truth Report, I’m Barry Nussbaum.
The Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA) commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, is an international agreement on the nuclear program of Iran reached in Vienna on July 14, 2015 between Iran, the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council – China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States – plus Germany), and the European Union. When it was finally announced, it was promoted within the United States as a major milestone in international diplomacy and sold to the American public and the congress as the deal that would prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. It was a lie then and anyone that tells you that the deal is going according to plan, is lying to you now. As best as we can estimate the Iran nuclear deal was a way to funnel money to the brutal and radical Islamic theocracy that runs Iran under the cover of a peace deal at the same time guaranteeing that Iran would go nuclear as soon as the deal expired, or earlier if they cheat. As we have reported many times, including our three-part analysis of the Iran nuclear deal produced in 2015, the JCPOA is a peace deal in the tradition of the negotiation concluded by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain with Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler in 1938, which enabled Hitler to launch World War II! Today on The Truth Report we will look at the JCPOA and its results in two areas: missile development and prisoner exchanges. One more thing, the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei, never approved the deal and didn’t sign it and it was never signed by Iran, the world signed, Iran didn’t.
Experts agree the most profound violation of the JCPOA and its corresponding U.N. resolutions, is Iran’s refusal to stop ballistic missile testing. The point here is that once you have a nuclear weapon, the question is how do you deliver it. The answer in most circumstances is by ballistic missile delivery.
The JCPOA was aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for relief from international sanctions. After the deal was reached, the United Nations Security Council, which had imposed sanctions on Iran to pressure it to negotiate, adopted resolution 2231. The resolution endorsed the deal and outlined conditions under which sanctions are to be lifted. Under the resolution, ballistic missile restrictions expire after eight years.
It is important to note the Iran deal is not the same as U.N. Security Council resolution 2231.
The JCPOA was officially implemented January 2016, after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) certified that Iran had complied with all the nuclear-related measures it agreed to in July 2015, yet Iran has continued to test ballistic missiles, and said it will not stop.
The deal does not prohibit the testing or development of ballistic missiles, but the U.N. resolution does contain restrictions relating to ballistic missiles. So how is Iran able to continue its testing? Experts say the resolution’s language allows Iran to argue that its ballistic missiles do not fit within the restrictions laid out in resolution 2231.
Previous U.N. resolutions had stated that the Security Council “decides that Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.” The new resolution (2231) states “Iran is called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.”
The language change from “decides that Iran shall not” to “Iran is called upon” represents a softening in tone, signaling a more non-legally-binding appeal. This change was made precisely because the Iran deal does not contain any limits on the country’s missile programs. It is perfectly respectable for opponents of the agreement to object to the Iran deal on these grounds, the JCPOA removes missile-related sanctions without requiring Iran to limit its missile programs.
Further, the new resolution refers to missiles “designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons,” rather than “capable” of such delivery. So, Iran now argues that its missiles are not “designed” for such capability; most of the world disputes this loophole in the agreement, as do I, especially when Iran parades its missiles before launch with slogans in Farsi like, death to America, and death to the Jews written on them.
Now let’s examine the prisoner swap. When President Barack Obama announced the “one-time gesture” of releasing Iranian-born prisoners who “were not charged with terrorism or any violent offenses” last year, his administration presented the move as a modest trade-off for the greater good of the Iran nuclear agreement and Tehran’s pledge to free five Americans.
Obama and other administration representatives weren’t telling the whole story on January 17, 2016, in their highly choreographed rollout of the prisoner swap and simultaneous implementation of the six-party nuclear deal, according to a politico investigation.
In his Sunday morning address to the American people, Obama portrayed the seven men he freed as “civilians.” The senior official described them as businessmen convicted of or awaiting trial for mere “sanctions-related offenses, violations of the trade embargo.”
