assets -- when the tsunami of unfrozen assets hits them in the future. then, we go to the lifting of the arms embargo and the is to of -- and the issue of arms technology. the iranian supplied arms have been used against our armed forces directly in afghanistan and against our allies in the violent proxies supported by iran. to make such a concession without any guarantees about any change of behavior by the region seems extraordinary to the point of being incomprehensible. likewise, the change in policy towards ballistic missile development in terms of ballistic missile technology, why would you want to develop a capability when you claim you have nothing to wish to deliver by such a system in the first place? all of these, taken together, seem to be the fulfillment of the iranian wishlist, rather than a negotiation to improve regional and global security. that does beg the question, why did such a deal take so long to negotiate? what congressional is given for this approach? we are told these measures will help iran become embedded in the international

. >> frozen assets being unfrozen in return for iran's agreement to cut back on refining nuclear materials. the tehran supported baghdad government is looking to iran for help in defeating isil while at the same time syria is backing al assad is backing his struggle to stay in damascus. is it just an isolated projacketed or the beginning of a new willingness to do business with other powers? we're joined by the policy director at the iranian american council, and a veteran reporter and author of the lonely war. one woman's account for the struggle for modern iran. and retired colonel patrick lang at the u.s. defense intelligence agency. jamal, can this deal between the permanent five members of the security council including the u.s., germany, the eu, and iran act as the predicate to something, anything? >> well, absolutely. it could. it depends on how the sides play their hand. what the deal did was it ended 35 years of of the ability to resolve issues. there's been an ebb and flow of outreach on both sides. we have not seen something that produced a final agreement and the fact that we h

unfrozen for this. and the immediate worry is there's really no immediate sort of carrot and stick treatment of that money. >> almost no carrot and stick. >> they have that money and the fear is they'll do a lot of bad stuff. >> the only thing we can do i guess is bomb, you know. >> what i'm saying is we can't monitor that, can't verify that. >> and let's be clear when we compare the soviets to the iranians. you could make a really good case that kruschev, brezhnev, gorbachev, and i probably missed an interim one somewhere between those three, were more rational human beings. >> two. >> i can't remember their names, but are more rational human beings than the clowns running iran. we are dealing with lunatics. to get to glen's question, what is president obama after when it comes to this? i think maybe not destroying the state of israel but i think eliminating it as a power, as anything of significance is probably his end game that there is a deep-seated leftist thought that israel is the root of all evi

clear implementation of the deal and access and they have to graduate to prove us of having assets unfrozen and sanctions lifted. that seems to me a much more sensible approach but it seems to be given everything in the outside. it's all predicated on hope. we hope that they will change. >> yes. gentlemen here in the front. and if anyone -- if you can identify themselves or any institutional affiliation, thank you. [inaudible] >> the administration says enough time -- not enough time for iran to cheat, gets access to the facility, however, according to of the agreement, iran has to answer but in other words, all they want us to do is drag out the time until it answers about not because facilities. 24 days. the verification is reasonable -- [inaudible] >> the second thing that people need to pay attention, it's not a signed agreement. we should not bring this agreement to the for parliament then i have to sign it and if i sign it obligation. >> thank you. i think this is a developing story, and i think as debate becomes more substantial, not about the big picture but details, i think it will

clear implementation of the deal and access and they have to graduate to prove us of having assets unfrozen and sanctions lifted. that seems to me a much more sensible approach but it seems to be given everything in the outside. it's all predicated on hope. we hope that they will change. >> yes. gentlemen here in the front. and if anyone -- if you can identify themselves or any institutional affiliation, thank you. [inaudible] >> the administration says enough time -- not enough time for iran to cheat, gets access to the facility, however, according to of the agreement, iran has to answer but in other words, all they want us to do is drag out the time until it answers about not because facilities. 24 days. the verification is reasonable -- [inaudible] >> the second thing that people need to pay attention, it's not a signed agreement. we should not bring this agreement to the for parliament then i have to sign it and if i sign it obligation. >> thank you. i think this is a developing story, and i think as debate becomes more substantial, not about the big picture but details, i think it will

