Israel; Iran has no bomb program.

Such is Terror based on desperation. One murders the innocent simply because one cannot prove that they did anything wrong.

 

So let us look at the last remaining item quoted from the IAEA report:

This is the essence of what the “Nuke Iran” brigade mean when they refer to UN sanctions against Iran, and that country being in continued violation of them, and use that as a reason for aggression. Let’s therefore take a closer look:

We see here a resolution by the UN Security Council calling for Iran to implement the Additional Protocol (AP). Those who have been reading this thread will know that in 2003/2004 Iran in fact voluntarily accepted the AP and made offers of disclosure which went well beyond even the AP. But the arrogant “West” decided that Iran still needed to be taught a lesson and applied sanctions. SO Iran refused to ratify the AP, as was her full legal right.

So here we have the UN, not only demanding that Iran do something that it had already offered to do, but the UN had spurned, the UN is now demanding that Iran do something that it is not legally obliged to do, and not just in some verbal rhetoric, but using the strongest tool that the US has, a UNSC resolution. This is an utterly illegal move by the UN. It is tantamount to trying to force the UK to join the Euro, or to demand that the USA gives up its veto right in the UN. The UN has absolutely zero authority to do so, and the members who voted in favour of such resolutions should hang their heads in shame.

In fact here is one of the four sacred goals of the UN as contained in the Preamble of its its charter http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml : “to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained.” It just booted that ideal way out the park!!

Is there any sane person out there who, knowing the above, still insists that Iran obey these resolutions?

DiSalvo, your last point was also blown away. There is nothing left post-2003 after Iran admitted to being in violation.

So, we have seen that the post-2003 reasons for attacking Iran are based on:

# “evidence” from a laptop which no-one, not even the IAEA, is allowed to see
# “Co-operation” and “confidence building” which are based on the Additional Protocol to which Iran is not a signatory
# “Suspicious technologies” most of which experts agree are common in industry, and
# UN SC Resolutions which violate the UN Charter and show blatant disrespect for rules and treaties

So what is left to justify the invasion of Iran? Come on DiSalvo and Mr R … what remains in that almost empty ammunition pouch called the IAEA report?

I will tell you. What remains is nothing more than the so-called 3 “suspicious technologies” which I will discuss within the next few hours.

THAT’s IT!! That is the pathetic excuse for attacking Iran. For disrupting not only the Middle East but potentially triggering Armageddon? Check out Eudora's video of statements by senior Israeli intelligence experts. Are you sure there is not already a suitcase bomb or three somewhere in the USA?

[Edit]Ahh ... I see there is a new post quoting Khalili exactly on that. Why develop nuclear weapons when you could have bought them from corrupt ex-USSR officials a decade ago, or perhaps on eBay from North Korea or Pakistan today. Remember, North Korea and Iran are both in the Axis of Evil. LOL, isn't it funny that when N. Korea showed it has nukes and a delivery system the big brave US of A immediately stopped poking it.

 

When faced with the clanging emptiness of the IAEA report when they are stripped of the literary style designed to make them seem to be all about new developments, but are in fact just regurgitating old news, we find that the vast bulk of the reports since at least 2008 (i.e. in the time of the previous Director of the IAEA who has now somehow morphed into an Iran-lover), all have accusations …. Well, not really accusations; they are speculations … based on the same sources of “information”, which are:

1) The “laptop of death” which no-one is allowed to see
2) That Iran is not complying with the AP … the Additional Protocol (couched in fuzzy words like “confidence building” and “co-operation” – so read the reports with this in mind) of which Iran is not even a signatory
3) The “suspicious technologies”, and …
4) ... the UN Security Council resolutions against Iran

Remember, we are talking about data sources here, as underpinning the content of the IAEA reports. I have shown in my previous few posts in this thread that all four of the above are crocks of crap. The “laptop” is not evidence if it is kept hidden. The AP is not pertinent since Iran is not a signatory. The “suspicious technologies” (with the exception of those noted below) are agreed by experts to be common place in industry not specific to nuclear weapons. And the main demands in the UNSC resolutions violate the UN Charter.

