GOP Fascist Warmongerers trying to neo-con us again on Iran - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 02:31 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
GOP Fascist Warmongerers trying to neo-con us again on Iran


U.N. Inspectors Dispute Iran Report By House Panel
Paper on Nuclear Aims Called Dishonest

By Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 14, 2006; Page A17

U.N. inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program angrily complained to the Bush administration and to a Republican congressman yesterday about a recent House committee report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document "outrageous and dishonest" and offering evidence to refute its central claims.

Officials of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency said in a letter that the report contained some "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements." The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy was hand-delivered to Gregory L. Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna.

The IAEA openly clashed with the Bush administration on pre-war assessments of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Relations all but collapsed when the agency revealed that the White House had based some allegations about an Iraqi nuclear program on forged documents.

After no such weapons were found in Iraq, the IAEA came under additional criticism for taking a cautious approach on Iran, which the White House says is trying to building nuclear weapons in secret. At one point, the administration orchestrated a campaign to remove the IAEA's director general, Mohamed ElBaradei. It failed, and he won the Nobel Peace Prize last year.

Yesterday's letter, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post, was the first time the IAEA has publicly disputed U.S. allegations about its Iran investigation. The agency noted five major errors in the committee's 29-page report, which said Iran's nuclear capabilities are more advanced than either the IAEA or U.S. intelligence has shown.

Among the committee's assertions is that Iran is producing weapons-grade uranium at its facility in the town of Natanz. The IAEA called that "incorrect," noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of 90 percent or more. Iran has enriched uranium to 3.5 percent under IAEA monitoring.

When the congressional report was released last month, Hoekstra said his intent was "to help increase the American public's understanding of Iran as a threat." Spokesman Jamal Ware said yesterday that Hoekstra will respond to the IAEA letter.

Rep. Rush D. Holt (D-N.J.), a committee member, said the report was "clearly not prepared in a manner that we can rely on." He agreed to send it to the full committee for review, but the Republicans decided to make it public before then, he said in an interview.

The report was never voted on or discussed by the full committee. Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), the vice chairman, told Democratic colleagues in a private e-mail that the report "took a number of analytical shortcuts that present the Iran threat as more dire -- and the Intelligence Community's assessments as more certain -- than they are."

Privately, several intelligence officials said the committee report included at least a dozen claims that were either demonstrably wrong or impossible to substantiate. Hoekstra's office said the report was reviewed by the office of John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence.

Negroponte's spokesman, John Callahan, said in a statement that his office "reviewed the report and provided its response to the committee on July 24, '06." He did not say whether it had approved or challenged any of the claims about Iran's capabilities.

"This is like prewar Iraq all over again," said David Albright, a former nuclear inspector who is president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security. "You have an Iranian nuclear threat that is spun up, using bad information that's cherry-picked and a report that trashes the inspectors."

The committee report, written by a single Republican staffer with a hard-line position on Iran, chastised the CIA and other agencies for not providing evidence to back assertions that Iran is building nuclear weapons.

It concluded that the lack of intelligence made it impossible to support talks with Tehran. Democrats on the committee saw it as an attempt from within conservative Republican circles to undermine Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who has agreed to talk with the Iranians under certain conditions.

The report's author, Fredrick Fleitz, is a onetime CIA officer and special assistant to John R. Bolton, the administration's former point man on Iran at the State Department. Bolton, who is now ambassador to the United Nations, had been highly influential during President Bush's first term in drawing up a tough policy that rejected talks with Tehran.

Among the allegations in Fleitz's Iran report is that ElBaradei removed a senior inspector from the Iran investigation because he raised "concerns about Iranian deception regarding its nuclear program." The agency said the inspector has not been removed.

A suggestion that ElBaradei had an "unstated" policy that prevented inspectors from telling the truth about Iran's program was particularly "outrageous and dishonest," according to the IAEA letter, which was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, the IAEA's director for external affairs and a former Hungarian ambassador.

Hoekstra's committee is working on a separate report about North Korea that is also being written principally by Fleitz. A draft of the report, provided to The Post, includes several assertions about North Korea's weapons program that the intelligence officials said they cannot substantiate, including one that Pyongyang is already enriching uranium.

The intelligence community believes North Korea is trying to acquire an enrichment capability but has no proof that an enrichment facility has been built, the officials said.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address

Last edited by FeelTheLove; 09-14-2006 at 03:15 AM.
FeelTheLove is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 02:55 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
baby boo's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,646
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No matter where Iran is in the enrichment process do you have any doubt that their ultimate goal is to produce nuclear weapons?

Didn't the IAEA refer Iran to the security council for breaching it's obligations under the NNT?

Seems to me the only point in dispute is how far away they are from achieving their goals; not what their ultimate goals are.

Would it be acceptable to you for Iran to have nuclear weapons?
baby boo is offline  
post #3 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 03:11 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
The thing driving the current drop in oil prices is an IAEA report that stated that Iran is ten years away from building a nuke, not six months as the war pigs were trying to get us to believe. Why has BushCo and his neo-fascist ally Hoekstra, a war pig extraordinaire, been so eager to say the opposite? Why was there such an attempt to pull us into the Hezbollah-Israeli conflict so we could get a possible war with Iran started, if the threat is ten years off? At least one thing is for sure after the Iraq fiasco, now the IAEA will trump GOP bullshit. As far as it being "acceptable", I'll worry about that nine years from now.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #4 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 08:57 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
baby boo's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,646
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think that Bush is going to press this matter before the end of his presidency. We can't trust the disarming of Iran to a possible future Democratic president. We're likely to get some bumbling idiot like Jimmy Carter who will either lack the nerve to persue the matter or launch a poorly planned and executed strategy like Carter did with helicopters crashing in the desert. As soon as we got a strong president in there (Reagan) our hostages were released and the immediate crises was over. With a weak president like Carter our embassy staff was held hostage for a year and a half with no end in sight until Reagan was elected.

