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.

 

Panetta admits Iran not developing nukes

page: 2
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 



And since when the warmongers care about facts?


Exactly so. They lied to us all about Iraq having WMD, remember? What makes anyone believe them now about Iran having Nukes? The leaders have plainly shown us they cannot be trusted to tell the truth. When are we going to just fire them all, and elect a real Congress, for, and by them People?




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Here is the actual video:




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Thank-you, I meant to post that in my OP but I got distracted.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Im glad this is out in the open and from such as source it really means a lot. I hope more people continue to share the truth, its the only right thing to do.
edit on 10-1-2012 by trustnothing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Just in case no one knows, in Canada the earliest nuclear plant is making isotopes for the medical market.
It was closed a while ago for increased safeguards [because of age and newer efficiency]. At that time there was a shortage of material available for the medical community. It is up and running again.

Can anyone even imagine that they are enriching for nuclear wmds? There are more than one nuclear reactors in that country and are all under the same scrutiny as Iran. Yet they have no nuclear warheads of any sort.
One can tag nuclear capability in any country that has a reactor.Even Pakistan has one.
All are under scrutiny .
What is not talked about is the obvious agenda of using all information to advance the aspirations of the ones that would sway the masses in the favor of 'liberating' any country and controlling it in the name of peace.
I need not say more. My attitude is to live and let live.
As long as there is a cloud in front of your eyes, you can never see the reality and the why's.
Peace to all!



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Some simple FYI's:

1)Nuclear Capability vs Nuclear Weapons Programs:

Let's replace Iran with Canada, since Canada is already at this 'feared' point.

Canada has no official nuclear weapons program, yet we are nuclear capable. Why?

Because we have the knowledge, expertise, and facilities to put up a nuclear weapon inside of a month.

We are nuclear 'capable', but we have yet to use that capability for weapons.

Any Americans afraid of this? Didn't think so. Why so afraid of Iran? Canada is just as likely to get an insane leader in power long enough to launch one...approx 1 month. Some would even say that we have this leader now...


2) Underground Enrichment Facilities.

Um...I know of 3 inside of this Canadian city. 2 are operated and ran by the University, one by a medical research company. All are monitored by Canadian Forces. Hmm, not very different than what is defined in Iran.

Any Americans afraid? Didn't think so.

They are put underground for security and safety reasons. You can negate about 80% of your security and safety needs by having good old concrete and soil walls.

It would be more idiotic to have it above ground.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I posted this on another thread, but I think it belongs here too:




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74


I was reading somewhere else but I've lost it so forgive the lack of link but, that part of what Iran is planning to do with it's ability to create nuclear power, is nuclear medicine to treat cancer patients.

I hope Sec. Panetta's words help put a stop to all this sabre rattling. Americans are sick of killing people already and I'm sure the rest of the world is sick of it too. Enough.

www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Thank you for sharing this. It makes quite a difference on the way these people phrase things. They are masters at the word game...

They THOUGHT they knew about Iraq (or knew it wasn't there..depending on theory) and were proven wrong. Kinda late for an OOPS by the time that was proven. For the love of everything we hold dear, lets not have another OOPS. If war there must be due to nukes, there BETTER BE nukes this time with 500% ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY to the point that I want to know Obama has a list of Iranian serial numbers on the labels of the warheads.


Panetta raises just enough doubt and is playing games here JUST enough to give me a sinking feeling. Getting this one wrong could mean the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people on all sides. Getting it RIGHT on the intelligence has to be an absolute given and must to even discuss it. I didn't realize Obama's own people were still something less than sure.


S/F.. Great catch.. yikes



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Observor

Originally posted by CranialSponge
Iran is cutting off their own nose to spite their face and allowing their arrogance to dictate their decisions by saying they're going to stop the transport of any and all oil in the Strait of Hormuz... But really people, what the hell do you expect an animal to do when you back it into a corner ?!

It is not Iran who are acting like animals.

Iran has every right, under the NPT to engage in the nuclear activities it is engaged in.

Every other country also has a right not to trade with Iran. However no country has a right to coerce other countries into not trading with Iran simply because Iran exercised its rights under a treaty it signed. Anyone who issues such threats is not human.

If the psychopathic animals of the US makes good on their threats to financially isolate Iran for Iran exercising its rights, Iranian response, making its territorial waters unavailable for transport (which effectively closes the Strait of Hormuz of all except fishing boats) can be considered only a mild response.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Observor because: (no reason given)


This is not a fact nor is there any truth to it. The NPT that Iran signed has stipulations of what Iran can or cannot do as well as the fact that IRAN MUST allow inspectors into their Nuclear Sites. Iran has also broken this agreement buy building secret underground facilities that the U.S. has recently shown the world where they are...and IRAN has admitted they exist.

The penalties for breaking these NPT rules allow the U.N. to intervene and disasemble or destroy if necessary all sites that are Nuclear in nature. If Iran had developed their Nuclear tech. on their own and had not signed this treaty as signing was the only way this backwater country could get it's hands on tech. that could lead it to develop a Nuclear Bomb....it could do whatever it wished as far as building the number of reactors or Building Nuclear Bombs....but without buying this tech....it would never have gotten the ability to do this for decades.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by Observor

Originally posted by CranialSponge
Iran is cutting off their own nose to spite their face and allowing their arrogance to dictate their decisions by saying they're going to stop the transport of any and all oil in the Strait of Hormuz... But really people, what the hell do you expect an animal to do when you back it into a corner ?!