So what we are left with has now been reduced to what a contributor to this thread provided and asked the following:

Let us treat the last three straws that remain, one by one.

1) What’s the civilian application for a neutron initiator?
I presume this refers to the Catherine Philp claim, although, as usual, no detail is provided. The accusation simply relies on the IAEA Nov 2011 report, Annex C.9, page 11.

The Philp document, alleged to have been obtained from Iran, “describes the use of a neutron source, uranium deuteride, which independent experts confirm has no possible civilian or military use other than in a nuclear weapon.” So far so good, other than the ‘alleged’ bit. You all spotted that dreaded word, right? Any evidence to PROVE that the document is real? No? And if so, to PROVE that it came from Iran? No? Then what about the ‘factual’ content in parentheses? Let’s check the view of the experts that I referred to previously.

Here’s a comment from Jeffrey Lewis: “Technically inclined readers may recall that earlier accusations against Iran [Edit: yes, correct, it is nothing new; also regurgitated as usual] focused on more traditional route of polonium-beryllium (Po-Be). Several colleagues have emailed me, expressing surprise that Pakistan is alleged to have used UD3 instead of the Po-Be.” And of course the same surprise applies to Iran. If Khan had supplied them with the know-how, as the “nuke Iran” brigade claims, the initiator would certainly have been Po-Be.

So the poster asked the wrong question. The interesting query is therefore NOT whether neutron initiators have a non-nuclear weapons role, but whether the documentation can be verified and whether it makes technical sense. So the replies to poster are:

A) Who says the document (in fact, 2 docs) is real?
On publication of Philp's piece in the Times, Iran claimed the document was a forgery. The Western press, as usual, 'laughed'. Then a columnist for the Times acknowledged that the two-page Persian language document was not a photocopy of the original document but an expurgated and retyped version of the original. Even worse, former Central Intelligence Agency official Philip Giraldi said U.S. intelligence judges the "nuclear trigger" document to be a forgery. The article goes on to smash the credibility of the "documents" even further. But does the IAEA mention this in its reports. Of course not!!
B) … and why on earth would Iran be using a deuterium system which the US had already rejected as being inferior in 1948?

But, not only that. Phip's used a nuclear expert to validate her findings. But it was later revealed that he was no expert at all. Read a full exposure of this slackness here: http://www.medialens.org/alerts/10/100114_nuclear_deceit_the.php

2) Whats the civilian application for an EBW (Explosive Bridegewire Detonator)?
That is quite trivial compared to item 1. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...-irans-nuclear-program-alarming-or-hyped.html

By the IAEA's own admission (Nov 2011 IAEA report, section C-5, para 39), Iran informed the agency in 2008 that it had developed EBWs for use in conventional and civilian applications. The accusation is that Iran has not explained to the Agency its own need or application for such detonators. In other words, the IAEA demands, "Tell us what you want to do with it," even though it was Iran that supplied the information in the first place, and Iranian scientists had published their work in scientific journals that even the IAEA mentions in its report. Iranian scientist has presented papers in 2005 on EBWs at an international conference. And here comes the killer: IAEA Nov 2011 report para 40 - "The Agency recognizes that there exist non-nuclear applications" OUCHIES!!

3) "Hydrodynamic experiments"
This is the easiest of all http://www.globalissues.org/news/2011/11/19/11932
"The IAEA claim that a foreign scientist - identified in news reports as Vyacheslav Danilenko - had been involved in building the alleged containment chamber has now been denied firmly by Danilenko himself in an interview with Radio Free Europe published Friday."

So what are we left with now? The IAEA reports have been shown to be thoroughly irresponsible. They are a thorough disgrace. There is nothing left which Iran needs to defend. Only die-hard "nuke Iran" fanatics would still even pretend that the IAEA reports have any credibility. I would suggest that the UN undertakes a thorough investigation of this sham, and restaffs most key positions in the IAEA.