In reality, some of them were accused by Obama’s own justice department of posing threats to national security. Three allegedly were part of an illegal procurement network supplying Iran with U.S.-made microelectronics with applications in surface-to-air and cruise missiles like the kind Tehran test-fired recently, prompting a still-escalating exchange of threats with the Trump administration. Another was serving an eight-year sentence for conspiring to supply Iran with satellite technology and hardware. As part of the deal, U.S. officials even dropped their demand for $10 million that a jury said the aerospace engineer illegally received from Tehran.
And in a series of unpublicized court filings, the justice department dropped charges and international arrest warrants against 14 other men, all of them fugitives. The administration didn’t disclose their names or what they were accused of doing, noting only that the U.S. “also removed any Interpol Red Notices and dismissed any charges against 14 Iranians for whom it was assessed that extradition requests were unlikely to be successful.”
Three of the fugitives allegedly sought to lease Boeing aircraft for an Iranian airline that authorities say had supported Hezbollah, the U.S.-designated terrorist organization. A fourth, Behrouz Dolatzadeh, was charged with conspiring to buy thousands of U.S.-made assault rifles and illegally import them into Iran. A fifth, Amin Ravan, was charged with smuggling U.S. military antennas to Hong Kong and Singapore for use in Iran. U.S. authorities also believe he was part of a procurement network providing Iran with high-tech components for an especially deadly type of IED used by Shiite militias to kill hundreds of American troops in Iraq.
The biggest fish was Seyed Abolfazl Shahab Jamili, who had been charged with being part of a conspiracy that from 2005 to 2012 procured thousands of parts with nuclear applications for Iran via China. That included hundreds of U.S.-made sensors for the uranium enrichment centrifuges in Iran whose progress had prompted the nuclear deal talks in the first place.
When federal prosecutors and agents learned the true extent of the releases, many were shocked and angry. Some had spent years, if not decades, working to penetrate the global proliferation networks that allowed Iranian arms traders both to obtain crucial materials for Tehran’s illicit nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and in some cases, to provide dangerous materials to other countries. So in summary, the Obama administration traded spies and enablers of the Iran nuclear weaponization program back to Iran in exchange for American civilians like Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian, who was the newspaper’s Tehran bureau chief arrested in 2014 and charged with spying, an allegation his paper strongly denies.
The other three Iranian-American prisoners released are Nosratollah Khosravi, Amir Hekmati, a former U.S. Marine who was arrested in 2011 while visiting his grandmother when Iran accused him of working for the CIA, and Saeed Abedini, a convert to Christianity who was working to build an orphanage in Iran when he was detained in 2012.
Stay in touch, we will be following up on this story! There are more issues relating to Iran and the JCPOA that we will want to know about. As President Trump visits the Middle East this week, we hope that he will begin revisiting the JCPOA as he promised he would during the campaign. You can write to me directly by sending me an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org, and go to our website where you can sign up to be on our mailing list so you never miss an important episode.
You can handle the truth, and we intend to bring it to you! I’m Barry Nussbaum.
“IRAN REACHES 90% ENRICHMENT, CAN BUILD MANY NUKES!”
Clare Lopez: With or Without the U.S., Israel Will Destroy the Iran Nuclear Program
Barry Nussbaum: Hello, and welcome to ATP Report. I’m Barry Nussbaum. We have a terrific guest today. She’s going to be on in just a second but first homework assignment for all of you out there that haven’t completed this assignment. Please take out your cell phone, text the word TRUTH, T-R-U-T-H, and address it to the number 88202. You’ll be signed up for free for all of our ATP content, including today’s special guest, which happens to be a friend of the family, Clare Lopez.
As you know, Clare has a very impressive background in various roles, with the United States government overseas in the intelligence field at the CIA, the State Department, and other places. She writes, does videos, is the expert on everything about American policy, and is the founder of Lopez Liberty LLC. Hello. Welcome, Clare.
Clare Lopez: Thank you, Barry. Another great intro. Thank you very much.
Barry Nussbaum: Well, it’s all you, so it’s easy. Let’s start with the new variety of the month. I’m referring to the Omicron variant of the SARS-COVID virus. Especially now that it’s in the news and nobody says Delta anymore. That was so last month.
