Survivor of Attack Leads Nuclear Effort in Iran

[alp227]

Source: The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Eight months after he narrowly survived an assassination attempt on the streets of Tehran, Fereydoon Abbasi, the nuclear physicist whom Iran’s mullahs have put in charge of the country’s Atomic Energy Organization, is presiding over what intelligence officials in several countries describe as an unexpected quickening of Iran’s production of nuclear material.

The selection of Dr. Abbasi earlier this year was itself a clear message to the West. As a university scientist, he was barred from traveling outside Iran by the United Nations Security Council because of evidence that his main focus was on how to build nuclear weapons, rather than power plants. But in recent weeks he has publicly declared that his country is preparing to triple its production of a type of nuclear fuel that moves it far closer to the ability to produce bomb-grade material in a hurry.

Filtering out the hyperbole surrounding recent proclamations about Iran’s tangible progress is always difficult, especially at a time when the country is determined to show that neither the Stuxnet computer worm, which crippled part of its nuclear infrastructure last year, nor Western sanctions have proved to be more than modest setbacks. Dr. Abbasi himself is rarely seen or heard outside of Iran.

But international nuclear inspectors and American officials say that all the evidence points to the imminent installation of centrifuges at an underground nuclear plant on a military base near the city of Qum. Iran revealed the existence of the plant in 2009, after learning that the United States and European powers were about to announce that they had discovered the complex, deep inside the Iranian base.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/world/middleeast/23iran.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

[Frisbee]

1. Here we come, baby!

War number four! :nuke:

[Peace Patriot]

2. Will someone tell me why Iran can't have nukes when everybody else does?

Did they invade somebody?

Did they slaughter a hundred thousand civilians anywhere?

Are they using anybody's civil war to drone-bomb civilians and get control of their oil?

How many wars are they involved in?

Have they ever in, oh, the last 200 years, invaded anybody?

Did they put torture dungeons around the world?

Do they possess the biggest war machine in the history of war?

Are they stealing their peoples' Social Security?

Is their government system especially bad, unrepresentative and tyrannical, compared to say, Saudi Arabia?

Is there not considerable evidence that Iranians have the government they want--a republic with a religious leader, kind of like the Pope, as a guiding moral force?

How did their current government come about, and what was happening before that to make them anti-U.S. and anti-U.K.?

Is their hostility to the west aggressive or just "leave us alone, please"?

Any evidence of violent Arab jihadism or Al Q in this Persian country? Any evidence of government sympathy with violent Arab jihadism or Al Q?

Do they have highly corrupt entities--Exxon Mobil, BP--or fascist billionaires--Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers--controlling government policy and information? Do they have out-of-control war profiteers and banksters? Is their income distribution particularly unfair (the super-rich lording it over the poor majority)? Do they have the super-rich and corporate moguls evading taxes and privatizing and looting "the commons"?

Do they have corporate-run 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines with virtually no audit/recount controls?

Is there any reason at all to particularly hate and fear Iran's government and seek to topple it, if they develop nuclear weapons?

Given the nuclear weapons surrounding Iran--in Pakistan, India, Israel, Russia, Europe and the U.K. and those of the U.S. military (which has a huge presence in the region and controls neighbor Iraq)--and given the history of U.K. and U.S. quite brutal interference in Iran, also Russian interference, all in the interest of controlling Iran's oil--is it not understandable that Iran may want comparable weapons as a deterrent to others' aggression?

Given the example of what U.S. invasion/occupation has done to neighbor Iraq, is it not reasonable for Iran to be fearful, and, given all of the above--Iran's peacefulness and lack of territorial ambition and relatively benign government--is it not overwhelmingly evident that, if Iran is developing nuclear weapons, they are doing so as a deterrent?