 

Extraordinary; bravo! But do you honestly expect conservatives weaned on 10-second Fox newsbites to digest that and make sense of it? I can see them glazing-over as I write...

 

I know, Snakestretcher .... I know. For them facts are just a nuisance that get in the way of a good pre-invasion 'rah'rah' sabre-rattle. It's what 'Murka wants that is important. And besides facts, reason is just a fly buzzing around the head of her hegemony.

 

The Klipper Nails It !

the last nail in the "nuke Iran" coffin






.

.​

.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16821214

I can't wait to hear the different versions of the "legal issues".

 

Anything related or organized by the UN is more than questionable. However, sanctions have been increased regarding Iran, except some of the EU nations might have given in because of oil. Greece. Spain. And a few more nations.

Of course, they could buy Ethical oil from Canada rather than oil than from countries that do not respect human rights and other religons. The oil via Keystone Pipeline that Obama is preventing because he wants the envrionmentalist votes. I bet some OPEC countries have funded the anti-Oilsands cause.

Either Iran gets nuclear weapons or it doesn’t. To ensure that it doesn’t, the only viable option is to break Iran’s weapons program militarily. This would surely be an unpleasant undertaking, and may well have undesirable short-term economic consequences. But which is worse: Iran as a permanent nuclear power, or the short-term risks that would arise from swift action to prevent that result?

Unfortunately, Western leaders may achieve the worst of both worlds: a nuclear Iran and an unrecovered Europe. If so, they will have only themselves to blame.

Don’t Let Iran Benefit From EU Financial Crisis: John R. Bolton
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...t-from-eu-financial-crisis-john-r-bolton.html

Iran may or may not be building nuclear weapon, but they’re keeping their options open: U.S. intelligence chief
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/0...yre-keeping-their-options-open-u-s-spy-chief/


Iran's Nuclear Program
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/...ndterritories/iran/nuclear_program/index.html

... a United Nations report released in November 2011 challenged that claim. The International Atomic Energy Agency released a trove of evidence that they said makes a “credible” case that “Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device” and that the project may still be under way. The report said the I.A.E.A. had amassed “over a thousand pages” of documents, presumably leaked out of Iran, showing “research, development and testing activities” on a range of technologies that would only be useful in designing a nuclear weapon.

The report offered no estimate of how long it would take for Iran to be able to produce a nuclear weapon. But it laid out the case that Iran had moved far beyond the blackboard to create computer models of nuclear explosions in 2008 and 2009, and conducted experiments on nuclear triggers. The report said that starting in 2000, the Iranians constructed a vessel to conduct those tests, which was not shown to inspectors who visited the site five years later.

The report, the harshest judgment that U.N. weapons inspectors had ever issued in their decade-long struggle to pierce the secrecy surrounding the Iranian program, rekindled a debate among the Western allies and Israel about whether increased diplomatic pressure, sanctions, sabotage or military action could stop Iran’s program.

However, there are a few members who think they have access to the real truth about Iran's efforts and desires. I am impressed.

 

Nope. If Iran achieves nuclear status then I'm going to blame America and their CIA-instigated coup which removed a democratically elected government from power in Iran, and installed a puppet thug-the Shah. The subsequent Islamic revolution and all issues the west has with Iran are of the west's own making. That is the truth that Iran's ignorant and hypocritical detractors are unwilling to admit to.

 

I agree The Judge. I is nothing short of hypocrisy for people to "cry" about terrorism, yet those are the same to champion the utilization of terror. What do they think that assissinations, war, interventions and the like are all about?

 

I think the west had some very good teachers over the years

 

I wonder what the Republican candidates (aside from Ron Paul) will have to say about this. They'll probably just continue spewing lies and war propaganda.

 

Yes, they will. They're also screaming for war in the Zionist press- even though their own security service states that Iran has NOT decided to weaponize its nuclear industry. It exactly the same situation as existed before the ill-fated invasion of Iraq when the US intelligence agencies confirmed that there were no wmd in Iraq. Really, anybody falling for this twice is a moron, a Zionist stooge or a Zionist.