This month it’s Omicron. Apparently, it’s more contagious and less deadly. So, as you and I have talked about, as the virus mutates, as all flu viruses do, it becomes more contagious and less dangerous, but we’re panicking like crazy. My question to you is why?
Clare Lopez: Well, you’re right about the Omicron variant Barry, that it is a mutation. We are well down into the Greek alphabet by now. There have been previous mutations that nobody ever even noticed, Lambda and Mu. The original variant or the original SARS-CoV-2.
The Alpha no longer exists, but yes, viruses mutate all the time. This is their nature to mutate, and the more obstacles, read vaccines, are thrown in its way. The more the virus, anthropomorphizing just a bit here. Tries to, wants to evade those obstacles.
So, we are down to the O. The Omicron of the Greek alphabet, but also typically, as you say, the further along the variations go, typically with a virus, the more contagious, the more transmissible. You can see why.
Again, anthropomorphizing, but the virus wants more hosts to infect. At the same time, less deadly, less lethal, and happily, so far with this variant, Omicron, there are absolutely zero deaths of Omicron. There is one reported death out of Britain, as I understand it, of somebody who died with Omicron. That might have been a speck of virus on their PJs. Nobody really knows for sure, but one last bit on this, and it’s a bit of a question mark. That is, where did this one come from? Yes, they spring up naturally.
This is Darwin, natural selection. You know, selection or survival of the fittest, but we’ve been told it originated in South Africa. In fact, it seems that this variant, Omicron, originated next door in Botswana. It originated with a couple of visiting diplomats whose home country is never mentioned.
Now, if their home country were a neighboring Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, or, you know, another country in Africa, they would have said so right away, but they haven’t. So, the question hanging out there is, where exactly did this variant come from?
Is it purely a result of natural selection, survival of the fittest, or is something else going on as with the original variant? The Alpha, the first one of SARS-CoV2, which we know, of course, came out of the Chinese Communist Party, People’s Liberation Army weapons labs.
Barry Nussbaum: But Clare, I agree with everything you said. Actually, even the mainstream media agrees with everything you said, so that’s one of those rare occasions. The part I don’t get is that viruses run their course, as my late mother used to say, and you need to let it do that. Then it just went away, and she was right. That’s normally what happens. Why are we panicking over this? Why are they now talking about booster number two and booster number three? We have to conquer Omicron. We’ve got to do new shutdowns. Why?
Clare Lopez: Well, I’m going to refer to an excellent set of videos and interviews by a Belgian intellectual. I believe a medical doctor named Dr. Matthias Desmet, D-E-S-M-E-T. He proposes to answer your question that what has overtaken the entire world, or at least a good part of it, is what he calls a mass formation.
We might call it something more along the lines of mass psychosis, or even I’ve heard this term mass hypnosis. In other words, people around the world have been scared out of their wits by something that has no bigger a lethality rate than the annual flu. Then on the flip side, there are those, again, many places in the world, but especially we’ll say here in the United States.
At the municipality, the city, the state level, and certainly at the public health level in the United States that have used, have cold-bloodedly used this crisis to #1 make gazillions of dollars in profit from “vaccines.” Well, that’s air quotes “vaccines,” of course, they’re genetic therapies. #2 to impose power.
To exert power over the population and to shut down the economy. To ruin millions of small businesses. To keep kids out of school, losing class time for more than a year, and on and on we go. It is mandating a penalty of losing your job or getting jabbed. This is too theoretical.
Barry Nussbaum: Yeah. I can tell you in just listening to you. The more I listen, the more I agree that this makes no sense, and yet we’re doing it. Speaking of no sense, let’s talk about Iran for a minute. The P5+1 is going full speed ahead, trying to put the deal back together in Vienna. Specifically, a JCPOA amended agreement. Except now while they’re talking, even though the United States is excluded from the room.
