| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:23 pm Post subject: On the Road to World War 3 (for Israel and Oil) |
| On the Road to World War 3 (for Israel and oil in accordance with JINSA/CSP/PNAC Neocon agenda):
http://nomorewarforisrael.blogspot.com
Do a search for JINSA at www.google.com
Canilor wrote:
Thanks to my Friend & Colleague VikingJohn for this submission.
The ultimate battle is for the control of oil. All kinds of excuses will be used to provoke a battle. Attacking Iran will certainly draw the ire of many other nations around the world who might see the necessity to get involved to defend their national interest. That consideration is already being applied in the expulsion of our military bases from Central Asia.
As long as Bush is not shown any opposition, his administration will feel free to carry out whatever plans involve the utilization of people like Cindy Sheehan's son. After all, the President doesn't consider any of them even worthy of a phone call (He does call Lance Armstrong, Serena Williams and Rafael Palmeiro).
Comments below are from VikingJohn
Scott Ritter says we already have operatives in Iran
Cheney already has the battle plan drawn up, either
we or israel will strike. how can we stop this? J.s.
................................................................................................
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9706.htm
Why Iran will lead to World War 3
"As President Bush scans the world's horizon there is no greater potential flashpoint than Iran, the President and his Foreign Policy team believe the Islamic regime in Tehran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons." Chris Wallace, FOX News
by Mike Whitney
08/08/05 "ICH" -- -- The facts about Iran's "alleged" nuclear weapons program have never been in dispute. There is no such program and no one has ever produced a shred of credible evidence to the contrary. That hasn't stopped the Bush administration from making spurious accusations and threats; nor has it deterred America's "imbedded" media from implying that Iran is hiding a nuclear weapons program from the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). In fact, the media routinely features the unconfirmed claims of members of terrorist organizations, like the Mujahedin Klaq, (which is on the State Depts. list of terrorist organizations) to make it appear that Iran is secretively developing nuclear arms. These claims have proved to be entirely baseless and should be dismissed as just another part of Washington's propaganda war.
Sound familiar?
Iran has no nuclear weapons program. This is the conclusion of Mohammed el-Baradei the respected chief of the IAEA. The agency has conducted a thorough and nearly-continuous investigation on all suspected sites for the last two years and has come up with the very same result every time; nothing. If we can't trust the findings of these comprehensive investigations by nuclear experts than the agency should be shut down and the NPT (Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty) should be abandoned. It is just that simple.
That, of course, is exactly what the US and Israel would prefer since they have no intention of complying with international standards or treaties and are entirely committed to a military confrontation with Iran. It now looks as though they may have the pretext for carrying out such an attack.
Two days ago, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman formally rejected a plan submitted by the EU members that would have barred Iran from "enrichment-related activities". Foreign Minister Hamid Reza Asefi said, "The Europeans' submitted proposals regarding the nuclear case are not acceptable for Iran."
Asefi did the right thing; the offer was conspicuously hypocritical. The United States doesn't allow any intrusive inspections on its nuclear weapons sites even though it is the only nation that has ever used nukes in battle and even though it is developing a whole new regime of tactical "bunker-buster" bombs for destroying heavily-fortified weapons sites buried beneath the ground.
The US is also the only nation that claims the right to use nukes in a "first-strike" capacity if it feels that its national security interests are at stake.
The NPT is entirely designed to harass the countries that have not yet developed nuclear weapons and force them to observe rules designed by the more powerful states. It was intended to maintain the existing power-structure not to keep the peace.
Even so, Iran is not "violating" the treaty by moving ahead with a program for "enriching uranium". They don't even have the centrifuges for conducting such a process. The re-opening of their facility at Isfahan signals that they will continue the "conversion" process to produce the nuclear fuel that is required in nuclear power plants. This is all permitted under the terms of the NPT. They temporarily suspended that right, and accepted other confidence-building measures, to show the EU their willingness to find a reasonable solution to mutual concerns. But, now, under pressure from the Bush administration, the EU is trying to renege on its part of the deal and change the terms of the treaty itself.
No way.
So far, Iran has played entirely by the rules and deserves the same considerations as the other signatories of the treaty. The EU members
(England, Germany, and France) are simply back-pedaling in a futile effort to mollify Washington and Tel Aviv. Besides, when Iran re-opens its plant and begins work, the UN "watchdog" agency (IAEA) will be present to set up the necessary surveillance cameras and will resume monitoring everything that goes on during the sensitive fuel-cycle process.
Iran has shown an unwillingness to be bullied by Washington. The Bush administration has co-opted the EU to enforce its double-standards by threatening military action, but that doesn't' conceal the duplicity of their demands. Why should Iran forgo the processing of nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes if it is written right into the treaty? Would Israel or Pakistan accept a similar proposal?
Of course, not. Both countries ignored the treaty altogether and built their own nuclear weapons behind the back of the international community. Only Iran has been singled out and punished for COMPLYING with the treaty. This demonstrates the power of Washington to dictate the international agenda.
