It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No Nuke Iran looking for Spys.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 09:11 AM
link   
"Iran probing four suspected nuclear spies, judiciary says

TEHRAN (AFP) Dec 07, 2004
Iran's judiciary said on Tuesday it was investigating four people suspected of spying on the Islamic republic's nuclear programme, contradicting reports that their trial had already begun.
"The trial of the nuclear spies will probably take place in secret after the end of the investigation," judiciary spokesman Jamal Karimi-Rad told the student news agency ISNA.

His comments were confirmed on state television by Abbas Ali Alizadeh, the head of Tehran's justice department.

On November 18, Ali Mobacheri, the head of Tehran's revolutionary courts, told the government newspaper Iran that the trials had already begun.

He said the accused had "infiltrated nuclear facilities" and "were spying for foreign countries".

The accused have not been identified, and officials have also not specified for which countries they were allegedly spying. But the paper said that "in the past these individuals also spied for Iraq".

In August, Iran's Intelligence Minister Ali Yunessi announced the arrest of a number of "spies" who sent information on Iran's nuclear programme to foreigners.

He said the People's Mujahedeen, an armed opposition group based in Iraq that the regime in Tehran labels as "hypocrites", had played the central role in the espionage.

The group's political wing, the National Council for Resistance in Iran, in 2002 revealed two nuclear sites Iran had been hiding, including a uranium-enrichment plant in Natanz.

Last month the group alleged Iran was hiding a uranium enrichment facility in Tehran and aimed at getting the atomic bomb next year.

The group also said the father of the Pakistani atomic bomb, Abdul Qadeer Khan who has admitted to running an international nuclear smuggling network, delivered bomb designs and weapons-grade highly enriched uranium to Iran.

Iran insists that its nuclear activities are purely peaceful."

The big question here is, if your intention is in fact peaceful why go looking for spys? What do you have to Hide?




posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Yes, it's interesting how foreign spies are setting up fake centrifuge businesses in an attempt to frame Iran in on NPT violation ...



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi

Yes, it's interesting how foreign spies are setting up fake centrifuge businesses in an attempt to frame Iran in on NPT violation ...



Nice try.........links give me links. Provide backup for you baseless charges. BTW never got HCM in my sites back in Cambodia, missed him by a day, thanks for the refresher picture in your avatar.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi

Yes, it's interesting how foreign spies are setting up fake centrifuge businesses in an attempt to frame Iran in on NPT violation ...





once again you sprout baseless crap. I mean how can you be taken seriously ?

I just read your posts for a bit of comic relief now. As I'm sure most people do



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Try using the ATS search feature before baselessly attacking other members...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 01:20 PM
link   


The big question here is, if your intention is in fact peaceful why go looking for spys? What do you have to Hide?


rather, the question would be how the us administration interprets any innocent revelation about Iran's peaceful nuclear programme... past events have shown that the us administration is willing to twist any fact about Iran's peaceful nuclear programme, to make it appear as if it had military applications. Iran's intention to enrich uranium to low levels, in order to produce reactor fuel domestically, is being falsely interpreted by the us administration as an attempt to fabricate bombs. secondly, the experience of Iraq shows, that the current us administration does not refrain from using fabricated and far fetched correlations from available facts in order to justify illegal invasions of sovereign countries. under these circumstances, it is only understandable, that any country labelled as part of an "axis of evil" by the same warmongering and law circumventing administration would take preventive steps against agents whose sole aim would be to feed the bush regime's bogus arguments



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Iran has already admitted to having hidden sites from the IAEA. Also, it has been proven that China provided Iran with HEU. Iran doesn't need to produce fuel, as Russian has already offered to provide it.

Nuclear power sites require a supporting electrical grid to distribute the power generated. Sattellite images show that this grid does not exist. Insufficient high voltage lines leading away from the site, no substations, etc.

Iran's missile program is in full swing. Shahab-2 and Shahab-3 Medium range ballistic missiles are in mass production, and efforts continue to add another stage to give ICBM capabilities. Countries do not develop these weapons to tip them with conventional warheads.

And when the focus on Iran becomes too much, what does Iran do? They accuse their arch-enemy in the region, Saudi Arabia of buying nuclear weapons from Pakistan. The point being that Iran "needs" the weapons as a deterrent.

In a nutshell, nobody in their right mind would believe that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Iran has already admitted to having hidden sites from the IAEA.


not exactly. it merely intended to declare those sites after they had been technically completed, but before starting operations there: which the NPT actually doesn't prohibit.



Also, it has been proven that China provided Iran with HEU.


these were negligible quantities, and not usable for fabricating nuclear weapons.