Iran is firing up more centrifuges than ever before, enriching more uranium than ever before. They’re literally on the cusp if they haven’t crossed the line into being able to manufacture half a dozen nuclear bombs. Yet what’s leaking out of the communications in Vienna, Clare, as you know so well, is Iran isn’t going to give up anything. They’re going to allow some cameras at the wrong sites.
They’re not going to allow inspections where they really should be, like Fordo, which is under a mountain. They’re running thousands and thousands of centrifuges, and it sounds to me like the only thing the various countries on the other side of the table are going to get is a new trading partner. Meaning we buy their oil, and we invest in their companies. Iran gives up nothing. Am I missing something here?
Clare Lopez: No, Barry, you’re not missing anything at all. So, here’s the thing about Vienna. This is, I believe, the seventh round of talks being held there. They include the P5+1, as you say, that is, the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, U.S., I’ll mention that in a minute, U.S., U.K., Russia, China, France, and the +1 Germany, plus the European Union represented there, too.
However, here’s the thing. The U.S. at Iran’s demand is not even in the room, is not even allowed to be in the same room as the others who are negotiating. Our Department of State meekly, Anthony Blinken, just said, okay, we’ll sit out in the hallway just as long as you promise to come out and tell us what’s going on now and then.
That’s what’s happening. They’re not even in the same room, but all of them piteously begged the Iranian regime to be allowed back into the July 2015 nuclear deal. But here’s the problem-
- Iran is playing games with them, slapping them all upside the head, and demanding that all sanctions ever imposed since the beginning of time be removed before they’ll even budge on these negotiations.
- I think this is more important. That is since 2015. We’re now in 2021, six-plus years later. The Iranian regime has so far surpassed the provisions in that nuclear deal as you were enumerating their Barry, in terms of numbers of centrifuges, the advanced models.
They were supposed to be the first generation allowed to be deployed, IR1, as they call them. They’re up to installing IR6, six generations on. So, newer, faster, better centrifuges. More centrifuges than were allowed under the deal, and then enriching uranium at greater volume than was allowed under the deal to a much higher-level percentage of enrichment, the deal says, 3.67%.
They are openly acknowledging now that they’re enriching up to 60%. You can make a bomb out of 60%, but the ideal is over 90% weapons-grade, and who knows how many warheads they’ve already made in places, as you say that the IAEA, that’s International Atomic Energy Agency nuclear watchdog for the United Nations.
Their inspectors are not even allowed to go to, and yes, the Iranian regime has smashed cameras in some of the places we know about. Never mind the places we don’t know about that, of course, they don’t have cameras, but now the places we did know about have had the camera smashed, broken by the regime, and they’re not being allowed to be repaired or replaced. This is where we are at.
Barry Nussbaum: So, Israel sees that, and apparently the Israeli leadership is the only government in the world that’s saying, hey, the emperor has no clothes, and we’re not going away. So, now their warnings to Iran and the rest of the world have never been more explicit. Defense Minister Benny Gantz, formerly commander of the IDF, the Israeli army, has made it very clear, so has Naftali Bennett, the prime minister.
Just as Bibi Netanyahu did previously, there will be no nuclear weapons in Iran, but the United States, a few days ago, denied long-range tanker aircraft, which could refuel dozens of Israeli bombers in the air. No one knows why. There was no explanation given other than the United States said no. Will Israel attack anyway, Clare Lopez?
Clare Lopez: Well, the first thing that we need to acknowledge, of course, is that Israel is squarely in Tehran’s bull’s eye. They are the first target. They are the ones most in immediate danger from this regime in Tehran, should it deploy deliverable nuclear weapons.
Now back to what we were talking about with regard to the deal and how far past the deal the Iranians have gone. It’s impossible to go back to that deal. It’s just not possible to do that, but meanwhile, of course, all these steps.
They openly acknowledged steps are being taken, and yes, the top levels of the Israeli government, Prime Minister, Defense Minister Chief of the IDF Chief of Staff, Kochavi. It’s a period of months that I’ve heard them make more and more explicit warnings directed right at Tehran.