Iran's refusal puts the EU in a position to refer the case to the IAEA, where the board members will make their determination and decide whether the case should be sent to the UN Security Council. Whether the IAEA passes the case along or not makes little difference. Bush, Sharon and the western media will exploit the details in a way that condemns Iran and paves the way for a preemptive attack. The drive to war will not be derailed by mere facts.
Iran has weathered the media criticism and the specious claims of the Bush administration admirably. They have responded with caution and discipline seeking reasonable solutions to thorny issues. Never the less, they have been unwavering in defending their rights under the NPT. This consistency in behavior suggests that they will be equally unswerving if they are the targets of an unprovoked attack. We should expect that they will respond with full force; ignoring the threats of nuclear retaliation. And, so they should. One only has to look at Iraq to see what happens if one does not defend oneself. Nothing is worth that.
The Iranian people should be confident that their government will do whatever is their power to defend their borders, their national sovereignty and their right to live in peace without the threat of foreign intervention. That, of course, will entail attacking both Israel and US forces in Iraq. Whether or not the US actually takes part in the initial air raids is immaterial; by Mr. Bush's own standards, the allies of "those who would do us harm" are just as culpable as those who conduct the attacks. In this case, the US has provided the long-range aircraft as well as the "bunker-busting" munitions for the planned assault. The administration's responsibility is not in doubt.
We should anticipate that the Iranian government has a long-range strategy for "asymmetrical" warfare that will disrupt the flow of oil and challenge American interests around the world. Certainly, if one is facing an implacable enemy that is committed to "regime change" there is no reason to hold back on doing what is necessary to defeat that adversary. So far, none of the terrorist bombings in London, Spain, Turkey, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia or the US have implicated even one Iranian national. That will certainly change. Iranian Intelligence has probably already planned covert operations that will be carried out in the event of an unprovoked attack on their facilities. Iran is also likely to become an active supporter of international terrorist groups; enlisting more recruits in the war against American interests. After all, any attack on Iran can only be construed as a declaration of all-out war.
Isn't that so?
If Iran retaliates against Israel or the US in Iraq, then both nations will proceed with a plan that is already in place to destroy all of Iran's biological, chemical and conventional weapons sites. In fact, this is the ultimate US strategy anyway; not the elimination of the "imaginary" nuclear weapons facilities. Both the US and Israel want to "de-fang" the Mullah-regime so that they can control critical resources and eliminate the possibility of a regional rival in the future.
In the short term, however, the plan is fraught with difficulties. At present, there is no wiggle room in the world's oil supply for massive disruptions and most experts are predicting shortages in the 4th quarter of this year. If the administration's war on Iran goes forward we will see a shock to the world's oil supplies and economies that could be catastrophic. That being the case, a report that was leaked last week that Dick Cheney had STRATCOM (Strategic Command) draw up "contingency plans for a tactical nuclear war against Iran", is probably a bit of brinksmanship intended to dissuade Iran from striking back and escalating the conflict.
It makes no difference. If Iran is attacked they will retaliate; that much is certain.
It is always the mistake of extremists to misjudge the behavior of reasonable men; just as it is always the mistake of reasonable men to mistake the behavior of extremists.
We should not expect the Bush administration to make a rational choice; that would be a dramatic departure from every preceding decision of consequence.
The President of the United States always has the option of unleashing Armageddon if he so chooses. Normally, however, sanity prevails.
When the bombs hit the bunkers in Iran; World War 3 will be underway.
Mike Whitney lives in Washington state. He can be reached at: fergiewhitney@msn.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: U.S. Prepared to Grab Iran's Southwesten Oil Rich Province after Saturation Bombings
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
August 10, 2005 -- U.S. prepared to grab Iran's southwestern majority Arab and oil-rich province after saturation bombing of Iranian nuclear, chemical, and command, control, communications & intelligence (C3I) targets. According to sources within the German Federal Intelligence Service (Bundesnachrichtendienst - BND), the Bush administration has drawn up plans to hit Iran's nuclear, other WMD, and military sites with heavy saturation bombing using bunker buster bombs and tactical nuclear weapons. The attack will be coordinated with urban and rural critical infrastructure sabotage carried out by elements of the People's Mujaheddin (MEK), Pentagon Special Operations units, and other Iranian dissident groups. The German intelligence comes from classified briefings provided by elements within the CIA that are concerned the neocons in the Bush administration will, in attacking Iran, set off a chain of events that will lead to world war. Intelligence on U.S. plans to attack Iran has also been passed by CIA agents to counterparts in France, Britain, Canada, and Australia. The Bush war plans for Iran also entail quickly seizing Iran's southwestern Khuzestan Province, where most of Iran's oil reserves and refineries are located. Khuzestan has a majority Shia Arab population that has close links with their ethnic and religious brethren in Iraq. The Bush plans call for a U.S. military strike across the Iraqi border and from naval forces in the Persian Gulf in answer to an appeal for assistance from the Al Ahwaz Popular Democratic Front and Liberation Organization rebel forces in Khuzestan, which will declare an independent Arab state of the Democratic Republic of Ahwaz and receive diplomatic recognition from the United States and a few close U.S. allies. After World War I, Khuzestan was annexed by Iran, then called Persia. There are also plans to incite rebellions among Iran's other minorities, including Azeris and Turkmenis in the oil-rich Caspian Sea region. Other minorities targeted by the neo-con planners are Iranian Kurds along the Iraqi and Turkish borders and Baluchis along the border with Pakistan. The neo-con plan seeks to separate Iran from its oil resources and create an "Irani triangle" centered around Teheran, Isfahan, Qom, and other historically Persian centers. In anticipation of the U.S. attack, the spy sub USS Jimmy Carter has placed taps on undersea communications cables in the Persian Gulf that carry Iranian commercial, diplomatic, and military traffic. In addition, Task Force 121 covert paramilitary forces have scouted Iran using the cover of journalists and businessmen to pinpoint military targets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who's Behind the Coming War with Iran?