Iran doesn't need to produce fuel, as Russian has already offered to provide it.


it is up to Iran to decide sovereignly where it wants to get its fuel from, and the NPT allows Iran to enrich uranium to low degrees for fuel productions. Iran intends to make use of that right. Iran cannot be forced to depend on the good will of foreign powers - none of which has a recent history of "friendship" with Iran -, when it comes to keep running an civilian infrastructure that is to provide a considerable amount of the country's electricity consumption (Iran plans to build around 8 nuclear reactors). plus, self-sufficiency in the field of energetic industries is perfectly in line with the Iranian government's development policies, which focus on acquiring sophisticated civilian technologies locally, so not to depend on outside sources.



Nuclear power sites require a supporting electrical grid to distribute the power generated. Sattellite images show that this grid does not exist. Insufficient high voltage lines leading away from the site, no substations, etc.


i fail to see how that would affect the topic. Iran is largely self-sufficient in the production of electrical power grids and associated installations. some industrial projects in Iran do face delays and technical problems, and there would be nothing abnormal about the construction of grids being somewhat delayed. there are hundreds of possible reasons why the mentionned source couldn't find enough grids to its liking. also, it should be noted that the Bushehr reactor, is a light water design, of no use to military purposes. it will provide power to the oil and gas industries in the south of the country, as well as to the southern population centers and their industrial areas.



Iran's missile program is in full swing. Shahab-2 and Shahab-3 Medium range ballistic missiles are in mass production,




and efforts continue to add another stage to give ICBM capabilities.


there are no reliable and conclusive enough reports about Iran's future military missile developments.

also, Iran intends to launch satellites, as this is much needed for the development of this mountainous country's civilian infrastructure and telecommunications. of course, it needs launch vehicles and more powerful missiles for that. but this does not imply any military application nonetheless.



Countries do not develop these weapons to tip them with conventional warheads.


from the littel thatis known, Iran's missile research since the Shahab-3, has focused on steadily improving the guidance of the missiles, not on their range or payload. plus, a country like Iran, does need such weapons for conventional means, because, if their precision is improved - which is in the reach of Iran's technical capabilities -, then they can replace cruise missiles and, to a certain degree, the airforce, in the role of attacking strategic enemy targets such as airfields or bases. knowing that Iran is sanctionned by arms embargo, and knowing Iran's policies of self-sufficiency rather than dependence on foreign spare parts or technical expertise (a lesson learnt from the Iran-Iraq war, when western countries refused to sell spares for Iran's western made equipment), it is only logical that Iran would use the missile technology as the easiest and cheapest way of creating a viable, even if temporary, substitute to strategic strike weapons such as last generation aircraft or cruise missiles.



And when the focus on Iran becomes too much, what does Iran do? They accuse their arch-enemy in the region, Saudi Arabia of buying nuclear weapons from Pakistan. The point being that Iran "needs" the weapons as a deterrent.


i don't think that Iran's point is to say it "needs" weapons too. rather, it would be to underline the blatant double standards applied by the us administration and israel in this regard: Brazil is "allowed" not to be part of the NPT, and to operate thousands of centrifuges; South Korea is "allowed" to research the fabrication of nuclear weapons; Israel is "allowed" to possess several hundreds of nuclear weapons, and to point numbers of them at Iranian cities; and next, yet another country in Iran's neighborhood (after Israel, Russia, Pakistan, India) would be "allowed" to go nuclear in silence? this shows where the problem actually originates: in the double standards of the us administration, which falsely accuses Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons, while the IAEA could find no proof whatsoever for such a thing after more than a year of intrusive inspections, and while other, nuclear armed countries with a record of violating UNSC resolutions (such as israel), don't have to fear illegal invasion by the us as a consequence.



In a nutshell, nobody in their right mind would believe that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful.


or perhaps nobody would believe pentagon claims to the contrary anymore, after the historic Iraqi "WMD" lies, and the vested neo-colonialist and militaro-corporatist interests that they revealed.


[edit on 7-12-2004 by mefftandieri]



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 03:07 PM
link   
The Bushehr reactor will produce 180kg of plutonium annually. Iran could divert this spent fuel and reprocess it, just as North Korea did. Also, by reducing fuel burnup, the Bushehr reactor could produce weapons grade plutonium directly.

Iran has a history of hiding it's activities, the Natanz facility was built in secrecy, and was not disclosed until Iran was challenged by the west.

The IAEA has declared Iran in violation of the safeguards requirements of the NPT. Iran responded by blocking inspections.

