News and Analysis (6/9/19)

Their letter asks if Brits are “willing to give up on our principles of fairness and equality for all, in order to placate President Trump, even going so far as to exclude our home secretary solely due to his Muslim heritage”:

Hezbollah has “endorsed the Lebanese government’s stance to enter direct negotiations to settle the border dispute with Israel,” and now the U.S. “and Iran may explore direct talks for the first time since … Trump took office”:

Preconception are challenged by “ruins … of the world’s first superpower, … quality craft-filled bazaars, bliss-inducing bathhouses and mosques so mind-blowing they might just convince … atheists … to believe”:

The White House has relied on a nonexistent “persona run by a team of people from the political wing of the MEK,” according to “a high-ranking defector from the MEK who said he had direct knowledge of the operation”:

“Russia’s deputy ambassador to the UN, Vladimir Safronkov, said after the closed-door briefing that no evidence had been presented linking Iran to the attacks”:

“Opposition and protest groups had called for workers to stay at home after security forces … kill[ed] dozens and deal[t] a blow to hopes of a peaceful transition after ex-president Omar al-Bashir’s removal in April”:

“Their prime goal must be to get the US and Iran to engage in direct talks. But this will not happen without the US lifting some of its sanctions”:

Analyst gives reasons there is “no chance” the U.S. will meet the seven conditions for successful negotiation, yet if it could, it would result in “a win-win situation both for Trump and Tehran”:

“Ministry of Health statistics puts acid attacks at 60 to 70 cases every year.” Although the legislation passed 161-9-9, “it needs to be endorsed by hardliner-dominated Guardian Council before being implemented”:

Leave a Reply