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/08/06/who-s-behind-the-coming-war-with-iran.php
Last edited by Alpha on Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:26 am; edited 4 times in total | |  | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:27 pm Post subject: Iran resumes atomic work, escalates crisis |
| Iran restarts nuclear programme:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4131706.stm
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iran
Iran resumes atomic work, escalates crisis
Reuters - 45 minutes ago
ISFAHAN, Iran (Reuters) - Iran resumed work at a uranium conversion plant on Monday, fanning Western fears it may be seeking nuclear weapons and defying EU warnings that it could be referred to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, confirmed Iran has restarted some nuclear activities that had been mothballed under a deal with the European Union's three biggest powers.
Iran Defies West, Resumes Nuclear Work
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 49 minutes ago
ISFAHAN, Iran - Iran stepped up its confrontation with the West over its nuclear program, restarting work at a uranium conversion facility Monday in a move the United States and Europe have warned will prompt them to seek U.N. sanctions.
ADVERTISEMENT
The resumption strikes a blow at European efforts to persuade Iran to rein in a program that Washington says is intended to develop nuclear weapons. Over the weekend, Iran, which says it aims only to produce electricity, rejected European proposals for economic incentives in return for limiting its nuclear activities.
The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, will hold an emergency meeting of its 35-member board of governors Tuesday to discuss the standoff with Iran.
Critics of Tehran question why Iran, which has vast reserves of petroleum, would need nuclear energy. Iran has responded by pointing out that it was Washington which first urged it to pursue a nuclear energy program while the pro-U.S. shah was in power.
France, Germany, Britain and the United States are likely to push for Iran to be referred to the U.N. Security Council, where they could seek new economic sanctions. But sanctions are far from a sure thing: Russia, which has helped Iran build its first nuclear reactor, and China, which has been strengthening ties with Tehran, hold veto power in the council.
"I think Iran should really bear in mind that this step is a step in the wrong direction," German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said, according to ZDF television. But he suggested negotiations could continue, saying: "We are trying to prevent a negative trend with fatal consequences."
French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy urged Tehran to reconsider, saying it wasn't too late to turn back. "I call on Iran one more time, tonight, to listen to the voice of reason," he said.
Tehran suspended its nuclear activities in November to avoid sanctions and as a gesture in the negotiations with Europe. But it has expressed frustration with the talks and has been threatening for weeks to resume part of the program — work done at the Uranium Conversion Facility outside the city of Isfahan.
On Sunday, Iran brushed off the sanctions threat.
"We are not concerned and are ready for everything," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said. He called the threats "not effective. What interests us is cooperation. We advise Europe to withdraw its threats."
On Monday, work at Isfahan resume, after IAEA inspectors installed cameras and other surveillance equipment intended to ensure no nuclear material is diverted. Iranian technicians in white suits and surgical masks rolled out barrels of yellowcake — raw uranium — to begin the conversion process.
The facility covers over 150 acres spread along mountains outside the city. Parts of the facility were built in tunnels in the mountains as protection from airstrikes. It is also surrounded by radar stations and anti-aircraft batteries.
Iran learned a lesson from the 1981 Israeli airstrike against Iraq's main nuclear reactor. Iran has spread its facilities over several locations, each with underground installations. The Isfahan facility and the uranium enrichment plant in Natanz house the heart of the country's nuclear program.
The Isfahan Conversion Facility, 255 miles south of Tehran, carries out an early stage of the cycle for developing nuclear fuel, turning yellowcake into UF-6 gas, the feedstock for enrichment.
In the next stage of the process — which Iran has said it will not resume for the time being — the gas is fed in centrifuges for enrichment. Uranium enriched to a low level is used to produce nuclear fuel; further enrichment makes it suitable for use in an atomic bomb.
Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said work was resuming "stage by stage" at Isfahan, starting with the unit that makes ammonium uranyl carbonate, or AUC, a component in the conversion process.
The plant will soon start turning yellowcake into UF-4, a preliminary stage before UF-6, the state news agency reported.
The AUC unit had not been sealed by the U.N. watchdog agency. Within the next two days, IAEA inspectors will remove seals that were put in place on the unit where UF-4 is turned into UF-6, bringing the facility into full operation, Saeedi said.
The seals are voluntary, and the IAEA has no choice but to remove them when Iran asks. Tehran says it is abiding by IAEA inspections of its sites, and allowed installation of surveillance equipment.
