Iran

[ZAMB]

As Bernie pointed out earlier, the US wants 'scarier' intelligence on Iran, and the IAEA are once again fighting back [not that it helped much in Iraq] - but I think [hope] that more people are informed about the real situation in Iran and won't just listen to the hype.

IAEA protests "erroneous" U.S. report on Iran

By Mark Heinrich

09/14/06 - --VIENNA (Reuters) - U.N. inspectors have protested to the U.S. government and a Congressional committee about a report on Iran's nuclear work, calling parts of it "outrageous and dishonest," according to a letter obtained by Reuters.

The letter recalled clashes between the IAEA and the Bush administration before the 2003 Iraq war over findings cited by Washington about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that proved false, and underlined continued tensions over Iran's dossier.

Sent to the head of the House of Representatives' Select Committee on Intelligence by a senior aide to International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, the letter said an August 23 committee report contained serious distortions of IAEA findings on Iran's activity.

The letter said the errors suggested Iran's nuclear fuel program was much more advanced than a series of IAEA reports and Washington's own intelligence assessments have determined.

It said the report falsely described Iran to have enriched uranium at its pilot centrifuge plant to weapons-grade level in April, whereas IAEA inspectors had made clear Iran had enriched only to a low level usable for nuclear power reactor fuel.

"Furthermore, the IAEA Secretariat takes strong exception to the incorrect and misleading assertion" that the IAEA opted to remove a senior safeguards inspector for supposedly concluding the purpose of Iran's program was to build weapons, it said.

The letter said the congressional report contained "an outrageous and dishonest suggestion" that the inspector was dumped for having not adhered to an alleged IAEA policy barring its "officials from telling the whole truth" about Iran.

Diplomats say the inspector remains IAEA Iran section head.

The IAEA has been inspecting Iran's nuclear program since 2003. Although it has found no hard evidence that Iran is working on atomic weapons, it has uncovered many previously concealed activities linked to uranium enrichment, a process of purifying fuel for nuclear power plants or weapons.

IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said: "We felt obliged to put the record straight with regard to the facts on what we have reported on Iran. It's a matter of the integrity of the IAEA."

Diplomats say Washington, spearheading efforts to isolate Iran with sanctions over its nuclear work, has long perceived ElBaradei to be "soft" on Tehran.

"This (committee report) is deja vu of the pre-Iraq war period where the facts are being maligned and attempts are being made to ruin the integrity of IAEA inspectors," said a Western diplomat familiar with the agency and IAEA-U.S. relations.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14966.htm

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm not sure who your remarks are addressed to, the Americans, a very fitting and realistic statement. Or, the Terrorists, already persucuted beyond belief by the Americans.

The US'ers who re-elected the mass murderer Terrorist Bush and his criminal terrorist team could for my sake join them in the bomb shelters, waitng for theirs to be hit by US "freedom" and "democracy" bombs.

Most non US terrorists do not seek to take shelter for the fight they choose to fight; most of those you hear about are dead by the time you hear about them. A massive difference, don't you think?
Those who create the fertile soil for such terrorist organisations to recrute at a non-stop rising speed are in my view as criminal as the terrrorists and in fact even more.

salaam.

 

[zion]

Aldebaran,

If you're going to post such bloodthirsty posts, don't end them with "salaam".

By the same reasoning, someone frustrated with the corruption of Fatah who voted for Hamas personally deserves aerial bombardment. I don't buy that. People are responsible for violent acts they commit themselves, not violent acts committed by someone else's decision half a planet away.

 

[Aldebaran]

1.I sign my posts how I want.
2. My descripiton of the bomb shelter is a description of how it is for people in Iraq. In my view those who order/support the murderous bombing of innocent people inside their own nation should share their ordeal.
3. Maybe you had none of your loved ones murdered by the bloodthirsty, arrogant, greedy USA, led by the criminal mass murderer Bush. I have.
4. Those whe re-elected Bush even *after* being informed about his lies and deceptive rethoric on Iraq clearly support and applaud his murderous policies.

salaam.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Meanwhile, with the neo-con wardrums beating for an attack on Iran, what would the implications of such an attack be for the US and UK forces in Iraq?

WASHINGTON - For many months, the administration of US George W Bush has been complaining that Iranian meddling in Iraq is a threat to the country's stability and to US troops. The irony of this publicity campaign over Tehran's alleged bid to undermine the occupation is that Iran may well be the main factor holding up a showdown between militant Shi'ites and US forces.