An interesting sidelight is that I don't think Russia and China realize that by running interference for Tehran they are greatly increasing the likelihood of an American attack. If they go along with us on strong U.N. sanctions it may be possible to coerce the Iranians to give up their nuclear ambitions. If they block reasonable efforts to do so and pass some watered down, ineffective resolution then I think that Bush will have no choice but launch a massive air (not ground) offensive to take out their heavy water and nuclear processing plants.
baby boo is offline  
post #5 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 09:33 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mzsmbs's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1972 Mercedes 250 (/8) W114/M130
Location: on a high bank of a creek
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink it.



in political asylum
mzsmbs is offline  
post #6 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 09:47 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Yes, we all fear the bumbling Democrats after the utter success of the GOP in Iraq. Iraq - the first war in US history waged by a political party instead of by the People of the United States, is a model of how war should be fought! Partisanship! Mismanagement! Poor Judgement! Yes sir, we definitely need more of that!

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #7 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 09:50 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Check Codes's Avatar
 
Date registered: Mar 2005
Vehicle: '01-E320 & 02-ST2
Location: John 15:18-19
Posts: 31,634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Right off I'll admit I'm not a nuclear physicist; that said, why is it supposed to take 10 years for Iran to build a nuke? As I recall once we made a decision to build one it didn't take that long, and we were literally inventing the thing as we went, whereas Iran has a wealth of proven research and history that already exists. They're not a bunch of uneducated goobers and they have the money to hire any intelligence they don't already have in-house. Basically, if they truly are 10 years away, why are they that stupid? (At the same time, if they truly are 10 years off then there's no urgency to do anything for a couple of years, but ultimately this is like ignoring the fact that sooner or later we're going to run so low on petroleum that a barrel is going to cost $300, so therefore we should take some actions now to stave off that inevitability.)

I'm not going to go so far as to say that I agree with the alleged warmongering and in any event my general distrust of politics and politicians keeps me from being excited about anything they have to say, in an "official" report or otherwise.

That said, what we do know is that the moron -- er, president -- of Iran has publicly stated his goal of wiping Israel off the face of the earth, that their equally-moronic religious leader (who in reality may well have more power than Ahmadinejad) has things to say that are even more facist, and they are refusing to stand down from their desire to build nukes. So let's assume we play nice guy and tell them yeah, you're a world power, let's give you a couple of nukes to level the playing field. Any doubt they would instead level Israel (who would launch their weapons as well) with the ultimate result either global nuclear war or -- if other major powers stayed out -- a nuclear winter? (And if Iran knows that's the result, wouldn't they point a few in directions other than just Israel?)

On the other hand, nuclear winter would end the concerns of global warming.



I don't have the answers, I'm just chiming in here. But in overall balance, I'm going to trust the babbling islamofacist moron-enabled regimes (let's start a trend and refer to them as BIMER) a great deal less than I will trust the goverments (including the US) that oppose such regimes.

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. (Winston Churchill)
Check Codes is offline  
post #8 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 10:04 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Jim Smith is the resident nuke expert, but I do know that enriching uranium requires a massive industrial base and extremely specialized machinery. It's a moon-shot style project. You just don't wip them up on the barby.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #9 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 10:11 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
baby boo's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,646
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
Jim Smith is the resident nuke expert, but I do know that enriching uranium requires a massive industrial base and extremely specialized machinery. It's a moon-shot style project. You just don't wip them up on the barby.
The Iranians don't need to do this on their own. It is known that A.Q. Khan has sold nuclear technology to other muslim states and is under house arrest in Pakistan.

Pakistan sold nuclear materials to Iran, Libya: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4324125/

From the article:

UALA LUMPUR, Malaysia - Iran and Libya received black market nuclear materials from Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, police said Friday, citing the deals’ middleman.

Buhary Syed Abu Tahir, the alleged chief financier of an international nuclear trafficking network run by Khan, told Malaysian police that the scientist asked him to send two containers of used centrifuge parts from Pakistan to Iran in 1994 or 1995....
baby boo is offline  
post #10 of 33 (permalink) Old 09-14-2006, 11:30 AM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
67_250SE's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregs210
...why is it supposed to take 10 years for Iran to build a nuke? As I recall once we made a decision to build one it didn't take that long, and we were literally inventing the thing as we went, whereas Iran has a wealth of proven research and history that already exists...
Exactly, building the "bomb" itself would not take 10 years. It took us far less time to build two towards the end of WWII.

But we dropped our bombs on Japan, in the conventional manner.

Nowadays the use sophisticated delivery systems and that may be the hang up.

Do you think that the people of Iran would ever be allwoed to watch the 1983 made for TV movie (aired by ABC) THE DAY AFTER?

That movie, with its horrific images of what can happen the day after a nuclear attack, was widely used by the anti-nuclear movement in the U.S.
67_250SE is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Top GOP Fascist declares war on Judicial Branch FeelTheLove Off-Topic 17 04-07-2005 02:15 PM
    Top GOP Fascist declares war on Democracy FeelTheLove Off-Topic 0 04-01-2005 10:20 AM
    Churchill the first Neo-Con? American imperialists think so... Zeitgeist Off-Topic 14 02-28-2005 07:08 PM
    Hitchens as a Neo-Con--anti-religious vehemence and love of democracy makes for strange bedfellows. kerry edwards Off-Topic 8 10-05-2004 05:22 PM
    Unfairly Labled Neo-Con Strongly Disagrees with Blair.... Uniwhale Off-Topic 16 09-17-2004 09:57 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome