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.

 

Iran rejects nuclear inspections unless Israel allows them

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2008 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


12 Arab members in the Knesset I believe. Barakeh was the Deputy Knesset Speaker sometime back. Wahabi is the current one. Not all the arabic members have been muslim, but several have been. But 12 MK's isn't too bad.

This doesn't mean I agree with some of the extreme views posted above mine. I'm only answering your question (and a common misconception).

[edit on 6-5-2008 by _Del_]




posted on May, 6 2008 @ 05:42 AM
link   
The way Jetxnet characterizes people who disagree with his hate-filled views as Arabs, terrorists and anti-Semites reveals his own ignorance.

This guy's another sad Nimrod who really believes nations like Iran constitute a threat to global security when he's being seduced by the Minister of Propaganda himself, George Bush.


Bottom line, Iran is a bigger threat to the Middle East than any other ME nation at this time. It is because Iran's President is a Muslim radical hellbent on Israels destruction and Islamic rule through the ME.

The proof is out there, go find it.


Well see, that's the thing. I haven't found any proof stating Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is planning to quote "destroy Israel and spread Islamic Rule throughout the Mid-East".

Apart from a misquoted and taken out of context speech, that you repeat like it's a prayer.

Just out of curiosity what do you mean by "Islamic Rule"?

The . of state of every nation in the Mid-East is a Muslim firstly, and secondly each nation in the Middle East has some degree of influence from the Quran on their legal, political and social structure.

So Ahmadinejad is sinisterly planning to convert Muslims to Muslims ey?
Yeah that adds up.

Your swallowing more propaganda than you can possibly chew so slow it down a notch and think things through before you speak.

Iran is vastly different from the rest of the Arab World. Iranians are Persians, not Arabs. They not only speak a different language, but are genetically and culturally different from Arabs. They have different customs and for a good majority of their history, Islam did not play a major role in politics, Zoroastrianism did. (Pssst, that's a religion too and it has nothign to do with Islam
)
They are also a majority Shiite nation, and have quite a different interpretation of Islam from the rest of the Mid-East, but since you collectively see them all as either towel.s or fanatics, you wouldn't understand.

Iran has for centuries distanced itself from the Arab world. The last thing it wants to do is invade or try to spread it's culture there.

Think of it this way. How many Sunni nations would accept a Shia form of government when Sunnis don't even view Shias as legitimate muslims?
NONE.

Why on Earth would Iran try to spread an imperialistic empire onto the Arab world?
So they can get stuck in quagmires left and right like the US?
Oh yeah that adds up.

The only one currently who's invading, spreading and exploiting anything is America.
One last thing, how would you feel if a nation hostile to you suddenly put hundreds of thousands of troops of the left and right of you and constantly threatened you of invasion for reasons which have yet to be proved?
Iran isn't in a happy place now and for good reason, only 6 years ago the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, and now their pointing their sword directly at their .s.
I wouldn't be jumping up and down if I lived in Iran either.

Grow up and stop spouting your racist, baseless views here.
I know a forum you would feel right home in, [hate-site-nolink]
It fits your beliefs like a glove



[edit on 6/5/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


top bloke - star for you


it wa sa question and not a `neer ner israel dont have any` - as i hadn`t checked the mfa website for the longest time

after more reading what is sad is that they themselves are subject to extremeist abuse from isralis

take Mohammad Barakeh - his live has been threatened by Baruch Marzel (who lives in hebron) , so its very obvious (but you know - kinda been saying this for along times aswell) that extremeists are on all sides in teh ME - and the people themseleves are the ones that suffer.

for the record - iran has 290 `mp`s , of which 31 are independant and 5 represent the `other` religions (the number is based upon the census of other religions - get more people you have more mps)



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 06:29 AM
link   
There are several Jewish settlements that could be bulldozed and I would lend a shovel. But so much of the anti-"zionist" propaganda is ridiculous. Like the fact no one blames Egypt, Jordan or Syria for "stealing" land when they refused to set up a palestinian state after being handed the keys to the kingdom so to speak by the 1949 armistice. Or ignoring the fact that conditions in the West Bank and Gaza were substantially better under Israeli control before the corrupt PA took power. Now Israel isn't always a saint, and I've already mentioned there are several groups and settlements just as guilty of extremism as any arab group. But Israel is also a fully functioning secular democracy in the middle east with MK's from all facets of society. It also volunteered 98% of the disputed territory and 50% of Jerusalem proper in a land for peace deal that Arafat rejected. It leads me to believe that the negotiations haven't been in good faith on both sides.

At anyrate, I don't want to derail the thread. Iran has the same options as Israel in reference to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Withdraw and develop Nukes or submit to verification to get the technical and logistical assistance to develop nuclear reactors.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 07:22 AM
link   
The US is as much to blame as anyone for the on going mess

gosh says the viewers - harly is slamming the usa again

well this time pay attention - israel offered all the land back , remake the border - this was 30 years ago - the offer was to be tranmsitted to the arab world via the usa

and guess what - it didn`t happen, was sent to the us ambassador who then buried it.

fast forward 30 years and we are at the same mess we allways have been.

oh and the comment (i think) about israel facing terrorists - just read up on the irgun and the king david hotel.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


I am not calling you a liar, but I have never heard of that before. Do you have any sources showing that the US failed to spread the info? I certainly wouldn't put it past us, but I just haven't heard that before.

[edit on 6-5-2008 by Karlhungis]



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


I agree,
Irans leaders are very, very smart.
Its a fool who goes up against Iran.

But they are right, again.

If Israel doesnt have to submit, neither should they.
There needs to be a counter balance...

And on that note, it worries me.
Because there's no way Israel will allow Iran to counter them in the nuclear club.
So long as Israel hold the trump card, they dont have to listen to anyone.




[edit on 6-5-2008 by Agit8dChop]



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
If Israel doesnt have to submit, neither should they.
There needs to be a counter balance...


That's just it. Noone is forcing Iran's hand. They can live up to the treaty obligations and submit to inspections/verification and receive aid to build reactors, or they can not and withdraw from the treaty and pursue nuclear weapons instead. Israel chose nuclear weapons. That's why noone is selling them fuel and they have no reactors.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
Isn't it funny how a nation like Iran, who has never invaded another nation in it's modern history is not even allowed the possibility of pursuing Nuclear weapons


Absolutely true! I starred you for this post my friend!

We, the US are a nation of hypocrites in just this very manner. ANY sovereign nation at all has the right to protect their people with the highest level of efficacy possible!


Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
but on the other hand Israel, who has been offensively bombing Gaza and Lebanon back into the Stone Ages for decades and have no restraint in attacking civilians; has acquired them without any discussion and without anyone knowing.


Sad, but true.


Very nice post.



AB1



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Karlhungis
 



On June 19, 1967, the National Unity Government [of Israel] voted unanimously to return the Sinai to Egypt and the Golan Heights to Syria in return for peace agreements. The Golans would have to be demilitarized and special arrangement would be negotiated for the Straits of Tiran. The government also resolved to open negotiations with King Hussein of Jordan regarding the Eastern border.
The Israeli decision was to be conveyed to the Arab nations by the United States. The US was informed of the decision, but did not re transmit it. There is no evidence of receipt from Egypt or Syria, and some historians claim that they may have never received the offer


thats taken from Chaim Herzog - heroes of israel (he was the president of israel till 1997)

now that deal , which never was - is actively being persude today

news.bbc.co.uk...

and there seems to be parties who want peace - just as there are extremeists who don`t.

give peace a chance.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


dimona

they have a reactor and make there own fuel



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin


The Israeli decision was to be conveyed to the Arab nations by the United States. The US was informed of the decision, but did not re transmit it. There is no evidence of receipt from Egypt or Syria, and some historians claim that they may have never received the offer


give peace a chance.


That statement could also imply the US sent along the message and Egypt and Syria didn't even reply with a "No thanks".

And Dimona would be used for making bombmaking material not nuclear powerplant fuel. It needs that fuel to operate
It's not a commercial power facility.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_
That statement could also imply the US sent along the message and Egypt and Syria didn't even reply with a "No thanks".


Yes, and we all know the US, acting as an intermediary between nations looking across a "No-Man's-Land" at each other, would NEVER do anything to screw up a peace deal that might reduce a client country's need to buy US-built military hardware. Naaah, we're above reproach, aren't we?


And Dimona would be used for making bombmaking material not nuclear powerplant fuel. It needs that fuel to operate. It's not a commercial power facility.


Israel's nuclear capability is troubling. I think Iran is right to point out the hypocrisy in the international community.

