IRAN is the new IRAQ? Proof!

Iran Nuke Laptop Data Came from Terror Group

WASHINGTON, Feb 29, 2008 (IPS) - The George W. Bush administration has long pushed the "laptop documents" - 1,000 pages of technical documents supposedly from a stolen Iranian laptop - as hard evidence of Iranian intentions to build a nuclear weapon. Now charges based on those documents pose the only remaining obstacles to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declaring that Iran has resolved all unanswered questions about its nuclear programme.

Iran Laptop Papers Showed the Wrong Missile Warhead

WASHINGTON, Nov 19, 2010 (IPS) - The most important intelligence documents used to argue that Iran had a covert nuclear weapons research and development programme in 2003 - a set of technical drawings of efforts to fit what appears to be a nuclear payload into the reentry vehicle of Iran's medium-range ballistic missile, the Shahab-3 – turn out to have a fatal flaw: the drawings depict a reentry vehicle that had already been abandoned by the Iranian missile programme in favour of an improved model.

Two more Iran nuclear scientists attacked with bombs

Unidentified assailants riding motorcycles launched bomb attacks early on Monday against two Iranian nuclear physicists here, killing one of them and prompting accusations that the United States and Israel were behind the episode, state-controlled media reports said.

The dead scientist was identified as Majid Shahriari, a physics professor at Shahid Beheshti University in northern Tehran, whose wife was injured when a bomb attached to his car was detonated remotely. A second professor at the same university, Fereydoon Abbasi, was injured in a separate, simultaneous attack. His wife was also hurt.

Nuclear program of Iran

In February 2009 testimony before the U.S. Senate, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair reaffirmed the conclusions of the 2007 National Intelligence Estimateand and said "although we do not know whether Iran currently intends to develop nuclear weapons, we assess Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop them." He said Iran was unlikely to achieve a nuclear weapon before 2013 because of foreseeable technical and programmatic problems, and that this would be in the case that it decided to do so.[454] Stephen Lendman, an American research associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization based in Canada, has argued Iran's commercial nuclear program is perfectly legal and that the U.S. has a double standard towards Iran's nuclear program.[455] Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear weapons expert and president of the Ploughshares Fund, has said the Obama administration does not want to be drawn into a debate over Iran's intent because "when you're talking about negotiations in Iran, it is dangerous to appear weak or naive."[456]

And as for the Saudis etc apparently hating Iran: look here, a poll of the people

Apart from that, there's:

1. The argument has turned from 'does Iran have nukes?' to 'should Iran be allowed to develop nukes?'
2. The evidence available to the public suggesting that Iran does have nuclear weapon capabilities is flimsy at best.
3. Saudi princes are in agreement with the USA over this issue. When dictators and aristocrats are profusely and unequivocally agreeing with a democratically elected government, there's something to worry about.

Just bear in mind for now that there is NO PROOF of nuclear weapons development capabilities or interest in Iran. Making nukes isn't something you can easily hide, nor do overnight, so we'll find out for sure if and when it actually happens.

I consider the "They have nukes" excuse quite ridiculous considering the US and Russia have nukes themselves. Funny that they have to assert their position in the world.

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
I consider the "They have nukes" excuse quite ridiculous considering the US and Russia have nukes themselves. Funny that they have to assert their position in the world.

Exactly. There's no way that after building "My First Nuke" Iran will suddenly become hell-bent on destroying the world, if they did they would simply expect to become a bigger player and be able to argue their own agendas in word politics.

Not necessarily a bad thing, having a bit of balance in a West/Far East dominated world, especially considering that a likely part of the reason for the whole Islamic terrorism fad is that some of the more fundamental groups have no legitimate way of gaining recognition without having the big T sticker stuck on them.

On the other hand, if they could have a bit of a preach, and got a bit more of the world stage, they'd be far more likely to become another IRA, EDL or Tea Party - acknowledged and understood with a representative political focus.

Don't forget israel.

Not only do they have nukes, but undeclared nukes.

This could be the largest case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Ask the IAA when the last time they inspected israel's nukes?

Yes ... the two "missing" nukes that were used to start the Iraq war were found to have been in Israel all along!

gauhar.com...

Just a couple of weeks ago, I read that those two nukes were missing and they were trying to insinuate that Iran has them now! Unbelievable!!! I'll try to find that article. I showed it to hubby and we were just shaking our heads. They don't even care anymore how many holes their fabrications have. Without the media lock, they could never get away with this. What is playing out on the world stage is a total joke. The level of espionage is so blatant - it would never fly in Hollywood.

reply to post by Baldur


and

This thread only got one star and one flag.

and

That star and that flag was from me.

What??

What happened ATS?

You don't see the connection?

Worse, you don't see what Wikileaks is?

Just a pretext for war, and just a divide and conquer dis-info propaganda>?

Praise the lord for ATS, and I thought we all woke up.

[oozy shakes head]

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by Baldur

 

and

This thread only got one star and one flag.

and

That star and that flag was from me.

What??

What happened ATS?

You don't see the connection?

Worse, you don't see what Wikileaks is?

Just a pretext for war, and just a divide and conquer dis-info propaganda>?

Praise the lord for ATS, and I thought we all woke up.

[oozy shakes head]

I don't think Wikileaks is a pretext for war. The pretext for war, in my opinion, is the dialog that Israel (Fundamentally opposed middle east megalomaniacs), the US (Driven by corporate interests, including banks with many shares in weapons dealing) and Saudi Arabian princes (rich aristocratic dictators, corrupt to the core that have no interest in democracy or the people's opinions) about Iran (a country that's trying to become a legitimate world power, but is incapable due to being embargoed for suspicion and superstition).

Somebody try to find me one thing, within Wikileaks or without which legitimizes war on Iran. Now, they're not perfect, but they're the best bet at one often-stigmatized group of people getting a voice in world politics.

Remember guys, Wikileaks just releases information - it's your news organizations that decide how to present it. I've seen news corps presenting the Iran cables as legitimizing war ('Everybody hates them, let's just bomb them') and as evidence of unfair backroom dealings aimed at causing a completely baseless war with fabricated evidence ('Where's the evidence? Why are the US/US interests so opposed to Iran?')

Remember, IRAN DON'T HAVE NUKES! They may or may not be trying to make them, but speculation doesn't cut it for a valid basis for war. Which is more akin to the conspiracy theorist spirit? Just agree with what you're told by the government and media as they frame some information released by some website? Or question what you hear, do your own research, and come to your own conclusions?

I hope to hell we all don't end up having to watch another Iraq.