The undisclosed uranium that Iran has imported is significant because it allowed Iran to test it's enrichment facilities without the IAEA's knowledge. Again, that is a violation of the NPT.

There is no guarantee that Iran will remain a signatory of the NPT once she is in posession of the technology (that she can only get as a signatory nation).

Given Iran's past behavior, it is not reasonable to rely on her "good intentions" regarding disclosure of all her nuclear activities. The only way to ensure Iran's peaceful use of the technology is to prevent her from enriching fuel on her own, and to require Iran to hand over all spent fuel to Russia as per her agreement when the reactor deal was originally inked.

No one cares if Iran uses the technology for power generation. But she must comply with her agreements, and permit inspections and monitoring of her programs like any other signatory nation.

[edit on 7-12-2004 by engineer]



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 06:27 PM
link   

The Bushehr reactor will produce 180kg of plutonium annually


i think the design of the site doesn't include a plutonium reprocessing plant (unlike the israeli dimona reactor fex), which is needed to weaponiser the plutonium. so this isn't among the kind of reactor complexes that would be particularly suitable for building weapons.



The Bushehr reactor will produce 180kg of plutonium annually.


yes, but, many plants around the world produce plutonium, often in greater quantities, but do not use it for weapons. some aspects of every civilian nuclear infrastructure could theoretically be used in a weapons program, and none of these aspects, as such, implies the existence of a weapons program.

but it is also a political question. i think the problem stems from the questionnable doctrine of 'preemptiveness', popular among us neocons and israeli ultras despite all dangerous setbacks and unnecessary suffering that it produced in Iraq already; this approach stipulates inherent suspicion towards certain countries, along a simplistic 'good' vs 'evil', 'liberators' vs 'terrorists' line of thought.



Natanz


to my knowledge, the NPT doesn't stipulate the sites have to be declared before their actual construction is completed. the mentionned site wasn't completed yet, therefore did iran have to declare it at that time?



The IAEA has declared Iran in violation of the safeguards requirements of the NPT.


the IAEA also declared that Iran has no nuclear weapons program. it conducted more than a year of intrusive inspections, and could not find evidence in support of the bush administration's contentions.



Iran responded by blocking inspections.


however now inspections are not blocked.



The undisclosed uranium that Iran has imported is significant because it allowed Iran to test it's enrichment facilities without the IAEA's knowledge. Again, that is a violation of the NPT.


the NPT authorizes such tests in principle, as long as they are conducted for peaceful purposes. equally, it could be argued that the 'nuclear' members of the NPT violated the treaty by not transferring peaceful nuclear technology to Iran, which the treaty stipulates as a counter part to non proliferation. the us could be accused of violating the NPT due to the measures it took to discourage other countries and personalities from helping Iran's peaceful nuclear program.



There is no guarantee that Iran will remain a signatory of the NPT once she is in posession of the technology (that she can only get as a signatory nation).


well it is already in the possession of enrichment technology. it has however agreed to temporarily freeze enrichment activities as a confidence building measure in exchange of official admission to the 'fuel cycle' club, so it can resume peaceful use of all aspects of its nuclear technology.



Given Iran's past behavior, it is not reasonable to rely on her "good intentions" regarding disclosure of all her nuclear activities.


in my opinion iran's past policies would best be caracterised as peaceloving, law abiding and pragmatic, particularly by regional standards including us-sponsored regimes and their proxies.. certain nuclear armed states have demonstrated immensely questionnable behaviour, including israel (whose policies were condemned by several UNSC resolutions), and pakistan (which, with us and saudi backing, promoted the taliban and afghan mujahedin networks), not to mention the current us administration, which overtly circumvents international law, and most recently invaded a sovereign state rather illegally and under bogus justification.



The only way to ensure Iran's peaceful use of the technology is to prevent her from enriching fuel on her own,


that would represent a violation of the NPT, as well as the Paris agreement between Iran and the EU, because these stipulate Iran's right to peaceful uranium enrichment.



and to require Iran to hand over all spent fuel to Russia as per her agreement when the reactor deal was originally inked.


iran hasn't renounced that part of the agreement: the reason it wasn't finalized yet, is technical details (such as prices), and various political factors (both sides using this deal as leverage in complex negociations).



No one cares if Iran uses the technology for power generation. But she must comply with her agreements, and permit inspections and monitoring of her programs like any other signatory nation.


that is correct. at the same time, much of the suspicion is created and held alive by the us administration itself, on shaky grounds. if iran's right to operate a peaceful 'fuel cycle' is finally recognised and put into practice, it will certainly comply with the rules, and the IAEA would have the opportunity to confirm iran's compliance.




top topics



 
0

log in

join