We will not allow you to deploy deliverable nuclear weapons. I think the Israelis probably have the best intelligence about where the Iranian nuclear weapons program is. In my opinion, I think it is probably because the Israelis depend on an internal network of Iranians.
It is probably affiliated with the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq that keeps them informed on where the program is and how far along, but this is something that baffles me, and that is again, my personal opinion is that Iran has been building warheads for some time now.
I think, personal opinion, they probably have maybe somewhere in the range of five to 10, but under the international definition, it’s not officially called a weapon until that warhead gets attached to the nose cone of a missile, a delivery system.
Barry Nussbaum: And Iran has announced new ICBM missile tests this week.
Clare Lopez: There we go.
Barry Nussbaum: There’s your delivery system.
Clare Lopez: And one last point that you mentioned. I wanted to comment on it, and that was the Israeli request. It was a request for expedited delivery of midair fueling tanker aircraft that are already on order, and I guess they’re going to be delivered.
I think they said somewhere towards the end of 2024, but they asked for expedited delivery because they need them ASAP. That’s what was turned down.
Barry Nussbaum: Disgusting. Unbelievable. If we have a nuclear war or if we have an attack on the nuclear program. I hold the American government culpable for not standing against Iran’s regime and the open arrogance, making it very clear we’re building nuclear weapons.
There isn’t anything you can do about it. Then a middle finger comes up, and we, as you said, sent out in the hall hoping to be told what’s being negotiated. I’m disgusted. I really am. Clare, tell people where they can find out about you.
Clare Lopez: Well, certainly right here at American Truth Project, and you heard Barry give the cell phone text number, 88202, which if you put that into your cell phone, and text it to my name L-O-P-E-Z, you’ll get announcements, text messages for my specific videos like this one that we’re doing today.
Also, I publish at the Citizens Commission on National Security. I write at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s online, FrontPage magazine. Join Jamie Glazov on the Glazov Gang now and then. You can find me on social media too @ClareM Lopez on Twitter. Also, my name at Facebook, and Lopez Liberty on Telegram. One more before I forget, and that is The United West.
Barry Nussbaum: The ubiquitous Clare Lopez, she is everywhere. Thanks for coming on today, Clare, and thank you out there in ATP Land for joining us on a very special episode. Listen to Clare Lopez. Send Lopez to 88202, and push send. You’ll get all of her stuff absolutely free. For ATP Report, thanks for joining us today. I’m Barry Nussbaum.
Anni Cyrus Explains Why Islamic Elected Officials Will Not Follow U.S. Law
Barry Nussbaum: Hello, and welcome to ATP Report. I’m Barry Nussbaum. We have a wonderful family member guest today, but before I bring her on, I want to remind all of you in ATP land. Please take out your cell phone; if you haven’t already done it. Text the simple message truth in the message box, and send it to the number 88202. When you push send, you’ll automatically be subscribed to our text message alert system. It’s always free. You’ll get all of our content like today’s show in the palm of your hand every time we release something, and you’ll never pay for it. Ok, hopefully, you did it.
Let me bring on Anni Cyrus. Anni Cyrus, as all of you know, is the national expert on what happens to a woman in Islam. She’s an escapee from the Islamic Republic of Iran. She has a story that is like no other. She has founded to Live Up to Freedom. She happens to be the editor of everything we do here, and she’s been with us since the very beginning. Welcome back, Anni.
Aynaz Anni Cyrus: My pleasure. Thanks for having me back, Barry.
Barry Nussbaum: Let’s start with what’s going on in the political news vis Islam in the United States. Hamtramck, if I say that right in Michigan, has a six-member city council; they were just elected. Every single one of the members in this Michigan small town is a Muslim, and the mayor is as well. They are now taking office in January.
It’s believed to be the first all Muslim administration in the United States and this town. Its officials now say even though they’re of the Islamic faith, all of the members have vowed their religion would not impinge upon their duties as councilmen.