Which of the countries of the world has actually used nuclear weapons? Which country has engaged in large-scale aggressive war, time and again, over the last half century? Which country has used its military and its spying/black ops capabilities, and/or economic and political bully power, to install friendly governments, and control markets and resources, time and again, over the last half century? Which country has done so quite recently in fact (Venezuela '02, Bolivia '08, Honduras '09, Haiti '10) in what it considers to be its "back yard"? Which country has opposed and often brutally prevented democracy, sovereignty and social justice in what it considers to be its "back yard"?

What has Iran done, that they should be denied the right to defend themselves, against the clearly and repeated aggressive actions against them and against many others, over the last half century, and recently, by the very country, the U.S., and its chief ally, the U.K., that seek to deny them a nuclear deterrent?

And, finally, was there not a Pentagon war plan to use nuclear weapons against Iran, in very recent memory ('03-'06, until Rumsfeld was ousted)? What guarantee does Iran have that those who would nuke and irradiate their country--horrible enough in itself, but also at the risk of nuclear Armageddon in the Middle East--cannot return to power in the U.S.?

I ask again: Will someone tell me why Iran can't have nukes when everybody else does?

Is it because they don't like us? Don't they have very good reason not to? (Ever hear of the U.S.-installed "Shah of Iran" and his 25 years of torture and oppression, in the interest of U.S./U.K. oil interests?)

Is it because, with no history of aggression, they might become aggressive? Is that not true of anybody, including the U.S.?

Is it because they don't like Israel? What's to like about Israel's rightwing/militaristic government, chafing at the bit to nuke Iran, egged on by U.S. rightwingers? I don't like them either, and I think their politicians and war profiteers are the ones endangering Israel--not Iran.

Is it because they are Holocaust-deniers and want Israel to be gone from the Middle East? Well, our country and the U.K. have done quite a bit of border rearrangement, and destruction and creation of nation-states and pseudo-nation states, over the last century, and Iran has done...zip. No messing with other peoples' national arrangements. Merely wanting Israel to be gone is NOT the same as nuking Israel, and they would have to be insane to do so, and they are clearly NOT insane. Holocaust-deniers? We're going to criticize them--and bomb and destroy them, if they dare to develop nuclear weapons--because some of them engage in propaganda? Because some of them make jerkoff statements playing to the least-common-denominator of intelligence? Because some of them lie?

Is lying a reason to invade somebody? To sanction somebody and try to cripple their economy, to soften them up for invasion? If so, we'd better hope that the tables are never turned, and we are held to such a standard.

I think Israel would be a lot safer if all this war plotting against Iran were stopped. It is U.S. rightwingers, militarists and war profiteers--and their allies in Israel and the U.K.--who are imperiling Israel, and many others, and "we the people" here in the U.S. Furthermore, Pakistan with nuclear weapons is infinitely more dangerous than Iran with nuclear weapons--and there is evidence that the U.S. (Cheney-Bush Junta) permitted that to happen. Who has pushed the region toward tinderbox status? Who outed the entire CIA WMD counter-proliferation project, putting all of its agents/contacts around the world who were cooperating with the U.S. to prevent proliferation of nukes and other WMDs, in grave danger of being murdered? Who did that? Not Iran!

Again: Will someone please tell me why Iran can't have nukes when everybody else does--when it is surrounded by nuclear powers, some of them quite hostile, and when its neighbor country has been invaded, its people slaughtered in great numbers, and a U.S. oil corp-friendly government installed?

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

I'm not happy, at all, about the world becoming a nuclear-armed camp. But I think that our own country has lost all credibility on aims of disarmament and world peace and is in fact engaged in proliferating weapons and violent conflict in numerous places, and seeks specifically to deny the right of self-defense to countries that it has targeted for their oil.

