Previously Scott Ritter mentioned some of the present day neo-conservatives support of the Iranian nuclear program during the 70’s.
“I can remember in the l970s there was an internal crisis at MIT when the institute authorities pretty much sold the nuclear engineering department to the shah in a secret agreement. The agreement was that the Nuclear Engineering Department would bring in Iranian nuclear engineers, and in return, the shah would provide some unspecified — but presumably large — amount of money to MIT. When (this was) leaked, there was a lot of student protest and a student referendum — something like 80 percent of students were opposed to it. […] It was quite striking that the faculty vote was the exact opposite of the student vote […] Anyway, it went through. Probably the people running the Iranian program today were trained at MIT. The strongest supporters of this U.S.-Iranian nuclear program were Henry Kissinger, Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz.
[…] This was in the mid-’70s. Kissinger now says, “How can Iran be pursuing a peaceful program when they have so much oil — they don’t need nuclear energy.” In 1975 he was saying the opposite. He was saying, “Of course Iran has to develop nuclear energy. It cannot rely upon its oil resources.” Kissinger was asked by the Washington Post why he had completely changed his judgment on this issue. He was quite frank and honest. He said something like, “They were an ally then, so they needed nuclear energy. Now they are an enemy, so they don’t need nuclear energy.” […]
[…] A large majority of Americans — something like 75 percent — agree that Iran has the right to develop nuclear energy, if it is not for nuclear weapons. But they are not part of the world either. The world consists of Washington and whoever goes along with it. Everything else is not the world...” Read more
Relevant post: Blasts from the past
“Iran’s nuclear program started with the support, encouragement and participation of the United States, France, Germany and the UK because it made economic sense, and it still does. At a time when Iran’s nuclear program is portrayed as an imminent threat, its interesting to see that the program actually started long ago, with the support and participation of the same countries that today insist Iran abandon its nuclear program.” Some of the old newspapers articles here
The Shah: America’s Nuclear Poster Boy:
“Back in the good old days, the regal Shah served as the poster boy for US power companies selling nuclear reactors TO A SKEPTICAL AMERICAN PUBLIC!”
Iran accused of hiding nuclear studies
Iran rejects nuclear weapons allegations
IAEA Chief demands full disclosure from Iran
Iran and IAEA agree on action plan; US, Europeans not satisfied
Iranian FM: US in no position to dictate nuclear terms … … …
We have all seen the above headlines starting all over again and again and again. Probably you haven’t read a full IAEA report, neither have I. None of the news articles usually gives a clear picture.
IAEA Report: “In May, the media characterized a report by the IAEA into Iran’s uranium enrichment program as evidence that Tehran is actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program. […] the media misrepresented the report and likely did not thoroughly review its findings. “We have a situation where the IAEA has published several technical reports all of which state there is no evidence Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program. None. Zero.”
How the IAEA report was drafted: “(Intelligence) information has been provided to the IAEA […] we all know that it’s basically intelligence provided to the agency by the U. S. of America, a nation openly hostile to Iran, a nation that has a track record of fabricating, exaggerating, and misrepresenting intelligence data. […]
… because the United States has such a dominating role in the United Nations Security Council and in the Board of Governors the IAEA couldn’t ignore the information it receives from the United States about Iran.
“The IAEA can’t go to Iran with information that isn’t serious. So they say it’s serious and it needs to be investigated. So they go to Iran and the Iranians say, correctly so, ‘this is bullshit.’ You’re basically serving as a front to the CIA. The CIA is asking intelligence based questions about issues that are not relevant to the safeguards agreement […]
“The IAEA acknowledges that what it’s asking Iran to answer has nothing to do with its mandate of the nuclear non proliferation treaty. […] Iran is saying it’s not their job to answer the CIA’s questions. So the IAEA reports that Iran is not being forthcoming on these issues and now it’s unnamed diplomats, i.e. American and British diplomats, who say they are very concerned because Iran’s refusal to cooperate only reinforces their concern that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
“This is purely CIA instigated tripe. When we get down to the nuts and bolts of the technical question of Iran’s uranium enrichment program and whether or not there’s any infrastructure in Iran that supports a nuclear weapons program and the IAEA technical find says there is none […]” Read the article
See also: The Nuclear Expert Who Never Was, by Scott Ritter
Previous posts: The case against Iran
- Algeria, France to Sign Nuclear Energy Pact: Minister May 2008
- French FM due in Jordan to Sign Nuclear Deal May 2008
- US Unveils Deals with Saudi on Nuclear Power, Oil Protection May 2008
- UAE, France Lay Ground for Nuclear Partnership May 2008
- Sarkozy, in Egypt, Offers French Nuclear Assistance to Cairo December 2007
- Yemen Signs Nuclear Energy Deal with US Firm September 2007
- Iran …
If you wonder what I think of this report, I can only quote (again) my friend Aref-Adib:
Posted previously at Politics by Aref-Adib
Update: Iran Intelligence Report: Another psychological warfare? By Soraya Sepahpour Ulrich + an interview with her.