I think a lot of people on this site are horribly ignorant about Islam and its different sects. Here's a hint, guys: You know how Christianity has, like, hundreds of separate sects, many of whom can't even agree on the proper contents of the Bible? Islam's the same way!!!! Not all Muslims are totalitarian Sharia dictatorial terrorists-in-training!! In fact, the whackos are a very small minority!! And another thing--most of the people who live under Sharia law--want to live under Sharia law and are happy with it, just like members of many other religions are happy living according to the rules of their own sects!!! What a concept!!!

But then, that's the downside of "Democracy", isn't it? When the citizens of a nation with resources we want democratically elect leaders who don't cater to American business interests then democracy itself becomes a problem. And that's when we jump in to assassinate, or invade, or whatever. We did it to Iran in the '50s, we did it to Central and South American countries from the '70s through today, and we did it to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. etc. etc. If we don't feel like invading we instead send Green Berets to train Terrorists (yes, Terrorists, not "freedom fighters") to overthrow those governments for us.

Of course we only do it to those nations that are "useful". Nations with oil or natural gas, nations through which pipelines can be run to cut the distance and reduce over. for the companies using the pipeline, nations close enough to ship cheaply and with land resources where huge factories can be built with little or no environmental regulation, nations with a large population base who will work for slave wages (or large populations of political prisoners who are just used as slaves).

Do the right-wingers here even try to notice that we mainly declare nations as "enemy states" after those nations elect leaders who won't play by our rules and let us exploit their land and people? Venezuela? Iran? Iraq? Afghanistan? C'mon, people, it's not hard to figure out.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Nighthawk

Yes, and we all know the US, acting as an intermediary between nations looking across a "No-Man's-Land" at each other, would NEVER do anything to screw up a peace deal that might reduce a client country's need to buy US-built military hardware. Naaah, we're above reproach, aren't we?


I said it could ALSO be interpreted that way. I didn't say that was the only way to interpret it. I didn't attempt to use scathing sarcasm to imply he was an idiot for not interpreting it that way, either.

As for Iran, I said it was savvy move. And that they had a choice to develop the weapons and withdraw from the treaty, or to stay a signatory and receive the benefits. Just like Israel chose to forgo being a signatory in exchange for developing nuclear weapons. Notice they don't have a commercial reactor: that is because noone will import the fuel necessary for it.

I don't know how that makes me guilty of the list of sins you've provided. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I'm condemning Iran for some reason
Go outside and enjoy the sunshine for abit.

[edit on 6-5-2008 by _Del_]



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


yeah cause the USA wouldn`t be real real pissed with israel for attacking the uss liberty 3 days before now would they and just ignore there request as a great big f*** you in retaliation .



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Ive said it once and Ill say it again....We need to just let Iran and Isreal duke it out and come to an agreement. The US has been meddling in these matters for to long and I feel making the whole situation worse. Sometimes there is a peace on the otherside of war and we need to quit being a policeman and worry about ourselves. Iran has their sovereignty and if I was them I would just pull out and let everyone know till Isreal joins the NPT then we are not going to be. Once again let them fight it out and get it over with so we can ALL move on.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


I give up. I only tried to say it was an ambiguous comment. Obviously that means I'm king of the zionists who can do no wrong and I hate Iran. My apologies. I meant to say Israel has no right to exist and that Iran should be able to have it's cake and eat it too in regards to the treaty even though Israel doesn't.


*slaps fore.*



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


Actually, Israel's nuclear programme was funded and supplied by the UK and France during the 50's and 60's. Without aid from them, Israel wouldn't have had a nuclear programme.



At this point in the mid-1950s, Israel's nuclear weapons program began receiving aid from other countries. By the Suez crisis in 1956, according to the preleminary Protocol of Sèvres, France agreed to help Israel build a nuclear reactor and reprocessing plant near Dimona which used natural uranium moderated by heavy water. Plutonium production started in about 1964. Top secret British documents obtained by BBC Newsnight show that Britain made hundreds of secret shipments of restricted materials to Israel in the 1950s and 1960s. These included specialist chemicals for reprocessing and samples of fissile material—uranium-235 in 1959, and plutonium in 1966, as well as highly enriched lithium-6 which is used to boost fission bombs and fuel hydrogen bombs. The investigation also showed that Britain shipped 20 tons of heavy water directly to Israel in 1959 and 1960 to start up the Dimona reactor. The transaction was made through a Norwegian front company called Noratom which took a 2% commission on the transaction. Britain was challenged about the heavy water deal at the International Atomic Energy Agency after it was exposed on Newsnight in 2005. British Foreign Minister Kim Howells hid behind the Noratom contract and claimed this was a sale to Norway. But a former British intelligence officer who investigated the deal at the time confirmed that this was really a sale to Israel and the Noratom contract was just a charade.[10] The Foreign Office finally admitted in March 2006 that Britain knew the destination was Israel all along.[11]