 

No American (and Allies) military effort has been "ill-fated" in the Middle East. It has shown all Muslims that America and Allies do not fear the Islamist-Jihadis and stay. Albeit Obama doesn't understand that Muslims go in phases of deceit and wars, and they have continued since the medieval times. A hundred-years war or more? A smarter president would establish key bases and stay as long as necessary. Soldiers need places to fight, so why not against warlords, despots, zealots and so forth who threaten the infidel world?

Iran has made it clear many times what their intentions are.

Iran is an ‘urgent’ nuclear threat: CSIS
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/03/iran-is-an-urgent-nuclear-threat-csis/

Force, the Revolution, and the making of a political culture — The nuclear stakes — Canadian ISecurity Intellignece Services
https://www.csis.gc.ca/pblctns/cdmctrch/nsghts_rn-eng.asp#l4

 

Yet YOU know all there is to know about Muslims................

 

Professor Alan J. Kuperman was called a hasbarist and was countered on a blog by a liberal Jew two years ago. Notwithstanding, still a threat or not? Interesting. The professor wasn't sure whether sanctions would do much. However, it seems serious sanctions have caused havoc in Iran and they rattled their swords. The problem here is the EU nations that kiss-ass for oil.

There’s Only One Way to Stop Iran - ALAN J. KUPERMAN
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/opinion/24kuperman.html?sq=kuperman&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=all

N.Y. Times Publishes Hasbarist’s Dream Op Ed on Iran
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/t...blishes-hasbarists-dream-of-an-op-ed-on-iran/

 

Really, anybody falling for this twice is a moron, a Zionist stooge or a Zionist.

 

Given the firmly established track record of the immoral puppet master War Mongers
.... in their shameless dissemination & use of propaganda & Lie, in order to perpetrate,
.................................................their so called Humanitarian or Preemptive Conflict

& admitting that the 'subduing' of Iraq, Libya, Syria & Iran was all proposed & planned for
..................... in numerous PNAC documents, years before the 9/11 Peal Harbor Event

For over 17yrs now we have repeatedly been told by these BloodyMinded Psychopaths,
that an Iranian Nuclear Bomb capability & therefore immediate Attack is but months away.

Yet we have repeatedly shown, that recent statements by US & Israeli Government officials
........ are clear & definitively show that; 'Iran does NOT have an Nuclear Weapons Program


We have seen here on this thread Quotes, by the very people within their
..................................................respective Governments. who should most likely know -
.................................................. "Iran does NOT have a Nuclear Weapons Program'


Reprise

We must Rationally & Morally conclude that there can be absolutely NO Justification
to begin the mass murder of Iranians based on a malignant, Loudly Horned charge
........................................................ that ‘Iran is developing Nuclear Weapons’

--------------------------------



Now in the face of such in your face facts,
What is the Willfully Ignorant responce, of those Lobbying for Death ?, -





......... What but this sort of Prattle ?

 

.


.

The Willfully Ignorant should not bet so heavily that EVIL acts
will result in only minor short term Economic consequences

As it has been shown that the the issue of Iran acquiring Nuclear Arms is a Charade
and a Canard hiding the real motives behind the policy urging War with Iran

It should behoove us to familiarize ourselves with what their Motivations actually are.

Petrodollar Pumping US Policy on Iran, Backfire Looms

By Michael T. Winter - February 01, 2012http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30409.htm


.

 

Petrodollar Pumping US Policy on Iran, Backfire Looms

By Michael T. Winter - February 01, 2012http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article30409.htm


Economic sanctions, spearheaded by the US and, less willingly, the EU could have a disastrous effect on both of their respective economies. If Iran cannot sell their oil to Europe, there are plenty of customers waiting in the wings, and if they come bearing not petrodollars, but gold and sovereign currencies, then all the better for Iran. These sanctions, if enforced, will in effect place a serious dent in the power of the petrodollar.

Any rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear program and the insistence on crippling it is nothing more than a US attempt to force regime change for one more receptive to maintaining the hegemony of the petrodollar.