as is their money that has been frozen that will be unfrozen this is therd -- money that has been unfrozen. setbacks, russia and china cannot control it. aey are not going to have veto. it has to be a majority vote. as long as the eu and the u.s. will be on the same side -- which only is it congress approved this deal -- as long as the europeans and the u.s. are on the same side they will always be able to override russia and china objections. last one on the missile program in iraq. again, i would like to see it region -- a region that has far less weapons. but it is important to keep in mind what has motivated the iranian missile program. theng the iraq iran war iraqis had much more advanced weapons, similar to what you see in the region right now. missiles tod scud attack iranian cities. they had the iranian capital with ballistic missiles the iranians have to be deep inside of iraqi territory to be able to in their capital of baghdad retaliation because they simply did not have same capabilities. at the end of that war in 1988 both sides were convinced that would not-- peace last and t

maintaining clear implementation of the deal and unfettered access and a graduated process of assets unfrozen in sanctions lifted. that seems to have been a much more sensible approach but it seems they've given everything away at the outset and it's all predicated on hope. we hope they will change. >> the gentleman here in front. if anyone could identify any institutional affiliation. [inaudible] i think something they don't pay attention to much as the fact that 24 days the administration has enough time only start after the access to the facility. however, according to the amax and the agreement, first of all iran -- [inaudible] in other words, all you want us to do is to drag out the time and tell it answers the nonnuclear facility. 24 days unlimited. it declares the facility reasonable. the second thing is nobody signed the agreement. the other day president rouhani said we should not read this agreement to the parliament -- [inaudible] >> thank you gate as they say this is a developing story and becomes more substantial, not about the big picture but about the details, i think there wou

i think they see the money being unfrozen for the likes of iran and saying, hey, we should do the samereaten to go nuclear and all of a sudden money comes our way. yeah the world caught us before but we can trick them again. >> absolutely. this is the issue with north korea. the one thing they completely lack is hard currency. they have none. they are the biggest black market mafia organization on the planet because they do anything they can to make money for the great leader. we've known this and seen this. the iranians will have a great deal of hard currency. the north koreans are always chasing that. anything they can do to include walking up and threatening the west. like they did last time. they did this under the bush white house as well. the bush white house gave them money, helped build reactors. it got us nothing. dealing with a rogue regime like north korea and iran, there is no reason to believe there is any agreement they'll stick by. it's completely amazing. >> you warned us. tony schaeffer. lieutenant colonel. he's done so much for the country. thank you, colonel. >>> did

it is really more about the money that will be unfrozen and freed up, funding iranian misbehavior inhe region. i think israelis and gulf arab states have a lot more to worry about in terms of what that money might fund than the united states does but it's a legitimate fear. i just wouldn't characterize quite that way. jenna: perhaps not. the language is inflammatory but we do know that iran is the number one sponsor of state terror. we know recently released documents of bin laden letters found in the compound, iran was used by al qaeda to harbor terrorists. we do know that from iran. when you look at polling from americans there is a fundamental fear what is potentially ahead. do you think that has properly been addressed? politics aside, from either side, has anyone really had an honest conversation with the american people about why we should think we're truly safer because of the deal? >> well, you know i think this goes back to another one of those very fundamental disagreements, not about the details but about the nature of the agreement. this was an agreement that was designed

base in the short term even if it devotes only a fraction of the 100 billion or more that will be unfrozen as part of the agreement. more than the government's entire budget, the iranian government's entire budget for the current fiscal year on military spending. over the medium term, the removal of economic sanctions and the united nations arms embargo will allow the regime to acquire other advanced technologies and weapons from abroad. and once sanctions against its ballistic missile program sunset, iran could more easily develop weapons capable of reaching targets in the middle east and beyond, including europe and the united states. that's the end of quote. this agreement will enable iran to modernize and expand its military capabilities while the united states military suffers from the devastating obama era defense cuts and the effects of sequestration. contrary to claims made by the president and secretary of state, the united states will be in a far worse position to defend our interests and prevent a nuclear-armed iran when the obama agreement sunsets than we are today. in addition

in the short-term even if it devotes nl only a fraction of the $100 billion or more that will be unfrozen as part of the agreement. more than the iranian government's entire budget for the current fiscal year on military spending. other the medium term, the removal of economic sanctions and the united states arms embargo will allow the regime to acquire other advanced technologies and weapons from ibroad. and once sanctions against its ballistic missile program sunset, iran could more easily develop weapons capable of reaching targets in the middle east and beyond, including europe and the united states, end quote. this agreement will enable iran to mornedize and expand its military capabilities while the united states military suffers from the devastating obama-era defense cuts and the effects of sequestration. contrary to claims made by the president and secretary of state, the united states will be in a far worse position to defend our interests and prevent a nuclear armed iran when the obama agreement sunsets than we are today. in addition to facile taiing iranian access to advanced w