The underlying reality in Iraq, which the Bush administration does not appear to grasp fully, is that the United States is now dependent on the sufferance of Iran and its Iraqi Shi'ite political-military allies to continue the occupation.

Three and a half years after the occupation began, the US military is no longer the real power in Iraq. As the chief of intelligence for the US Marine Corps revealed in a recent report, US troops have been unable to shake the hold that Sunni insurgents have on the vast western province of al-Anbar.

But the main threat to the occupation comes not from the Sunni insurgents but from the militant Iraqi Shi'ite forces aligned with Iran, led by Muqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi Army. The armed Shi'ite militias are now powerful enough to make it impossible for the US occupation to continue.

Gone are the days when the US military could be so cavalier about Muqtada's forces that it deliberately provoked a major confrontation with him in Najaf in April 2004. That was when he was believed to have 10,000 poorly trained troops.

Since then, US officials have avoided giving any estimate of the Mehdi Army's strength. But according to a report published last month by London's Chatham House, which undoubtedly reflected the views of British intelligence in Iraq, the Mehdi Army may now be "several hundred thousand strong". Even if that estimate vastly overstates his troop strength, it reflects the sense that Muqtada has the strongest political-military force in the country - because of the loyalty that so many Shi'ites have to him.

The Mehdi Army controls Sadr City, the massive Shi'ite slum in eastern Baghdad that holds half the capital's population. But even more important, perhaps, it holds sway in the heavily Shi'ite southern provinces, and as Muqtada knows well, that gives him a strategic position from which to bring the US military to a standstill.

Patrick Lang, former head of human-intelligence collection and Middle East intelligence at the Defense Intelligence Agency, explained why in an important analysis in the Christian Science Monitor of July 21: US troops must be supplied by convoys of trucks that go across hundreds of kilometers of roads through this Shi'ite heartland, and the Mehdi Army and its allies in the south could turn those supply routes into a "shooting gallery".

source

Col. Lang's article referenced above. source

 

[zion]

In my view those who order/support the murderous bombing of innocent people inside their own nation should share their ordeal.

We are not talking about restorative justice for the specific people ordering the bombing of innocent people here, Aldebaran. I wouldn't be upset by this if we were. I am upset by your many leaps and expansions that take you from the Israeli military commanders ordering bombing of specific sites, through the Israeli civilian leadership, through the US military and civilian leadership talking to the Israeli leadership, through the people who voted for the re-election of Bush, and finally to the whole population, voting and non-voting, living in the US, including me, who in your mind deserve to get bombed.

Is it worth even pointing out that the Israeli military and the US military are not the same thing? that the bombing of Lebanon had not begun during the 2004 election, and that people had many reasons for voting for Bush, very few of which had anything to do with his Israel policy? that it is not right to punish an entire population for the evil acts of a few men, even if those few men have done terrible things?

So you're feeling hurt. I get that. But that doesn't justify you compounding the felony by deciding that all people living in America deserve to be bombed.

 

[ZAMB]

that it is not right to punish an entire population for the evil acts of a few men, even if those few men have done terrible things?

Did you protest against the bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq then? Do you support your government as it lays waste to whole countries trying to find AQ [reportedly there are only a few hundred in the whole world] or non-existant WMDS?

 

[Descartes]

I think the most apt saying would be:

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

But, on;ly when good men are informed of the evils

 

[zion]

Did you protest against the bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq then?

As a matter of fact, I did, and still, periodically, do. I did not, and do not, support either of Bush's wars, and there are plenty of people in the US who feel that way.

So does that mean that I get a pass from this let's-bomb-the-continental-US deal?

I would also strongly oppose, of course, the bombing of Bush voters, because as I said above, the number of people who voted for Bush on the strength of his policy towards Israel is extremely small.

Neither should those very few people be bombed, because I do not believe in an ethic of revenge.

 

[ska invita]

...

 

[Aldebaran]

We are not talking about restorative justice for the specific people ordering the bombing of innocent people here, Aldebaran.

You and me are not the same person. I write what I write. You on the other hand....

I am upset by your many leaps and expansions that take you from the Israeli military commanders ordering bombing of specific sites, through the Israeli civilian leadership, through the US military and civilian leadership talking to the Israeli leadership, through the people who voted for the re-election of Bush, and finally to the whole population, voting and non-voting, living in the US, including me, who in your mind deserve to get bombed.