Iran has insisted it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to carry out the entire fuel cycle — from raw uranium to fuel for a reactor. Europe fears that if Iran can develop fuel on its own, it will secretly produce material for a bomb.
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said work had resumed as Isfahan before the surveillance equipment was tested, "which normally takes 24 hours," ElBaradei's spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said in Vienna.
Earlier, Iran converted some 37 tons of yellowcake into UF-4. Experts say that amount could yield 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium, enough to make five crude nuclear weapons.
Saeedi said Iran is willing to wait on starting uranium enrichment until a deal is reached with Europe. "We won't restart work in Natanz for now," he said. "We hope we will reach a logical conclusion in talks with Europeans."
An exiled opposition group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, accused Tehran of exploiting talks with the Europeans in a "cat and mouse game" to stall for time while covertly developing a nuclear weapons program. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 6:47 pm Post subject: Iran's Nuclear Program Goes Back Online |
| http://www.latimes.com
Iran's Nuclear Program Goes Back Online
By Sonni Efron Times Staff Writer
Tue Aug 9, 7:55 AM ET
WASHINGTON — Iran on Monday defied European and American threats and resumed processing uranium, setting off a new confrontation with the West over its nuclear program.
French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy called Tehran's decision to restart uranium conversion "grave and troubling" and a "clear violation" of a 2004 agreement reached in Paris under which Iran had pledged to freeze nuclear activities while it negotiated with European nations.
The board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, was expected to meet today to discuss the issue. The board could refer the matter to the U.N. Security Council for consideration of sanctions, but it seemed unlikely that it would do so now.
Although Iran says its nuclear activities are aimed purely at generating electricity, the U.S. and other Western nations fear it is using the program as a cover to build weapons. After months of discussions, Britain, France and Germany made an offer to Iran last week aimed at resolving the dispute.
The Europeans proposed providing Iran with a guaranteed source of fuel for its civilian nuclear plants and offered other economic incentives. In return, Tehran would have been required to forswear the sensitive nuclear fuel-cycle technology that could be used to produce bombs.
On Monday, Iran delivered a blunt, unsigned communique to the British, French and German embassies in Tehran rejecting the deal.
"The proposal is extremely long on demands from Iran and absurdly short on offers to Iran, and it shows the lack of any attempt to even create a semblance of balance," said the Iranian statement, delivered by Pirooz Hosseini, a senior Foreign Ministry official.
"It amounts to an insult on the Iranian nation for which [France, Britain and Germany] should apologize."
Douste-Blazy said the tone of the Iranian letter was "particularly alarming and contrary to the spirit of the dialogue we have had with Iran for the past two years."
After delivering the letter, Iran started feeding uranium ore concentrate into machinery at its conversion plant at Esfahan, the first step toward producing enriched uranium as fuel for nuclear power plants or for use in weapons. Although Iran allowed the U.N. nuclear agency to put monitoring cameras in place before the uranium conversion began, it did not wait the 24 hours usually required for the cameras to be tested, said Mohamed ElBaradei, the agency's director-general.
To many observers, the breakdown between Iran and the Europeans came as no surprise. Iran has consistently refused to relinquish its right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of 1970 to enrich uranium and has emphasized that its nuclear freeze was only temporary while talks continued with the Europeans.
But Tehran had grown increasingly impatient as the freeze neared the one-year mark and the Europeans made it clear they would not accept an enrichment program.
Iran had asked the IAEA to seal portions of the Esfahan plant after it agreed to suspend uranium conversion under the Paris agreement.
Eight days ago, it asked the IAEA to remove the seals. The agency said Monday that Iran had not restarted all parts of the conversion plant.
With Europe and the United States in accord over the need to keep Tehran at the negotiating table, the IAEA's 35-member board was to meet today in Vienna to discuss its response.
Two European diplomats said Britain, France and Germany would propose a resolution urging Iran to halt conversion activities and resume negotiations but making no threats should Tehran refuse.
"In Vienna, we aim for a simple text, something short and snappy," one diplomat said. "It will call on Iran to maintain the [nuclear] suspension."
The idea is "not to slam the door completely" but to leave the Iranians an opening "to go back to reason," the second diplomat said.
The Bush administration supports the European negotiating effort and is consulting with its allies on a response, State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said. A second State Department official declined to comment on whether the United States was satisfied with the text of the Europeans' proposed IAEA resolution.
European and U.S. officials have warned Iran that if it converts uranium, they will seek to have Iran's case referred to the Security Council.
But it is not certain that the allies have the votes on the IAEA board for such a referral. The governors almost invariably make decisions by consensus, although under the rules of the organization, they can decide to hold a vote. Two weeks ago, Western diplomats in Vienna concluded that they could not muster even a simple majority to refer the Iranian matter to the council.
In the past, the Bush administration has urged the Europeans to push a tough resolution against Iran that it hoped would win a majority — if not unanimity — but the Europeans have been reluctant to do so, a U.S. official said.