So, here’s the question that no one but you and I seem to be asking, which is if all six of these council people and the mayor are really practicing Muslims. Doesn’t their religion, Islam require them to follow Islam over the laws of the land when there’s a contradiction? If they choose Islam over Michigan law or United States law, what happens next?
Aynaz Anni Cyrus: Well, let me start here, Barry. You said they have all vowed that their religion will not affect their job. If that’s the case, why is it so important for them to repeatedly say we are Muslim? Why is it so important to wear their religion on their sleeve? Why is it so important to say the first all-Muslim council in America? That right there tells me that their being Muslim has everything to do with what they’re planning to do.
Personal opinion or just a question. As far as me believing they’re not practicing Muslims, as I said they are. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t wear it on their sleeve. Now, because they’re practicing Muslims because they’re very proud of being Muslim they will follow what is ordered, and the order is you follow the law of the land until it goes against the words of Allah or Sharia.
We have discussed this many times in the past few years, you and I, Barry, that Sharia goes completely against our Constitution, which means our Constitution goes against Sharia. So, they will be put in positions where they have to choose. If they claim to be Muslims, then they have to choose Sharia. Therefore, let’s say if a woman is involved with an argument, and the man is involved, they’re going to have to take the man’s word over the woman because, well, under Sharia, a Women’s word is counted as a half of a person.
Barry Nussbaum: All right, let’s make the news even bigger and more horrible, shall we? Based on your answer. The election of Muslim candidates across the United States has just broken the all-time record, and here are some examples. Tania Anderson is a Muslim lady elected to the Boston City Council in Massachusetts. Etel Haxhiaj was elected to Worchester City Council in Massachusetts.
Abdullah Hammoud is now the mayor of Dearborn, Michigan. Amer Ghalib is the mayor of Hamtramck, Michigan, as we just talked about, and Azrin Awal is elected to the Duluth City Council. Shamar Haider is elected to the New Jersey state legislature. Omar Mohamed is on the Galloway City Council. Shahana Hanif is the New York City Council member. I mean, it goes on and on.
Now, I assume all of these elected officials, as is normal and customary in United States politics, will take an oath, usually on the Bible. Although I imagine these people will swear on the Quran to uphold the local law, the state law, and the National Constitution. How can they honestly do that in light of what you just told us?
If they are acting contrary to the laws of Islam they have to switch from the laws of the land to Islam. Now isn’t it true that when there’s a contradiction between the laws of the land and the words of the prophet or Sharia, they must choose Islam? What happens then if they make that choice?
Aynaz Anni Cyrus: Well, I can give you a very simple answer, which is, you just named 11 people. So, imagine 11 more Ilhan Omar’s and Rashida Tlaib’s Boom, you have the answer, but I’m going to expand a little bit just to make sure no one who’s watching this video would go on their impression in any shape or form that we have any problem with Muslims, we don’t.
The conflict here is the fact that, for example, when Keith Ellison was taking office, when Ilhan Omar was doing it when Rashida Tlaib was doing it, and when Hussein Obama was doing it. They all have said the same thing; they did.
When it came to it, Hussein Obama opened the White House door and let the Muslim Brotherhood in. When it came to it, Ilhan Omar forced Congress to lift one 108-year-old ban to let her in with her religious wearing hijab. When it came to it, Keith Ellison got away with beating his girlfriend because, under Sharia, that’s allowed. You see where I’m going, right Barry?
Barry Nussbaum: Oh, absolutely, Anni, but here’s the more complex question. If you remember, we talked about this several years ago. Thomas Jefferson was so concerned about the conflict philosophically and religiously between the Book of the Mohammedans, as he called Islam and the laws of the new land.
He said, ‘unless they walk away from that book, they can’t be Americans’ because he saw the conflict in the 18th century. What’s going to happen when they’re asked to choose? How will they choose?
Aynaz Anni Cyrus: Oh, they will choose Sharia. They will choose Islam. Remember, I say this with such confidence, not because I’m an Islamophobe. No, I say this because I decided to choose American freedom over Islam. Guess what? I got bounties on my head.