You do not seem to know what you talk about.
What on earth has Israel, the Israely army, Israeli citizens etc.. etc.. to do with my remark that the criminal mass murdering government of the USA and people who support the leading mass murderer and even reward him with a re-election for the massacre of thousands of Iraqis -including the woman who raised me and a child of her relatives - should be forced to share what they so eargerly bring onto them?

Is it worth even pointing out that the Israeli military and the US military are not the same thing?

Is it worth pointing out to you that you, not me, seems to see them as the same thing? What on earth has Lebanon to do with this?

So you're feeling hurt. I get that.

No you don't. I'm not "feeling hurt". I grieve every second of my life and shall do so for the rest of my life, for I would not be the man I am without her and I'm not the man I was without her. That is what your country did to me and to uncountable others, and continues to do, and shamelessly plans and plots to do once more.
You should better answer the question: "why". If you can't answer, spend your time to go looking for it instead of wasting mine with your ridiculous (therefore no less arrogant) attempt to play online-phsychiatrist-of-the-unknown.

But that doesn't justify you compounding the felony by deciding that all people living in America deserve to be bombed.

Once again a poor attempt to twist my words, following your vivid self-serving fantasy. You must be surrounded by fools if you are that used to play such simplistic games.

salaam.

 

[ska invita]

.Juan Cole on Iran - fascinating and enlightening - convinced me that Iran is so far away from nuclear weapons that its all bluff, smoke, mirrors and disinformation.

40min interview touches on some other subjects.

File here:
http://www.savefile.com/files/105155

 

[zion]

Aldebaran,

You're right that I misunderstood - I did not see your reference to Iraq, and was merely thinking about the bombing campaign most recently begun. I apologize.

Those whe re-elected Bush even *after* being informed about his lies and deceptive rethoric on Iraq clearly support and applaud his murderous policies. In my view those who order/support the murderous bombing of innocent people inside their own nation should share their ordeal. They could for my sake join them in the bomb shelters, waiting for theirs to be hit by US "freedom" and "democracy" bombs.

You too easily wish upon the American people the same thing that many Iraqi people have suffered. Surely part of your outrage is that many people who do not deserve it have died. I do not see how justice would be advanced by repeating that tragedy on the American people.

I live and walk among American people every day. They do not thirst for your or anybody's blood. The war in Iraq has not come out of their hearts, but out of the hearts of a very few people who have used our government to further their aims. The people who re-elected Bush did so for reasons that made sense to them, and that had very little to do with the effect of the invasion of Iraq on the Iraqi people. I think they were wrong to do so, but they do not deserve death for how they vote - no-one does - and that is what you were wishing on them here.

Making more people suffer like you have suffered does not help anyone. It is the men of war on both sides who are the enemies of the people caught in the middle.

 

[snorbury]

they do not deserve death for how they vote - no-one does - and that is what you were wishing on them here.

 

[zion]

Nope, not even for doing that.

 

[ZAMB]

This is an article in which a US Congressional candidate calls on the US forces to take action if ordered to attack Iran, so that the Iraq tragedy is not repeated. It is a courageous stance, but I doubt if it will help him get elected, just as I don't hold out much hope that the military will act as he wishes. Not enough people in the US, IMO, have read the NPT for themselves and know for themselves that the case against Iran is, as another poster said 'all smoke and mirrors'.

Morrisseau, a Congressional candidate who was court-martialled for opposition to the Vietnam War in 1968, said he has written to General Pace to ask for the intervention of the military. "In spite of my opposition to the Vietnam War and the court-martial which we ultimately defeated, I was a good soldier who had the respect of my superior officers throughout the ordeal. And they had mine!" Morrisseau said. "There are many many, very, very decent people in the active duty military. I know this," he said "--- people who love their country and democracy too, and hate war."

Morrisseau wrote that "Iran is no present threat to us or anyone. Their right to enrich uranium under treaties signed by us for the production of nuclear power is clear: and that is all they have so far done. An attack upon that nation now by us, acting alone will constitute an illegal war of aggression under international law. It is illegal under our law as well. I urge you to so advise the President," Morrisseau wrote to Pace, "and urge that he take no such actions. In particular, he must not act in the absense of a full, formal, responsible War Declaration by Congress. That is the Constitutional requirement." If he and Cheney persist, Morrisseau wrote, "than the country must rely upon you, Sir, and our armed forces generally, to resist all illegal orders by Bush or Cheney, and take the gentlemen into custody if necessary.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15056.htm

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Looks as though it will be in the next 6 weeks.