The Europeans are betting that IAEA board members will be unhappy with Iran's decision to proceed with uranium conversion in the face of the European proposal to facilitate Iran's access to civilian nuclear power under strict nonproliferation rules. But to try to build consensus, they will propose the more gradual approach of first asking the Iranians to come back to the table.
Ereli stressed that U.S. officials wanted to refer Iran to the Security Council unless it made a verifiable deal with the Europeans. But he avoided saying that Washington would seek a referral immediately. The diplomatic language appeared designed to give the Europeans maximum negotiating room.
But the Iranians are testing the U.S. and Europe, waiting to see how much pressure the West can bring to bear at the IAEA, said George Perkovich, who analyzes the Iranian nuclear situation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.
"It's 'Let's see what the other guy's got. Let's test it,' " Perkovich said, noting that Tehran could back off if it found international reaction too negative. The wild card, he said, is "in the IAEA — how much is the U.S. going to bully and bribe other states?"
Within the atomic energy agency, a crucial problem for the West will be articulating a set of rules acceptable to other developing countries that already have or may wish to develop nuclear power, analysts said.
Brazil, South Africa and other nations that may want to develop their own nuclear fuel cycle may worry about the precedent they would help set by requiring Iran to give up that technology. But the Europeans hope that these countries, as well as Russia, will be willing as a first step to endorse a resolution calling on Iran to halt uranium conversion and return to the negotiating table.
Even if the U.S. and its backers overcome the objections of other aspiring nuclear countries to referring Iran to the Security Council, it would be difficult to win agreement within the U.N. to penalize Iran for its nuclear programs. China, which is generally opposed to international sanctions, could block such a move, as it has done in the case of North Korea.
Under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the Iranians are permitted to convert and enrich uranium. But they are taking a calculated risk by breaking the Paris agreement while complying with the letter, if not the spirit, of the IAEA safeguards, said Sharon Squassoni, an expert on weapons of mass destruction and proliferation at the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.
"They're really dancing on the edge," she said. "They're very savvy on what they can and cannot get away with, and I think the IAEA is cognizant of that also." | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 5:53 pm Post subject: Backlash Builds Against Cheney's 'Guns of August' |
| Just saw the following linked at www.whatreallyhappened.com
Backlash Builds Against
Cheney's 'Guns Of August'
By Jeffrey Steinberg
8-9-5
As millions of copies of Lyndon LaRouche's July 27 "Cheney's Guns of August" statement circulate worldwide (see www.larouchepac.com), a Washington policy brawl has erupted into public view, over the Bush Administration's now-confirmed contingency plans to stage a pre-emptive military strike against Iran-possibly using nuclear weapons. The report that Vice President Dick Cheney had tasked the Strategic Command (STRATCOM) to develop military contingencies for a massive aerial bombardment campaign against Iran, in the event of a new 9/11 attack, was first revealed in The American Conservative magazine's Aug. 1 edition. The story highlighted the likely use of nuclear weapons, and the widespread military opposition to the pre-emptive nuclear war scheme.
Since that initial story by former CIA officer Philip Giraldi, this news service has confirmed the accuracy of the report from a significant number of horrified U.S. government officials-from Senators on both sides of the aisle, to military officers, diplomats, and spies. One former U.S. ambassador in the Persian Gulf reported that he had received angry reports from officials of the Central Command (CENTCOM), who have been tasked as part of the contingency planning.
Another military source suggested that there are probably pre-positioned tactical nuclear weapons at the U.S. military base at Diego Garcia, in the Indian Ocean, under the new military reorganization, which created a "Global Strike" plan for rapid, massive assaults anywhere on the planet.
The bottom line: Vice President Cheney, the architect of the pre-emptive nuclear attack plan, has gone stark raving mad, and is prepared to bring the world to the brink of chaos, before he is driven from power. Democratic Party figure Lyndon LaRouche describes Cheney's state of mind as "like Hitler in the bunker."
White House De Facto Confirms
In response to a question from EIR's White House correspondent Bill Jones, Presidential spokesman Scott McClellan let the cat out of the bag on July 28. Asked by Jones about the American Conservative report on the bombing contingencies, McClellan pointedly chose not to deny the charges, and instead, after telling Jones he "appreciated the question," went into a discussion of Iran's alleged secret nuclear program, threatening United Nations sanctions and other actions, should Iran fail to shut down its nuclear reprocessing efforts.
In response to a follow-up question by CBS reporter John Roberts about whether an attack on Iran might fall under the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive action against "terror states," given the new Iranian President's former position in the Revolutionary Guard, McClellan again refused to reject the possibility, reminding the press that the Administration still considered Iran a "state sponsor of terrorism."
It should be recalled that on Jan. 20, 2005, the day of the Bush-Cheney second inauguration, the Vice President appeared on the Don Imus show on MSNBC cable TV, to target Iran. Using language identical to his earlier lies about Iraq, Cheney accused Iran of pursuing "a fairly robust nuclear program" and of sponsoring terrorism. "That combination is of great concern," he declared, warning that Israel could be expected to launch preventive bombing attacks on Iran's alleged nuclear weapons sites, if the Iranians don't abandon those supposed nuclear efforts.