They want me dead for it. So, there is no other choice. If they choose to follow the Constitution, respect our freedom and liberties here they will put their own head out there, possibly being chopped off or doing what they did.
So, knowingly or unknowingly, they will end up choosing Sharia and Islam. Again, if this was like, I don’t know, 15 or 20 years ago, this would have been a guesstimate, but as I brought up examples, they have proven to come in, and when they are sworn in, they do use the Quran.
They come in, and they end up being practicing Muslims. Now, they will just get more powerful going back to Quran 47:35, where it says: “Do not call for peace when you are superior in numbers.”
Last year, in 2020, we had 89 Muslims elected to office. This year in November, we had 11. Comes 2022, CAIR is encouraging more than 200 candidates to run. It’s just a matter of time until they are superior in number than the blasphemy law comes in. Then the First Amendment will be revoked.
The second, and before you know it, as I called it in 2015, we will be saying, welcome to the Islamic Republic of America. I know it’s dramatically hard for most Americans to wrap their head around it, but I come from it.
The Islamic Republic of Iran was Iran by itself, known as Mini America, in the Middle East. Now, for the last 43 years, it’s the Islamic Republic of Iran. Very recently, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, right. So, that’s where it’s going to go. That’s what’s going to happen unless we all do something about it. I’m sorry to be brutally bringing bad news. It is the reality.
Barry Nussbaum: Anni, I can’t argue with your logic. Skipping over across the pond to Liverpool, England. A taxi driver is the hero of Great Britain after he witnessed a jihadi in the backseat of his taxi. Get this, assembling a bomb! He slammed on the brakes, jumped out, locked the door, and the bomb detonated. It killed the terrorist. Britain is now on nationwide high alert, expecting another attack.
So, here’s the part I don’t get. The British borders are virtually wide open. Immigration from the Middle East, mostly Afghanistan and Somalia, is unchecked. Nobody is being vetted. There are no background checks. These people are flowing in by the tens of thousands. After what happened, and Great Britain has intelligence that more attacks were coming. Why don’t they close their borders?
Aynaz Anni Cyrus: Because if they do, then there will be no more terror attacks? I’m sorry. Bad joke, probably. Let me add something real quick for our audience, who have now followed the news on the Liverpool taxi bombing. This happened in front of a woman’s hospital. In front of the entrance, I believe it’s called the Labor Ward, where are all the pregnant women are.
This Muslim jihadi was about to take out mothers and their babies. For anyone who thinks they are peaceful. That is the extent of the inhuman act he was about to commit, as to why they’re not closing the border?
Genuinely, honestly, I know this sounds like a ridiculous joke, but because they don’t want to be Islamophobes. Because they don’t want to provoke Muslims, they will look the other way. They will run to cameras and announce this had nothing to do with Islam. Knowing it had everything to do with Islam because the guy was whispering Allah Akbar as he installed and put together that bomb.
Still, they will do everything in their power to not be Islamophobic and not provoke Muslims, especially under the circumstances of ISIS being back in power. They are too afraid. They are cowards. They don’t want to face reality and fight back.
Barry Nussbaum: You might be right, and it’s very sad because there will be more attacks, according to British intelligence. Anni, tell our viewers where they can get in touch with you and follow your work,
Aynaz Anni Cyrus: LiveUpToFreedom.com is my website, LiveUpToFreedom.com. Also, I come in and have a good chat with Barry Nussbaum about every other week on AmericanTruthProject.org. So, those are the two places you can find.
Barry Nussbaum: Well said. I urge all of you to follow her. She’s a brilliant and courageous young lady. Please remind yourself if you haven’t done it. Sign up for our message alert system by simply messaging the word truth to the number 88202 and push send. You’ll be signed up, and you’ll get all of our stuff like the wonderful Anni Cyrus, absolutely for free. Thanks for coming on to watch us today. For ATP Report. I’m