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.

 

Uranium One deal led to some exports to Europe, memos show

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   
So the Uranium 1 deal apparently had an "understanding" that none of the uranium mined in the U.S. would be exported.

That seemed to be the safety cushion "selling point" (Of course, the profits might have been "exported" right?).

Now it looks like some uranium was in fact "exported" by hook or crook.

Something to do with export licenses etc.

I wonder if any has been "smuggled" as well?


Uranium One deal led to some exports to Europe, memos show


After the Obama administration approved the sale of a Canadian mining company with significant U.S. uranium reserves to a firm owned by Russia’s government, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission assured Congress and the public the new owners couldn’t export any raw nuclear fuel from America’s shores.

“No uranium produced at either facility may be exported,” the NRC declared in a November 2010 press release that announced that ARMZ, a subsidiary of the Russian state-owned Rosatom, had been approved to take ownership of the Uranium One mining firm and its American assets.

A year later, the nuclear regulator repeated the assurance in a letter to Sen. John Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican in whose state Uranium One operated mines.



Yet NRC memos reviewed by The Hill show that it did approve the shipment of yellowcake uranium — the raw material used to make nuclear fuel and weapons — from the Russian-owned mines in the United States to Canada in 2012 through a third party. Later, the Obama administration approved some of that uranium going all the way to Europe, government documents show.


And from Europe to who knows where else.





posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The European Union is an ally with a very active civilian nuclear power sector. If uranium mined in the US did go there -- and, like petroleum and other raw materials, it would be difficult to tell what part of the shipment came from the US and which from Canadian mines-- there would be nothing to fear, assuming it was not hijacked. Are you implying it was stolen in shipment?



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

All by "hook and crook" proxies.




posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001


With the ZERO tolerance of anything Russian of late, then how is it cool for Russia to be making bank off our freaking uranium?


Just trying to understand the logic of all them Hillary cultists out there...
edit on 2-11-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I think they skirted the agreement by using a Trucking firm that had a licence to export Uranium . LLC maybe ?

edit on 2-11-2017 by the2ofusr1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The deal took place when there were no sanctions against Russia because they had not yet invaded Ukraine. In fact, the official policy towards Russia was the infamous "reset." There is nothing wrong with Russian firms making money legally, and the deals seems perfectly legal

I don't understand why Trump cultists hate Obama and the Clintons so much. (Actually, I do, but since this isn't the Mud Pit I should probably not say it.)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: xuenchen

Are you implying it was stolen in shipment?


That's your claim not mine.

Interesting.

Hmmm.




posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

The boom must be about to lower on the Trump adminstration because the right is flooding the blogosphere with fake news about Obama and Hillary. Sad.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: xuenchen

Are you implying it was stolen in shipment?


That's your claim not mine.

Interesting.

Hmmm.


Then what did you mean by "and from Europe to who knows where else?" Oh, wait... you want to imply that NATO is supplying ISIS with bomb materials! Brilliant trollery!



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

I've a book of data showing they're the same war criminal CIA drug running scum as the Bush's, that I know you've personally seen that is, (and then some), so you know why.

I dont know why you keep feigning ignorance on this stuff. Well, actually I do know why, but this isn't the Mud Pit.


edit on 2-11-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:50 AM
link   
The uranium ore has always been destined for refinement in Canada. This is not news.

As far as "giving away our uranium" the Canadian firm already owned the mines, which are basically shut down at this point. We import 83% of the uranium we use from other countries, and 25% of it comes from Russia/Kazakstan.

We have traded ENRICHED URANIUM to Russia since the 90s in exchange for their low-grade material from decommissioned missiles.

There is nothing here in these continuing whining posts except lies and ignorance.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Interesting vid by George



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 11:01 AM
link   
thehill.com...
From the op


Inform News. Coming Up... Autoplay: On | Off After the Obama administration approved the sale of a Canadian mining company with significant U.S. uranium reserves to a firm owned by Russia’s government, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission assured Congress and the public the new owners couldn’t export any raw nuclear fuel from America’s shores. “No uranium produced at either facility may be exported,” the NRC declared in a November 2010 press release that announced that ARMZ, a subsidiary of the Russian state-owned Rosatom, had been approved to take ownership of the Uranium One mining firm and its American assets.