NIE Leaked
One of the most dramatic signs of the ferocious behind-the-scenes fight was the Aug. 2 lead story of the Washington Post, which leaked a recent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) concluding that, far from being on the verge of achieving a nuclear bomb, Iran was at least ten years away from such a capability. The story, by staff writer Dafna Linzer, noted that "the carefully hedged assessments, which represent consensus among U.S. intelligence agencies, contrast with forceful public statements by the White House. Administration officials have asserted, but have not offered proof, that Tehran is moving determinedly toward a nuclear arsenal."
The last time an NIE was prepared on Iran, it was estimated that Iran was five years away from obtaining a nuclear bomb, and that was in 2002. When Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon visited President Bush at his Crawford, Texas ranch this past April, his top military aide, Gen. Yoav Galant, presented an Israeli assessment that Iran had a "very advanced" nuclear weapons program, could have a bomb within 12-18 months, and was near to reaching a "point of no return," when "it could not be any longer stopped."
The leak of the NIE, which was carefully prepared over a six-month period, beginning in January of this year, was widely hailed as a direct factional move, from high-level intelligence community circles, against the Cheney madness. One former Cabinet official noted that the mass circulation of LaRouche's "Guns of August" statement had created the necessary political conditions for the leak to occur, seriously undermining Cheney and the neo-conservatives' race to a new confrontation with Tehran.
The National Intelligence Council, the coordinating body of the 15 agencies that comprise the U.S. intelligence community as a whole, is now housed in the office of Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte. Just days before the leak to the Washington Post, Negroponte's deputy, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, had testified before the House Intelligence Committee about the overhaul of the NIE process, to assure that there would be no repetition of the horrid mistakes made in the October 2002 Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. That rushed October 2002 NIE vastly overstated and misrepresented Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, particularly its purported nuclear weapons program, and was a large contributing factor to the U.S. Congress's capitulation to Bush and Cheney, in sanctioning the Iraq pre-emptive invasion-even as United Nations weapons inspectors were continuing their inspections with minimal interference from the Saddam Hussein regime, and were stating that no nuclear weapons production was to be found.
Hayden emphasized that the Estimates would now reflect the views of all the relevant intelligence agencies, would be much more "nuanced," and would not be released without a thorough review process, including an assessment of the quality of the sources of key intelligence findings. According to the New York Times's Douglas Jehl, "Other government officials said the standard had already been applied, to a recent highly classified intelligence report on Iran."
The Usual Suspects
In further probing of the Cheney-led drive for a pretext to bomb Iran, EIR has confirmed that the same cast of neo-con characters who led the disinformation campaign against Iraq, in the run-up to the March 2003 invasion, have been tasked to carry out the same effort, this time targetting the regime in Tehran. Furthermore, while some media have portrayed the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last month as President of Iran as the trigger for the new war push, the truth is that the campaign was launched, in earnest, within days of the November 2004 dubious re-election of Bush and Cheney.
In November 2004, Dr. Jerome Corsi, a leading player in the Karl Rove-inspired dirty-tricks apparatus known as Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth, suddenly emerged as the new head of the Iran Freedom Foundation (IFF), promoting regime change in Tehran. Corsi was touted by Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) as being the driving force behind the Iran Freedom and Support Act of 2005, which calls for $10 million in funds to be handed out to Iranian dissident groups. Corsi had co-authored the Rove-inspired propaganda book Unfit To Serve, smearing Bush's Democratic Presidential rival John F. Kerry over his military service in Vietnam. In March 2005, Corsi published another propaganda book, Atomic Iran, peddling scare stories about Iran's imminent possession of nuclear bombs.
From May 15 to May 18, Dr. Corsi led an "Iran Freedom Walk" from Philadelphia to Washington, where a rally was addressed by neo-con Richard Perle, and where Corsi was congratulated, in a written statement, by Dick Cheney.
In April 2005, Regnery Publishing, Inc. released another fractured-fairy-tale propaganda piece, promoting pre-emptive war on Iran, this one by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.). Sources familiar with the book report that Weldon was snookered by ex-CIA Director and leading neo-con war party operative James Woolsey, and self-proclaimed "universal fascist" Michael Ledeen, into buying fake intelligence, pushed through a former Iranian minister under the Shah, who has more recently been a business partner of discredited Iran-Contra gun dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar. Representative Weldon concealed the identity of his high-level "source," referring to him only as "Ali." But "Ali" was soon identified as Fereidoun Mahdavi, a former commerce minister, who fled Iran shortly after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and never looked back.
In an interview with The American Prospect's Laura Rozan, Mahdavi professed shock and outrage that his "information" had formed the basis for Weldon's shrill book. He confirmed that all of the information he passed on to the Congressman had, in fact, originated with Ghorbanifar, a notorious disinformationist, and Iran-Contra ally of the Washington neo-cons. Weldon's saga with "Ali," as recounted in his book, Countdown to Terror-The Top-Secret Information That Could Prevent the Next Terrorist Attack on America ... And How the CIA Has Ignored It, began in March 2003, at the very moment that the Bush-Cheney regime was about to launch its Iraq invasion.