as is their money that has been frozen that will be unfrozen this is therd -- money that has been unfrozensetbacks, russia and china cannot control it. aey are not going to have veto. it has to be a majority vote. as long as the eu and the u.s. will be on the same side -- which only is it congress approved this deal -- as long as the europeans and the u.s. are on the same side they will always be able to override russia and china objections. last one on the missile program in iraq. again, i would like to see it region -- a region that has far less weapons. but it is important to keep in mind what has motivated the iranian missile program. theng the iraq iran war iraqis had much more advanced weapons, similar to what you see in the region right now. missiles tod scud attack iranian cities. they had the iranian capital with ballistic missiles the iranians have to be deep inside of iraqi territory to be able to in their capital of baghdad retaliation because they simply did not have same capabilities. at the end of that war in 1988 both sides were convinced that would not-- peace last and tha

that account is unfrozen and iranians are only able to use it for very specific purposes, like humanitarian goods. host: frozen by the individual countries where the accounts are? guest: correct. they are frozen essentially at the behest of the united states which is able to get other yountries -- and particularl other countries banks -- to do what it wants with the threat of cutting off those countries from the u.s. banking system. if you want to do business with citibank then you have to do what the u.s. treasury says you should do. you are right. that is a fact that people should understand. people should also understand what the amount is. and yes, it is the iranians money. that somee concern people have about this deal and about the iranians getting access to that money is, what will they do with that money? will they use it to try to prop assad?lid -- will they use it to funnel money to hezbollah, or will they use it to meet the needs of their own people? that is how i would look that question. me, but i have blanks on the second question. host: she wanted inspections in israel. guest

once iranian assets are unfrozen and sanctions lifted, iran will be able to make very rapid progress in updating their aging and perception in both civil and military field. will the effect of any subsequent sanctions be diminished, but western governments will face increased pressure from their own domestic and industrial interests once contracts have been signed, product -- projects have been started and are put at risk. we know that and the iranians know that. those who don't believe all this are just being cynical. maybe there will be genuine political change in iran by the time the tenure -- 10 year deadline has passed. many -- may be any change will make iran into a constructive partner. maybe iran will offer free and open access. maybe they will be completely honest and transparent with us. maybe they will follow their own religious scripture and state developing a nuclear weapon is acceptable. maybe they will not use their own frozen assets to probe -- fund terrorism and the region with a have in the past. won't improve their economy with the sale of oil and pursue a nuclear

in the short-term even if it devotes nl only a fraction of the $100 billion or more that will be unfrozen as part of the agreement. more than the iranian government's entire budget for the current fiscal year on military spending. other the medium term, the removal of economic sanctions and the united states arms embargo will allow the regime to acquire other advanced technologies and weapons from ibroad. and once sanctions against its ballistic missile program sunset, iran could more easily develop weapons capable of reaching targets in the middle east and beyond, including europe and the united states, end quote. this agreement will enable iran to mornedize and expand its military capabilities while the united states military suffers from the devastating obama-era defense cuts and the effects of sequestration. contrary to claims made by the president and secretary of state, the united states will be in a far worse position to defend our interests and prevent a nuclear armed iran when the obama agreement sunsets than we are today. in addition to facile taiing iranian access to advanced w

the republicans are burping about the tens of billions of dollars that are going to be unfrozen. well, that doesn't even compare to the tens of billions of dollars that iran's going to get when all the sanctions are lifted. i do believe that iran, their motive for this, ok, is they need the cash to develop a viable intercontinental ballistic missile. because they would love to just lob one over and hit america. it doesn't even have to be particularly accurate. could be within 10 miles of anywhere in a metropolitan area. that's terrorism -- that scares the hell out of me, i don't know about you. back to the cockroaches. and keeping secrets. i think it's naive to believe that the only military grade fissionble material that iran possesses came from their centrifuges. when the sove outunion broke up, yes, there were -- when the soviet union broke up, yes, there were black market routes to gaining fissionable material. i think it's even more naive that to believe that they don't already have enough fissionable material and perhaps even when what they need to make their first warhead

the $150 billion in unfrozen assets. does anyone think that iran will use that to build schools or hospitals or teach tolerance of other faiths? but instead how about using it to wipe israel off the map? how about the chant death to america? what about paving the weapon that can accomplish these atrocities? why should we trust iran? what is it about their history of deceit, destruction and killings that warrants our bestowing trust that they will be paesful? and here's a question for those who say this is a good deal. what's the over-under death toll threshold for this deal to no longer be a good deal? and i ask these questions because very simply this money's going to be used to kill people, and this deal provides the funding for it. millions of americans throughout the history of this country have fought and died, families have sacrificed in the name of freedom. generations of americans have wrought about american strength and exceptionalism and this has engendered a belief in our allies that we will have their back an