Venezuela is a prime example. How come the U.S. has banned Venezuela from obtaining parts for military aircraft that it purchased from the U.S.? How come the U.S. has slapped sanctions on Venezuelan trade? Venezuela is one of the strongest and best democracies in the world. It is a leader of the Latin American cooperation, social justice and independence movement, and has many strong and loyal allies in the region--including Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Uruguay, Paraguay, Nicaragua and others. What justification is there for U.S. hostility to Venezuela? What justification is there to make it difficult for Venezuela to defend itself, if necessary? What evidence is there that Venezuela has any aggressive intentions or even has untoward military expenditures? (Brazil's military budget is much bigger--and, of course, the U.S. military budget--the U.S., which is making all these hostile noises and moves against Venezuela--has an humongous military budget and three oil wars in progress.)

The U.S. wants to be able to invade and occupy Iran, when the time is right, without having to contend with a nuclear deterrent. That is the only reason that I can see for its obsession with preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. U.S. policy is not fair. It is not reasonable. And its intent is aggression.

And as for Iran somehow magically changing into an aggressor nation, and lording it over the world with nuclear blackmail, I think we ought to realize that this is psychological projection, used as a propaganda weapon, on the part of U.S. war profiteers and warmongers. It is the controllers of our own war machine who are blackmailing the world, in the interests of U.S. corporations and banksters and of war profiteering itself. Iran has shown no tendency toward aggression or military blackmail, nor even toward seeking unfair advantage in markets or resources. They are a normal country, in a very difficult position as a target of U.S. interests. We are not a normal country. We are a blatant aggressor. And, believe me, our militarists and war profiteers know both of these things very well. They know that Iran is innocent of aggressive intent and has reason to be fearful. And they know what they themselves are up to, as to control of the world's oil by whatever means necessary, including baldfaced lying and mass murder.

[Bosonic]

3. very short answer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty">They are party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

As is almost every nation except India, Pakistan ,North Korea and Israel.

[Peace Patriot]

4. And are they not a sovereign nation, with a government recognized as legitimate

throughout the world, and with all sovereign rights to sign or not sign such a treaty, to interpret the provisions of the treaty and even to secretly violate the treaty so long as such violations, actions or one-sided interpretations are not an act of war or serious act of harm?

Possibly you would say, "So there! They VIOLATED an agreement! Economic ruin and invasion and war are therefore justified!" Are they?

Didn't the U.S. government violate the Geneva Conventions and the U.N. Charter (a treaty approved by the U.S. Senate), not to mention the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the U.S. Constitution, by torturing prisoners at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and other places, and by creating its own category of "prisoner of war"--"enemy combatant"--and thus violated all the rights of POW's that this country and the rest of the world had solemnly agreed to?

So, is someone justified in taking away our nuclear arsenal because we violated the above treaties--very serious violations inflicting great and real harm? Is someone justified in denying us the right of self-defense--or any other sovereign right--because of this?

What about the invasion of Iraq and the pack of lies the U.S. used to justify it? What about the lack of a UN mandate for that war?

Iran may be showing bad faith--on a matter of no immediate threat to anyone, and with no history of aggression--and thus pre-war sanctions and war against them are justified?

You see, this is my problem with the U.S. campaign against Iran. It is not only egregiously hypocritical, it is the U.S., and not Iran, which has committed the crimes that the U.S. anticipates that Iran will commit--and with no basis for that prediction--and with the U.S. itself being the singularly most dangerous threat to world peace, having already destroyed world peace by outright war and in other ways, and having essentially ripped up the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, the UCMJ, the U.S. Constitution, and all sorts of international laws and agreements.

But Iran is the malefactor--Iran, which has done nothing--according to the U.S.

And it is the U.S. leading this campaign against Iran--bullying, conniving, bribing and threatening to force others to go along. This has been especially evident in Latin America, but it is true all over. This is part of a U.S./U.K." global "game" first of all to control oil, and with other purposes, for instance, to prevent self-rule and independence in Middle Eastern countries, which the U.S., the U.K. and Israel have blatantly done for the last half century. It has NOTHING TO DO with any misdeeds by Iran--and even the relatively minor "bad faith" violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has not been established. It wouldn't surprise me if they were developing nuclear weapons. Frankly, they would be fools not to, in the world as it is. But we really REALLY cannot trust the U.S. and western powers, and their war propaganda machine, to tell the truth about this or any other such matter. They have lied again and again and again about their oil targets.