In late June of this year, Kenneth Timmerman, a propagandist for the neo-cons and for right-wing Israeli circles around former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, published another book, Countdown to Crisis: The Coming Nuclear Showdown With Iran, which makes a string of preposterous claims, all based on information provided by the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, an Iranian exile group on the U.S. State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Timmerman asserted that: Iran was behind the 9/11 attacks; Iran is safehousing Osama bin Laden inside the country; and Iran has all of the elements to produce nuclear weapons, and possibly provide them to terrorist cells already infiltrated into American cities.
When the Timmerman book was published, the Washington Times ran three days of excerpts, along with an editorial touting the book and calling for action against Iran.
If all of this sounds remarkably similar to the propaganda run-up to the Iraq invasion of March 2003, that's because it is. The same Michael Ledeen/Richard Perle/Dick Cheney circles that brought you Operation Iraqi Freedom, are aggressively pushing war against Iran. But this time, with 170,000 American troops bogged down in Iraq, Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, et al. are now pushing their decade-old plan to conduct pre-emptive nuclear strikes.
http://www.larouchepub.com/pubs/subscribe.html | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:17 pm Post subject: Iran Resumes Full Conversion Operations |
| Iran Resumes Full Conversion Operations
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer
29 minutes ago
A defiant Iran resumed full operations at its uranium conversion plant Wednesday, as Europe and the United States struggled to find a way to stop the Islamic republic from pushing ahead with a nuclear program they fear will lead to weapons of mass destruction.
With United Nations inspectors watching, Iranian officials removed U.N. seals that had been placed voluntarily on equipment at the facility eight months ago when Tehran agreed to freeze most of its nuclear program.
Technicians then immediately resumed work on the process that turns raw uranium into gas for enrichment.
The breaking of the seals at the facility in the mountains outside the southern city of Isfahan was the latest move of Iranian brinkmanship over its nuclear ambitions. The hard-line government's determination to move ahead left Europe and the United States scrambling over what to do next.
Iran has rejected European proposals to limit its program in return for economic incentives and shrugged off threats of U.N. sanctions. Any attempt to impose sanctions could face a veto in the U.N. Security Council from Russia and China, which have close ties with Iran.
Europe and the United States were left appealing to Iran to reconsider the proposals and waiting for Tehran to make its own offer in negotiations, while diplomats at the U.N. nuclear watchdog — the International Atomic Energy Agency — debated how strongly to rebuke Iran.
The 35-nation board of governors of the IAEA canceled a session tentatively planned for Wednesday, and instead diplomats were holding private on how best to persuade Iran to suspend its latest nuclear activities. A resolution was introduced Wednesday evening and will be discussed at a board meeting Thursday, said IAEA spokesman Peter Rickwood. He had no details on the resolution.
Matthew Boland, a spokesman for the U.S. mission to the IAEA, described the breaking of the seals as "yet another sign of Iran's disregard for international concerns."
"We strongly support (Germany, Britain and France's) efforts to convince Iran to stop its dangerous activities," he said.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's office said it "hopes Iran will still take the sensible path and look seriously and constructively at the offer from the (Europeans)." The French Foreign Ministry urged Tehran to stop work at the plant "to restore confidence."
Europe has hoped to persuade Iran to accept fuel from abroad for a nuclear energy program.
But Iran's reopening of the Isfahan plant underlined its insistence on developing the entire fuel cycle on its own. Iran says its nuclear program is peaceful, aiming only to produce electricity.
On Tuesday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he was willing to continue negotiations and would put forward his own proposals. However, Iran has said it won't restart uranium enrichment without a negotiated deal with Europe. Enrichment can produce nuclear fuel for a reactor or material for a bomb.
The Isfahan facility carries out an earlier step in the process, converting yellowcake — raw uranium — into uranium hexaflouride gas, UF-6, the feedstock that in the next stage is fed into centrifuges for enrichment.
The facility covers an area of over 150 acres, spread along a range of mountains outside the city, separated from the main road by metal fences and trees and surrounded by radar stations and anti-aircraft batteries.
On Wednesday, security was tight around the complex, with plainclothes security agents shooing journalists away from the front gates.
Parts of the facility were built in tunnels in the mountains as protection from airstrikes. Tehran learned a lesson from the 1981 Israeli airstrike against Iraq's main nuclear reactor. Iran has spread its facilities over several locations, each with underground installations.
Work at some parts of the Isfahan plant began Monday, but other, more sensitive units — including the one that ultimately produces UF-6 — had remained under U.N. seal. Iran notified the IAEA on Tuesday that it wanted the seals removed — saying the IAEA could either do so itself or authorize Iranian officials to break them under IAEA supervision.
"The IAEA said in a letter to us today that it gives (the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran) permission to remove the seals and fully restart activities at the facility," Mohammad Saeedi, Iran's deputy nuclear chief, told state-run television Wednesday.
Before the November suspension, the Isfahan facility converted some 37 tons of yellowcake into UF-4, a preliminary stage. Experts say that amount could yield 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium, enough to make five crude nuclear weapons.