Modern Musings wrote: “Reading yesterday’s paper I found an article that spoke of the new Iran sanctions being prepared by the United Nations. Two sentences in this article got my blood boiling. I like being informed, I like keeping tabs on our government but I get so emotional, baby, that sometimes I can’t intelligently respond to the absurdities I encounter. So this is what the article stated:
“Acting U.S. Ambassador Alejandro Wolff said the United States rejected amendments by Indonesia and Qatar calling for the Middle East to be free of weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. U.S. officials said Iran’s nuclear program should be the sole focus.”
Just a few questions…
- Why isn’t mandating a nuclear free Middle East a good thing?
- Wouldn’t adopting such an amendment allow Iran to comply without losing her sovereignty as a nation in the eyes of her people?
- Would Israel’s nuclear weapon stores be the cause of rejecting said amendment?”
United Nations complicity in war crimes: interview with Hans von Sponeck, or here
Count Hans-Christof von Sponeck, has been working for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) for 32 years. Appointed in 1998 as United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq, with the status of UN Assistant to the Secretary General, he resigned in March 2000 in protest against the sanctions, which had led the Iraqi people to misery and starvation. He speakes about the sufferings endured by the Iraqis and he appeals to the political leaders responsible for the catastrophe.
More about the UN: UNSC Role Change, Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
Iran, Israel, The Big Lie and The Real Threat, by Frank Scott, Information Clearing House: “Attempting to portray Iran as a nuclear menace to Israel and the world, in that order, even though it has no nuclear weapons and Israel has hundreds, is not merely a sign of dementia. It is indication of near idiocy in a society that can be repeatedly manipulated into believing such totally crackpot notions that have no foundation in the material world but exist only in a world of superstitious psycho-fantasy.”
Keeping All Options on the Table: A Roadmap to Negotiation or War?
Farideh Farhi, Foreign Policy in Focus, March 6: ” … if the Iranian leadership thinks that negotiations and compromise on the nuclear issue will indeed lead to a breakthrough in relations with the United States and on the abandoning of its policy of weakening the Iranian regime. Without such an incentive, the hardliners in Iran will be able to run the show based on the argument that no matter how many concessions are given, American hostility will not end…”
I just came across the following classified document, by someone who must remained unidentified, as his revelations might put him in great danger. See yourself:
“Just imagine what the world would look like if, and only if EyeRun (Iran) has nuclear weapons.
First thing they would do is to send one missile to Hiroshima because Japan backed US sanctions against EyeRun. Just think of all them Toyotas destroyed.
Then they will move into Iraq and invade it. Poor Iraqis living under military rule of the EyeRunians. They don’t even care about their injured let alone the Iraqis.
They might even invade Vietnam just not to be behind in their race against us. Then Afghanistan and the rest of the world.
They will surly invade Israel and hand it over to those Palestinians. And these Palestinians will build a wall all through the country and check points and won’t let Israelis breath a word about their right to live in their own country.
They will do all they can to change the glob into one small village. Just imagine running into AhmadiNejad on your way to work every morning.
Imagine all the people living under EyeRunian rule. You may say I am a dreamer but, I am not the only one. You can join us if you like.
WHAT TO DO?
1- Pave the way for Bush’s army to attack EyeRun. Ask your representatives to help him.
2- Join the peace parades and convince people to join the army in the name of peace.
3- Use Greece experience in invading EyeRun by Alexander the Great. We can use their intelligence reports and satellite pictures taken before their attack.
Don’t let another Sadam be born with all those weapons of mass destruction. (you can ask for details about this from Tony the Blair).
You don’t believe me? Just look at this picture from Tehran. All men here are wearing mustaches just like Sadam and are all potential dictators to be. And what you will have millions of Sadams on your hand giving a million dollars for each to be hunted down.
See you in Tehran Conference (the second) after our peaceful war is over.”