And, frankly, I think the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is a farce. It's the big bully nuke powers, who have no intention of ever giving up their own bully advantage in having the power to destroy all life on Earth, getting together and piling on the smaller, weaker countries--with the U.S. government (Bush Junta) even destroying the CIA's non-proliferation project and very likely permitting Pakistan to obtain nuclear weapons technology. This is a two-faced game. Non-proliferation doesn't apply to nuclear powers! And the U.S. has established, without question, that it is an aggressor.

We PROMISED not to make unjust war. We PROMISED not to torture prisoners. We PROMISED to respect the human rights of POWs. We PROMISED not to use war for imperial and resource purposes. We signed on the dotted line. We are in very, very bad faith on a number of very, very serious matters--and we're criticizing and plotting against Iran because they may have broken, or intend to break, a treaty provision, in their own self-defense?

It's DIRTY game--like the one the U.S. played on the Iraqi people. Depriving them of their air force, then "shock and awe" bombing Baghdad! Holding THEM hostage--and slaughtering THEM--for the real or imagined crimes of their ruler. A dirty COWARDLY game, in my opinion. They want to deprive Iran of this deterrent--nuclear weapons--so they can invade and occupy Iran.

And this is not even to mention the corruption of the nuclear weapons (and nuclear power) industry, with all sorts of leech-like government contractors making billions and billions of dollars mostly off U.S. taxpayers, to shop this technology and all its attendant maintenance, cleanup and other requirements, around the world. They feed off world terror and nuclear nightmares. And they are very likely one lobbying component of the anti-Iran campaign because THEY want the contracts. They don't want Iran to have their own capability, developed internally. There are huge private, government and international bureaucracies and moneyed interests involved. Utter hypocrites, all of them. They might as well be called the Nuclear Proliferation Network. Non-proliferation, disarmament and world peace would destroy their gravy train.

So, we're going to cripple Iran's economy, and invade and occupy Iran, and maybe even nuke Iran--if the generals can figure out how to do it while not irradiating the oil supply--for this worldwide "non-proliferation" bullshit?

It's crap. I did not ask for the EXCUSE being used to do this to Iran. I know what the excuses are. I asked a real question--what has Iran done to deserve being treated this way?

Israel, which, like the U.S., has exhibited aggression and belligerence, has developed nuclear weapons without signing the "Non-Proliferation" Treaty. Does that make Israel's proliferation okay?

Iran has at least put itself under nominal supervision and has at least agreed to non-proliferation in principle. This creates at least a bargaining situation, in which the interests of other countries in non-proliferation by Iran can be expressed. There could be legitimate concerns of the international community--apart from U.S./U.K. war plans--including safety and security--not because Iran is unstable; it isn't; but because of the inherent dangers of nuclear technology. Israel has made no such concessions--even nominally, even to the principle. So why isn't the U.S. sanctioning Israel, and threatening Israel, for being a total scofflaw on nuclear weapons? Or India? Or Pakistan? (North Korea, I put into a separate category because their leaders seem to be truly nuts (maybe even more nuts than Donald Rumsfeld). But I also think there are corporations who want into N. Korea (and have been into N. Korea) to make a profit off their nukes, and that is part of the motivation for opposing N. Korea nukes. Pakistan is another dicey situation in which unstable people--people who do not care about the consequences--could get control of the nukes. So why aren't we sanctioning Pakistan? Because we want their help for controlling the gas/oil pipeline route that runs through Afghanistan?)

We really need to stop accepting simplistic excuses and explanations for U.S. policy. The U.S. violates treaties, at will, and pretty much does what it damn pleases, and has established itself as an aggressive empire with a thousand military bases around the world. Its targeting of Iran has NOTHING TO DO with "bad faith" on a treaty.