The world now knows the truth about the US and how they conduct their affairs. US hostilities toward Iran have nothing to do with nuclear weapons development. If that were the case, then North Korea and Pakistan would be facing similar sanctions and threats, but they aren’t. The difference of course is in what lies beneath the ground – oil. Iran has it and the other guys don’t.

At the heart of the issue is not Iran’s dubious attempt to build nuclear weapons, or even oil, but how that oil is paid for. In 1973, Richard Nixon promised King Faisal of Saudi Arabia that the US would protect Saudi Arabian oilfields from any and all interested parties seeking to forcefully wrest them from the House of Saud. It’s important to remember that in 1973, Saudi Arabia didn’t have a fraction of the military and ground forces it possesses today (almost exclusively US manufactured weapons) and the USSR was very much a threat.

In return Saudi Arabia, and by extension OPEC, agreed to sell their oil in US dollars only. As if that weren’t sweet enough, as part of the deal, they were required to invest their profits in US treasuries, bonds and bills. The real zinger is that all countries purchasing oil from OPEC had to do so in US dollars, or ‘petrodollars’.

This strengthened the US dollar, resulting in a steady US economic growth cycle throughout the 80’s and 90’s. Countries purchasing OPEC oil started buying US treasury bills, bonds and securities to ensure they could continue purchasing OPEC oil. This worked fine for the US until 2001.

No plan, however well formulated, functions smoothly indefinitely.
2001, enter Saddam Hussein. He floated a plan to sell oil for European currencies in lieu of petrodollars. Shortly after Iraq was ‘suddenly’ found to be seeking and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction – allegations spearheaded by the US. The world knows what happened, suffice it to say that Saddam is dead and Iraq is ‘back on track’, selling its oil for petrodollars once again.

Muammar Gaddafi harbored the Lockerbie Bombers and allowed various terrorist organizations establish training camps in Libya. He tried to buy a nuke from China in 1972. In 1977, he approached Pakistan, then India. He sought nerve gas from Thailand. In spite of well over fifty failed assassination attempts on Gaddafi by Israel, the US and the UK, Libya was left to its own devices for the most part. Seeking nukes and harboring terrorists is one thing, but threatening the petrodollar is quite another. Gaddafi made a fatal error when he decided to move away from the petrodollar in favor of other currencies. This simply was not tolerated by the US. Having already played the WMD card in Iraq, something new was pulled from the US ‘regime change’ grab bag. Within a year, ‘internal’ elements rose up in rebellion against Gaddafi and now he is dead. Long live the petrodollar.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), suggested last year that the Euro would be a more suitable oil reserve currency than the US Dollar. Within three months of that statement, allegations of rape ruined his career, derailing his bid for the French Presidency in the process. Soon thereafter, all charges were dropped, but of course, le dommage était fait – the damage was done. Christine Lagarde, DSK’s replacement as head of the IMF sees no reason to change the current arrangement, naturellement.

The Iran situation is a little trickier. The US has sought to dismantle Iran’s regime ever since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, so this round of hostilities, while not new, reflects a new level of intensity. Why, after thirty years of hostility, has the US ratcheted up its rhetoric? As Obama stated in his recent State of the Union address, when it comes to Iran and the insistence they dismantle their nuclear program, “no options are off the table”. By stating ‘no options’ this would include nuclear deployment as a deterrent.

The answer of course is that Iran is now seeking to disengage itself from the petrodollar dynamic. In 2005, Iran sought to create an Iranian Oil Exchange, thus bypassing the US controlled petrodollar. Fear that western powers would freeze accounts in European and London banks put an end to that plan.

But that was not the end of their attempts, and Iran sought other ways to get around the petrodollar noose. There are rumors that India, which imports 12% of their oil from Iran, has agreed to purchase oil for gold. Energy trade with China, importing 15% of its oil and natural gas from Iran may be settled in gold, yuan, and rial. South Korea plans to buy 10% of their oil from Iran in 2012, and unless Seoul sides with American and European sanctions, it is likely to use gold or their sovereign currency to pay for it. Also, Iran is already dumping the dollar in its trade with Russia in favor of rials and rubles.