that account is unfrozen and iranians are only able to use it for very specific purposes, like humanitarianoods. host: frozen by the individual countries where the accounts are? guest: correct. they are frozen essentially at the behest of the united states which is able to get other yountries -- and particularl other countries banks -- to do what it wants with the threat of cutting off those countries from the u.s. banking system. if you want to do business with citibank then you have to do what the u.s. treasury says you should do. you are right. that is a fact that people should understand. people should also understand what the amount is. and yes, it is the iranians money. that somee concern people have about this deal and about the iranians getting access to that money is, what will they do with that money? will they use it to try to prop assad?lid -- will they use it to funnel money to hezbollah, or will they use it to meet the needs of their own people? that is how i would look that question. me, but i have blanks on the second question. host: she wanted inspections in israel. guest:

after a year of isolation, they've unfrozen their military ties.the two militaries are involved in syria to a lesser or greater extent. they don't want to get involved in an unexpected confrontation with each other. the fact they're talking with each other to make sure they don't hit each other, i think it's an important and interesting sign that the intention going forward is to cooperate and to coordinate. i'd be very surprised if this turned into a sort of stand off between these two figures of global politics. >> yeah. certainly a very delicate situation, though. matthew chance joining us live from moscow. many thanks. >> many other world leaders took their turn addressing the u.n. general assembly on monday. >> iran's president criticized saudi arabia's handling of the recent stampede near mecca that killed hundreds of people. >> the cuban president praised the relations between his nation and the u.s., but also demanded a lifting of economic sanctions imposed by the u.s. >> the chinese president urged the world community to fight climate chan

now, madam president, for our unfrozen caveman senators on the other side of the aisle whose primitive minds are confused and frightened by modern science, sperm-egg fusion is when biology tells us that human life begins. on day one, a fact that is neither a mystery nor above the pay grade of a curious seventh grader. at eight weeks, madam president, eight weeks, we know a fetus can feel pain. that's not just scientific consensus. it's universally accepted, entirely uncontested in dr. condit's words. why then does the bill before us allow abortions even up to 20 weeks? because that's where the science is directly observable. that is how modest a compromise this bill is. as dr. condit puts it, fetuses at 20 weeks have an increase in stress hormones in response to painful experiences that can be eliminated by appropriate anesthesia yeah. -- anesthesia. in other words, madam president, at 20 weeks, an unborn child can feel pain. we can see them feel it. we can observe them as they feel it. that is also the age, according to the "new england journal of medicine," at which an unborn child i

so with sanctions disappearing and iran's money being unfrozen, the deal's moving forward. shouldn't we want this agreement to proceed with the oversight of the united states of america to make sure that iran abides by the very letter of this agreement not to develop nuclear weapons? instead of standing in its way, we in congress should play a leading role in the implementation and rigid enforcement of this deal to prevent iran from developing nuclear weapons. . this agreement is an unprecedented opportunity to stop iran's nuclear weapons program and make the world a safer place. of all our options, it's the one most likely to succeed in preventing iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. i urge my colleagues not to stand in the way of this important deal to make sure that iran a country that supports terrorism, has a terrible record of human rights violations at home, and even just two days ago said that the state of israel wouldn't last 25 years, it's important that we ensure that they don't have access to the nuclear weapons that will allow them to carry through with their t

it does not detect how it sends the cash unfrozen and puts blinds, lifting the 300-kilogram spock pile and enrichment limit. these are troubling. it is possible, perhaps probable that iran will use some of that additional cash and access to conventional arms to arm terrorist groups. it is possible it will have a nuclear program as a foundation for nuclear weapons. that is a substantial concern. and for this reason many have come to this floor and argued the united states instead of implementing should withdraw it and negotiate a better deal. the prospects for that, however, are slim. our p-5 plus 1 partners and i've met with the ambassadors, they believe that this is the best path, the best opportunity to prevent iran from nuclear acquiring and will sign on with or without the united states as long as iran does as well. and if iran has every reason to fulfill this because it lifts the sanctions and provides the trade for partnerships. if iran were to follow this course it would obtain benefits while leaving united states in and undermined and tragic and consequences throughout a large