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 'has atomic bomb capability'

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by gallifreyan medic
 


I'm starting to really like this thread w/its twists and turns.
Now, perhaps it's too late for me as well, but I went to go look for the original article, perhaps on Reuters.

Well, the link on google to BBC is still there, and still goes to the 2nd articles. Went to Reuters.... and

....... that's the hard evidence that your OP didn't change, that BBC did -- because I used your exact thread title, with the quotations and everything....

and it was the same at Reuters. Found This at Guardian.co.uk. pretty much the same story, a month or two earlier, with a lesser estimated amount of low-grade that was estimated in the OP.

Soooo, I wonder if your OP will return tomorrow morning -- y'know sort of a low-grade conspiracy ....... an article released too early?

cheers



[edit on 5/6/09 by argentus]




posted on Jun, 5 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
What are the examples of Iran growing and becoming a stable nation? Nuclear capability makes a nation stable? Is NK "stable". Please i need more facts and criterion.


Originally posted by gallifreyan medic
So Iran now has nuclear bomb capability.

Do you think that there should be a worry over this?
Personally I dont.
Iran despite from what the media puts out for us to believe,are progressing and growing on the right path to becoming a stable nation.
Unlike the situation we in the west are going through which is regressing.
I would like to hear your views of why and why not to worry.



news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 5/6/09 by gallifreyan medic]

[edit on 5/6/2009 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Who amongst the readers here would claim to have nuclear bomb capability just because they had a stack of uranium?

It's just nonsense to convince people we should make Israel happy by attacking Iran for them.

- And possibly starting the war that would really end all wars.
- all wars using technology, anyway.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by gallifreyan medic
reply to post by Chris McGee
 


It was titled exactly as the original article.Hence the first few posts.
Why the BBC removed it,not a clue.


Hmm, that's a bit strange then. From the look of it it they've changed the whole tone of the article from Iran to Syria in the couple of hours between your original post and my reply. Apologies for the error.


edit: Did a bit of googling around and found this. Is that a copy of the original article? It references the BBC and contains the exact quote used in the OP so it looks like this site could have lifted it from the BBC site before it was changed.

[edit on 6-6-2009 by Chris McGee]



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Hellmutt
 



OMG Man...thats a very interested theory...nice one m8



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


There are two links on page 2 of this thread that can you can use for discussion
on North Korea.
As for Iran.That information you would already know.
Having looked through your thread activity on your profile page.Very interesting,as is your name ???



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


when will israel grow and become a stable nation? when will they stop killing chrisians? when wiill they stop celebrtating the murder of christ and the murder of englsih servicemen?



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 


Love the net,pulled but not hidden from other sources.
Nice going fella in finding.


Will ask a mod if I they can edit to have one of the other sources used.
Gone past me being able to edit.
If it reappears as more people friendly,it will show just how manipulated the
news can be.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


Agreed.
Its the constant negative view of other countries that people are fed to have them support and go along with TPTBs view.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Chris McGee
 


No need to apologise.All ok.


Good one finding.Not the Beebs but its still out there to be seen.

[edit on 6/6/09 by gallifreyan medic]



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Has anyone ever thought that maybe Syria is hiding a missile and warheads for Iran and have been secretly developing it?

Just a hint, or thought.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by gallifreyan medic
I have used my own mind to see what is with Iran.
Iranian leaders of past have been a worry,what I have seen with the present leader is someone who is trying to develop and advance the progress of the country.
He has been willing to sit at the table so to speak,but has been rebuked.We have been constantly feed a view that hasn't always been what is.

I really wish people would actually follow what goes on,instead of just jumping on the band wagon of BS.
I watch the US news and I can not believe it when I see you're being told something totally different than what is in UK news.
The UK news is starting to steer to the same way unfortunately.


The Iranian people and culture are exceptional in so many ways. Sadly many of the brightest have found reason to leave the country since the Islamic Revolution.

Iran's current theocracy has made every effort to reverse engineer progress in terms of freedoms, human rights, sound economic polices, foreign policy. It is verging on becoming a pariah state.

Iran has essentially lost 30 years of development and is still moving in the same backwards direction.

Theocracies may have been viable in previous centuries but not today.
Iran's population is predominantly young now. They are aware of their increasingly disconsonant position on the world stage.

It is hard to imagine a poorer leader than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Fiscal irresponsibility bringing the economy to near ruin, embarrassing lack of tact and diplomacy, delusions of religious grandeur that has sparked sharp rebuke from his clerical bosses.

A responsible acting country not making deserves the right to nuclear weapons. But Iran threatens it's neighbours in the region and actively sponsors terrorist acts and military proxies.

It takes it's cues on ramming through it's nuclear policies from it's ally North Korea, a demonstrably failed state run by a mad dictator.

The Iranian people deserve better.

btw from what I read in your defenses of the current Iranian regime, if they had a spokesman posting online he would sound just like you.


Mike



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


At the beginning of reading your post,I thought ok someone who has an interesting view point,not as mine but can add to the discussion.
And then you it started going down hill,especially the last comment.

Your view is obviously in a non negotiable position.

The spokesman comment you have made to people before on other threads.
Do you not see you are exactly that of what you speak.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by watchtheashes
 


Possible,as well as the NK angle.
But if Iran were doing it via that route,you can be sure that certain agencies would know of it.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
The other night, I saw on TV Admiral Mullen speaking on behalf of the white house on Iran, saying "We believe that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, and that they will have them in about a year, and we only have a small window of opertunity" We will be there VERY shortly. I cant say what, but there are other things going on as well, over here in Iraq that tell me that they are ready for something big to happen there, aside from Kuwait and Qatar stepping up their defenses.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by gallifreyan medic

At the beginning of reading your post,I thought ok someone who has an interesting view point,not as mine but can add to the discussion.
And then you it started going down hill,especially the last comment.

Your view is obviously in a non negotiable position.

The spokesman comment you have made to people before on other threads.
Do you not see you are exactly that of what you speak


I have many Iranian friends. What I say is largely informed by their knowledge and direct experience. A few of them of the worked in official capacities in Iran at different times.

They consistently lament the current situation there.

It is common on a site like this that people who promote certain regimes are considered agents of some sort.

I just am highly critical of a regime that Iranians I know consider terrible.


Mike



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
This article is a laugh really... They are still quoting the "wipe of the map" thing altough it has been proved it's a (purposely) bad translation.

With low-enriched uranium which is about 5% enrichment, Iran cannot build a bomb. For a bomb, they need high-enriched uranium which is about 90% enrichment.
Low-enriched uranium is used in power plants.

This article is blatantly exploiting people's ignorance in the matter.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Manouche
 


Here are to two versions of mainly the same article.

Iran says U.N. report shows its nuclear work peaceful



Reuters.com Article 1.

Iran in major nuclear expansion,U.N.oversight harder



Reuters.com Article 2

Spot the negative spin.

[edit on 6/6/09 by gallifreyan medic]



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manouche
This article is a laugh really... They are still quoting the "wipe of the map" thing altough it has been proved it's a (purposely) bad translation.

With low-enriched uranium which is about 5% enrichment, Iran cannot build a bomb. For a bomb, they need high-enriched uranium which is about 90% enrichment.
Low-enriched uranium is used in power plants.

This article is blatantly exploiting people's ignorance in the matter.


OK, I don't really have anything to substantiate this. But there is some talk that Iran is running parallel nuclear programs. One for the inspectors and the rest of the world that they are prepared to have compromised or busted.

The Israelis picked up one the one being set up in Syria with the help of North Korea.

It may be just rumour. Maybe not.

Mike



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join