Iran is breaking the back of the petrodollar. Others have tried, but Iran is succeeding. To understand how disastrous this is for the US, one must have a basic understanding of how critical a role the petrodollar plays in the economic health of the US.

Through King Faisal, Nixon elevated the US to supreme economic ascendency, not unlike Damocles in his desire to rule. Sitting on the (economic) throne of the world is great, but Nixon was either unaware of the sword dangling over the US economic system, or chose to ignore it in favor of reaping the rewards of the moment.

By creating the petrodollar paradigm, the US economy soared, as all countries of the world were required to amass US currency to purchase oil from OPEC nations. Sales of T-bills, securities and US bonds soared. US coffers fattened. With the US dollar as the world’s oil currency reserve, economic fortune favored the US. But with great reward comes great risk. While other countries exchanged their currency for the dollar, (forfeiting value in the process) the US simply printed more money to match their needs and purchase their oil – essentially for free. The best example is that while gasoline in the US cost $3.00 per gallon, in Europe that same gallon costs $6.00 or more.

Herein lies the danger. If Iran is successful in its bid to set up their own bourse, or oil exchange, then what need does the world have for all those US dollars? The answer is none at all. As Iran creating gold and sovereign currency partnerships with India, China, South Korea and Russia, the hegemony of the petrodollar will be destroyed.

The resulting sell-off of US dollars, T-bills, securities, bonds and assets will flood the already swollen world economy with even more useless dollars, ultimately devaluing it into a position where hyper-inflation becomes a risk.

So, while the US government sabre-rattles and prattles on and on about nuclear weapons and the threat Iran poses to the Middle East, the thin veneer of lies spouted by the elite controlled media is being stripped away, revealing the truth of their warmongering rhetoric.
The US, by their foolish insistence on enforcing embargoes and sanctions against Iran, is hastening the end of the petrodollar and ushering in the age of US dollar hyper-inflation. A practical example: One loaf of bread in a healthy economy is $1.00. In an inflationary economy it’s $1.75. In a hyper-inflationary economy, $500.00.

Bullies may be large and dangerous, but rarely are they intelligent.

Damocles wisely vacated the throne of Dionysius before the sword fell upon his head, but the US is foolishly refusing to step down from their economic dais in spite of the catastrophic effect current policy direction will mean for US citizens and the world economy.



.​

 

those must be self hating jews that said that..... REAL jews know iran has nukes!!!

 

Facetious - I take it

 

Cole's thoughts on an Israeli attack on Iran;

That's not the half of it though. There's also the possibility that the US of AIPAC will do Zionism's bidding - which cannot fail to involve the Russians. If Washington cannot prevent the Zionist fascists from committing suicide then it had better resolve to stand back and watch without becoming an aggressor itself.
Why not just openly refuse to support an Israeli attack and put an end to this maniacal scaremongering once and for all ?

 

What's Nat King Cole got to do with it?

 

If Israel did not attack Iran's nuclear bomb facilities, then a year or two later most of NYC goes up in nuclear fireball with Iranian fingerprints all over it who would be to blame? While I do detest and am opposed to all war unless its for demonstrable self defense, in some cases we must commit to an action that may be good or bad.

Another way of understanding the problem~

If a nut crawls into my bedroom window (he would not make it that far) and starts sneaking towards my bed when if ever should I shoot? Should I shoot to wound (what if he has something that looks like a pistol in his hand)..or shoot to kill (ie use the .22, the .45 or the 12 ga with OO and dear slugs) ? I support Israel and if they have to make a preemptive strike God bless them and I will pray they make the right choice. Oh BTW Israel and the USA works in conjunction with the Hebrew God ie; YHWH or the name of God related to Moses אהיה אשר אהיה

Without God nothing is possible. We Christians here in the USA enjoy controlling 70% of the vote, our vote is the supernatural will of God made temporal and existent in this, our world.

reva


Supporting an illegal (mythical) Palestinian state is evil by default.