What part of "no" is hard to understand?



Uranium One's American arm, however, emailed a statement to The Hill on Wednesday evening confirming it did export uranium to Canada through the trucking firm and that 25 percent of that nuclear fuel eventually made its way outside North America to Europe and Asia, stressing all the exports complied with federal law.

25% is some
When none may be exported it appears there may be a problem.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Could we go back to Zero and can someone tell me why it would be so impossibly dangerous to move uranium to russia, when they themselves have uranium and, even more important, the worlds largest excavator of uranium is KAZAKHSTAN, which isn't exactly a neighbor to the USA...

This whole thread is an example of fake news with a tiny bit of truth in it, designed to distract from the Potus and his very, very serious problems right now.



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

What part of "the exports complied with federal law" did you not understand?



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: xuenchen

Are you implying it was stolen in shipment?


That's your claim not mine.

Interesting.

Hmmm.


Then what did you mean by "and from Europe to who knows where else?" Oh, wait... you want to imply that NATO is supplying ISIS with bomb materials! Brilliant trollery!


Another statement by you.

Not by me.

Great "assumptive/deductive" reasoning there.




posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Then please explain what you meant. Pretty please?



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 11:48 AM
link   
How interesting that none of you are bothering to quote this from the OP's source:




“None of the US U308 product produced to date has been sold to non-US customers except for approximately 25% which was sold via book transfer at the conversion facilities to customers from Western Europe and Asia," executive Martha Wickers said. “Any physical export of the product from conversion facilities to non-US destinations is under the control of such customers and subject to NRC regulation.”

The United States actually imports the majority of the uranium it uses as fuel. In 2016, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, 24 percent of the imports came from Kazakhstan and 14 percent came from Russia.


Emphasis mine.

Notice, there is no statement that product was exported to Europe or Asia, merely that ownership of the material was moved via a "book transfer" that was subject to approval by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ... you know, that Federal agency mandated to control what nuclear materials can come into and leave this country.


edit on 2-11-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
How interesting that none of you are bothering to quote this from the OP's source:




“None of the US U308 product produced to date has been sold to non-US customers except for approximately 25% which was sold via book transfer at the conversion facilities to customers from Western Europe and Asia," executive Martha Wickers said. “Any physical export of the product from conversion facilities to non-US destinations is under the control of such customers and subject to NRC regulation.”

The United States actually imports the majority of the uranium it uses as fuel. In 2016, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, 24 percent of the imports came from Kazakhstan and 14 percent came from Russia.


Emphasis mine.

Notice, there is no statement that product was exported to Europe or Asia, merely that ownership of the material was moved via a "book transfer" that was subject to approval by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ... you know, that Federal agency mandated to control what nuclear materials can come into and leave this country.



Well I suppose you have quite the question to answer then?

What value is there in owning something in a country that you do not operate in unless you can extract the material from said country?

Another way to ask would be;

What value is there for Russia to hold the book ownership of uranium if they cannot use it or sell it to anybody outside of the country it resides in? *IF* said country would purchase it from Russia, then why didn't they just purchase Uranium One instead?

Nothing about this entire Uranium One story makes any sense what-so-ever. When you mine for minerals or metals, it's up to you to report the weight you've mined. What stops Russia from under reporting and illegally exporting the unaccounted mined uranium? You see this with Diamond and Gold mines on the regular. Why would it be different for uranium?

There is only one logical reason for Russia to have purchased any stake in Uranium One and that's to smuggle uranium out of the country.

Just because it's against the law to export Uranium doesn't mean it's not happening. Why would Russia go in on the U1H deal at all if it's just going to stall out and produce nothing? Where do they profit? What was their incentive to make this purchase, *IF NOT* to illegally export Uranium?

This is the only question I want an answer to, because it's the only question that matters. Explain why the Russian government made this purchase, please. What was their motivation, how will they get a return on the investment? If there is no return on their investment, what other reason would they do this for but to smuggle uranium illegally?
edit on 2-11-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Another who either doesnt understand what no means or just cares about crimes when one party does them.




top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join