2 carrier groups arrive in a week, the propaganda is stepping up, Blairs marching around spouting this "progressivisation" twoddle, USM's and SF's have been over the border for weeks, with no congressional consent I might add....

WWIII may well be coming, because Iran are not pushovers and when they have to bring out the "mini" nukes, all bets are off.

But have a nice day yeah.

Looks like this was a little off base...

 

[ZAMB]

Those whe re-elected Bush even *after* being informed about his lies and deceptive rethoric on Iraq clearly support and applaud his murderous policies. In my view those who order/support the murderous bombing of innocent people inside their own nation should share their ordeal. They could for my sake join them in the bomb shelters, waiting for theirs to be hit by US "freedom" and "democracy" bombs.

You too easily wish upon the American people the same thing that many Iraqi people have suffered. Surely part of your outrage is that many people who do not deserve it have died. I do not see how justice would be advanced by repeating that tragedy on the American people.

I don't think Aldebaran was wishing death on Americans, but that they could experience what it's like to be in a bomb shelter, afraid for their life while US 'shock and awe' was happening around them. Perhaps after such an experience they would not be so quick to vote for draft dodgers who took them into a war with no personal experience of what the horrors of war are.

 

[zion]

This bit wishes for Americans to be in bomb shelters:

They could for my sake join them in the bomb shelters...

This bit wishes for them to die:

...waiting for theirs to be hit by US "freedom" and "democracy" bombs.

 

[ZAMB]

This bit wishes for Americans to be in bomb shelters:

They could for my sake join them in the bomb shelters...

This bit wishes for them to die:

...waiting for theirs to be hit by US "freedom" and "democracy" bombs.

"Waiting for" is what makes the difference. He is not talking about being hit, he's talking about the experience of the fear and anticipation of people in this situation. But, as usual, you will stick to your own interpretation.

 

[ZAMB]

More Bush lies

British patrols find no evidence of arms traffic from Iran
US allegations are put to test in Iraqi desert
By Ellen Knickmeyer, Washington Post | October 5, 2006

ON THE IRAQ-IRAN BORDER -- Since late August, British commandos in the deserts of far southeastern Iraq have been testing one of the most serious charges leveled by the United States against Iran: that Iran is secretly supplying weapons, parts, funding, and training for attacks on US-led forces in Iraq.

A few hundred British troops living out of nothing more than their cut-down Land Rovers and light armored vehicles have taken to the desert in the start of what British officers said would be months of patrols aimed at finding the illicit weapons trafficking from Iran, or any sign of it.

There's just one thing.

``I suspect there's nothing out there," the commander, Lieutenant Colonel David Labouchere, said last month, speaking at an overnight camp near the border. ``And I intend to prove it."

Other senior British military leaders spoke as explicitly in interviews over the previous two months. Britain, whose forces have had responsibility for security in southeastern Iraq since the war began, has found nothing to support the Americans' contention that Iran is providing weapons and training in Iraq, several senior military officials said.

``I have not myself seen any evidence -- and I don't think any evidence exists -- of government-supported or instigated" armed support on Iran's part in Iraq, British Defense Secretary Des Browne said in an interview in Baghdad in late August.

``It's a question of intelligence versus evidence," Labouchere's commander, Brigadier James Everard of Britain's 20th Armored Brigade, said last month at his base in the southern region's capital, Basra. ``One hears word of mouth, but one has to see it with one's own eyes."

Allegations that Iran or its agents are providing military support for Iraqi Shi'ite Muslim militias and other armed groups is one of the most contentious issues raising tensions between Washington and Tehran. US generals and diplomats accuse Iran of providing infrared triggers for special explosives that are capable of piercing heavy armor.

Evidence of Iranian armed intervention in Iraq is ``irrefutable," one US commander in Iraq, Brigadier General Michael Barbero, told Pentagon reporters in August. The lead US military spokesman in Iraq renews the allegation almost weekly in Baghdad.

Iraq's remote Maysan province is ``a funnel for Iranian munitions," said Wayne White, who led the State Department's Iraq intelligence team during the war and now is an adjunct scholar at the Washington-based Middle East Institute. White said that in the first year of the occupation a well-placed friend had seen ``considerable physical evidence of it, and just about everyone in al-Amarah knew about it." Al-Amarah is the commonly used name of Maysan province.

http://www.boston.com/news/world/mi...s_find_no_evidence_of_arms_traffic_from_iran/