In 1961, the Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion informed the Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker that a pilot plutonium-separation plant would be built at Dimona. British intelligence concluded from this and other information that this "can only mean that Israel intends to produce nuclear weapons".[12] By 1969, U.S. Defense Secretary Melvin Laird believed that Israel might have a nuclear weapon that year.[13][14] Later that year, U.S. President Richard Nixon in a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir pressed Israel to "make no visible introduction of nuclear weapons or undertake a nuclear test program", so maintaining a policy of nuclear ambiguity.[15] The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency believed that Israel's first bombs may have been made with highly enriched uranium stolen in the mid-1960s from the U.S. Navy nuclear fuel plant operated by the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation in Apollo, Pennsylvania, where sloppy material accounting would have masked the theft.[16][17]

Source - Wiki



So, the point about going NPT and getting help or not going NPT and doing it yourself is moot, as Israel throughout it's short violent history has relied on the West to prop it up, either with financial or military aid of some kind.

EDIT: To add emphasis in quoted text.

Note how the Israeli's have been stabbing their best friend, the USA, in the back for decades? On top of selling top secret technology to China, they also stole uranium from the USA!!!

[edit on 6/5/08 by stumason]



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_
I said it could ALSO be interpreted that way. I didn't say that was the only way to interpret it. I didn't attempt to use scathing sarcasm to imply he was an idiot for not interpreting it that way, either.


I understand and apologize. My sarcasm wasn't directed at you. Nor were my comments about Islam and Iran. I don't spend nearly as much time on this site as I used to because of people like jetxnet and other rabid right-wingers spreading misinformation and outright willful ignorance, and it gets tiring refuting their crap with facts whose existence they refuse to even consider, let alone accept--thus I find myself more and more turning to sarcastic commentary as a counter to the lies and stupidity.


As for Iran, I said it was savvy move. And that they had a choice to develop the weapons and withdraw from the treaty, or to stay a signatory and receive the benefits. Just like Israel chose to forgo being a signatory in exchange for developing nuclear weapons. Notice they don't have a commercial reactor: that is because noone will import the fuel necessary for it.


I'm personally bothered by pretty much any nation having nukes, including the US and its allies. I'd think any nation that demands other nations disarm and play along should lead by example and dismantle its own weapons first. But, I'm sure there are those who believe if we did so we'd be hit the second our last bomb was decomissioned because without the threat of mutually assured destruction there's nothing holding anyone back.


I don't know how that makes me guilty of the list of sins you've provided. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I'm condemning Iran for some reason.


You're not, and again I apologize if that was implied. As I've stated, my commentary was primarily aimed at folks like jetxnet. I've become so tired of the propagandist rhetoric of the brainwashed that I'm sometimes at a loss when it comes to keeping a civil tone, and occasionally my wit is more like a smartass grenade than a sarcastic sniper rifle, hitting friend and enemy alike. I'm terribly sorry about that.



posted on May, 6 2008 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_
reply to post by Harlequin
 


I give up. I only tried to say it was an ambiguous comment. Obviously that means I'm king of the zionists who can do no wrong and I hate Iran. My apologies. I meant to say Israel has no right to exist and that Iran should be able to have it's cake and eat it too in regards to the treaty even though Israel doesn't.


*slaps fore.*



no no no it was just mearly a comment in reply to yours - yes its true that the USA could very well have happily passed along the land divide plan and the other parties , smarting at the recent kick in the happy sacks israel gave them just ignored it , but given the incident with the liberty just days before i personally am inclined to think it never reached the arabs.

ambiguous comment for sure - but thats the language of the politician

what it shows is there is definately hope - israel offering an `olive branch` to peace - which sadly got swept away

as for dimona - where do they get the fuel to run it from then?



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join