The removal of the seals Wednesday means the facility can start converting that UF-4 to UF-6, as well as convert more yellowcake from scratch. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:59 am Post subject: Envoys: Iran Faces Sept. Deadline on Nukes |
| Envoys: Iran Faces Sept. Deadline on Nukes
By SUSANNA LOOF, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 4 minutes ago
The U.N. nuclear watchdog expressed "serious concern" Thursday over Iran's resumption of activities that could lead to an atomic bomb, and diplomats said Tehran has a Sept. 3 deadline to stop or face another possible referral to the Security Council.
Iran, showing the defiance it has increasingly displayed since its new president was inaugurated last weekend, responded with indignation. Tehran's chief delegate here vowed that Iran would become a nuclear fuel producer and supplier within a decade.
"This resolution is political," said Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi, according to the state-run news agency. "It comes from American pressure. ... It lacks any legal or logical basis and is unacceptable."
The topic of the International Atomic Energy Agency resolution, adopted by consensus by its 35-nation board, was Iran's move Wednesday to reopen its uranium conversion plant in the mountains outside the southern city of Isfahan.
With the plant now working at full force, Iran's hard-liners are pushing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to ignore European warnings and resume uranium enrichment.
Mohammad Javad Larijani, a member of Iran's powerful Expediency Council, said the transfer of power to Ahmadinejad has given the country an opportunity to change the rules of the game.
He called France, Germany and Britain — the countries negotiating with Iran — "three international savages" and said any debate over enrichment is "shameful."
Starting up the enrichment facility, a plant built mainly underground outside the city of Natanz to protect it from airstrikes, would heighten tensions with Europe and the United States. Enrichment is the final step in uranium development, producing either fuel for a nuclear reactor for electricity or material for a nuclear bomb.
Iran denies it seeks to develop nuclear weapons and says its program is only for peaceful purposes. But Tehran insists it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to develop the full fuel cycle, including enrichment.
"Any government in Iran that gives up nuclear technology will collapse since the issue has turned into a matter of national pride. There is no doubt that Natanz will resume work sooner rather than later," said Ahmad Tavakoli, a lawmaker allied with Ahmadinejad.
President Bush, meeting at his Texas ranch with his foreign policy team, welcomed the nuclear agency's warning to Tehran. He also indicated Ahmadinejad will receive a U.S. visa to attend an annual United Nations gathering next month in New York.
After the meeting, National Security Adviser Steve Hadley met with reporters and noted that president of Iran indicated that there could be more talks.
"We think that is the right step, to have — for Iran to come back into compliance with the Paris Accord, and to resume the negotiations and discussions with the EU-3," he said.
Britain's Foreign Office said the IAEA resolution "sends a clear message to Iran of what it must do. We still believe there is a non-confrontational way forward if Iran wants to take it."
In Vienna, the nuclear agency asked IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei to deliver a report on Iran's implementation of nuclear safeguards by Sept. 3. Diplomats made clear that insufficient progress by that date could mean the board would consider referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions. The diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized by their governments to discuss the issue.
Thursday's resolution did not mention the Security Council, given concerns such a move could backfire by hardening Iran's position. Iran had said it would rather endure sanctions than back down.
Security Council diplomats in New York say the IAEA may also be wary of referring Iran to the council because there is a real risk the body would not agree to sanctions. China, for example, has said it opposes bringing the issue before the council, and could use its veto power to block a resolution punishing Iran.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the IAEA "has spoken with one voice" and he expects its resolution to be implemented, U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said at U.N. headquarters in New York.
The board's next scheduled meeting is Sept. 19, but members can call emergency meetings at any time. This week's meetings were called by France, Germany and Britain after Iran announced it planned to resume uranium conversion.
Iran had suspended that process and the subsequent enrichment process under an agreement with the three European Union countries.
Tehran saw the text adopted Thursday as unacceptable because it would bar it from enrichment and other related activities that are allowed under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or NPT, said Sirus Nasseri, the country's chief IAEA delegate.
"All Iran wants to do is to enjoy the right under the NPT, the right which has been denied to it for more than two decades," he said.
He said his country would be a "nuclear fuel producer and supplier within a decade" and dismissed the resolution as an attempt "to apply pressure."
But he also told reporters the Iranians did "not leave the door closed to (the Europeans)" and would, for now, keep the enrichment process suspended "to give a chance for negotiations."
"If they wish to negotiate on the enrichment facility in Natanz and how we would put it into operation through an agreed arrangement, we would consider (it)," he said.
ElBaradei said he was "very encouraged" by statements from the EU and Iran that the talks would continue.
EU envoys said the burden was now on Iran to keep talks alive.
"A breakdown will be a matter of regret to the EU, because the EU hoped that it could persuade Iran to take measures that might lead to a restoration of international confidence in Iran's nuclear intentions," the statement said. "But the EU is confident that another way of making possible the necessary restoration of confidence in Iran's nuclear intentions can be found.
___
Associated Press writer Ali Akbar Dareini contributed to this report from Natanz, Iran.
___
On the Net:
IAEA: http://www.iaea.org | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