It is not Iran who are acting like animals.

Iran has every right, under the NPT to engage in the nuclear activities it is engaged in.

Every other country also has a right not to trade with Iran. However no country has a right to coerce other countries into not trading with Iran simply because Iran exercised its rights under a treaty it signed. Anyone who issues such threats is not human.

If the psychopathic animals of the US makes good on their threats to financially isolate Iran for Iran exercising its rights, Iranian response, making its territorial waters unavailable for transport (which effectively closes the Strait of Hormuz of all except fishing boats) can be considered only a mild response.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Observor because: (no reason given)


This is not a fact nor is there any truth to it.

Oh! it is a fact alright! Incessant lying by lying, murdering, psychopaths doesn't change facts.

The NPT that Iran signed has stipulations of what Iran can or cannot do as well as the fact that IRAN MUST allow inspectors into their Nuclear Sites.

Yes it does and Iran has been allowing, nay, requesting IAEA inspectors to monitor their nuclear activities.

Iran has also broken this agreement buy building secret underground facilities that the U.S. has recently shown the world where they are...and IRAN has admitted they exist.

Iran can build any damn thing it pleases and have any amount of secrecy around them as long as they are not involving nuclear material as verified by Iran accounting for all the reactors and nuclear material. When they finally decided to move their nuclear reactors to these, until then, secret locations, they did so right under the supervision of the IAEA inspectors.

The penalties for breaking these NPT rules allow the U.N. to intervene and disasemble or destroy if necessary all sites that are Nuclear in nature. If Iran had developed their Nuclear tech. on their own and had not signed this treaty as signing was the only way this backwater country could get it's hands on tech. that could lead it to develop a Nuclear Bomb....it could do whatever it wished as far as building the number of reactors or Building Nuclear Bombs....but without buying this tech....it would never have gotten the ability to do this for decades.

None of that is relevant because Iran has fulfilled and continues to fulfil its obligations under the NPT.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Observor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Ok, we have two EXTREMELY conflicting threads here. This one, we're posting in now, and this one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


So, uh, wtf is going on??????????



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
Ok, we have two EXTREMELY conflicting threads here. This one, we're posting in now, and this one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


So, uh, wtf is going on??????????


Not sure what the conflict is. One is an admission that Iran has no nukes and is not developing nukes. Another is that the US administration will pretend Iran will develop nukes at some point in future and to thwart that possibility attack Iran.

Don't you rememeber Donald Rumsfeld's "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absense"? There is no evidence that Iran is developing nukes, but that doesn't mean it is evidence of Iran not developing nukes. The latest US position in regards to ME is everyone is guilty by accusation. Once US accuses someone of something, unless they can prove themselves to be innocent, they are guilty. Since Iran cannot prove it will not develop nukes, Obama will assume they are guilty of developing them in future and attack them in the present.
edit on 11-1-2012 by Observor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Bloomberg reporting....


Oil Pares Loss After Fars Says Iran Nuclear Scientist Killed in Bomb Blast

By Paul Gordon - Jan 10, 2012 11:36 PM MT

Crude for February delivery was at $102.02 a barrel, down 22 cents, at 2:33 p.m. Singapore time, after earlier sliding as much as 64 cents.

Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a director at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in Isfahan province and a professor at Tehran’s technical university, was killed when a person on a motorcycle placed a magnetic bomb under his car, Fars said. Two other people were hurt in the blast, the agency said. - Link


Expect finger pointing, and increased tensions along with a bump in crude, Gold & commodities.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Observor

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
Ok, we have two EXTREMELY conflicting threads here. This one, we're posting in now, and this one:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


So, uh, wtf is going on??????????


Not sure what the conflict is. One is an admission that Iran has no nukes and is not developing nukes. Another is that the US administration will pretend Iran will develop nukes at some point in future and to thwart that possibility attack Iran.

Don't you rememeber Donald Rumsfeld's "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absense"? There is no evidence that Iran is developing nukes, but that doesn't mean it is evidence of Iran not developing nukes. The latest US position in regards to ME is everyone is guilty by accusation. Once US accuses someone of something, unless they can prove themselves to be innocent, they are guilty. Since Iran cannot prove it will not develop nukes, Obama will assume they are guilty of developing them in future and attack them in the present.
edit on 11-1-2012 by Observor because: (no reason given)



Hmm I guess I see your point. With Rumsfeld logic, you can easily attack anyone, anytime for something they're going to do in the future.

GENIUS!



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by OBE1
Expect finger pointing, and increased tensions along with a bump in crude, Gold & commodities.

Finger pointing? Nah, it was some random criminal trying to blow up some random guy and coincidentally managing to kill a Director of Iran's Nuclear facility.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
Hmm I guess I see your point. With Rumsfeld logic, you can easily attack anyone, anytime for something they're going to do in the future.

GENIUS!

Yeah, it certainly provides a simple rule that can be applied whereever they please and all psychopaths can pretend they have an excuse. But it works only for psychopaths, human beings will fail to see any logic in it.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:07 AM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 





Hmm I guess I see your point. With Rumsfeld logic, you can easily attack anyone, anytime for something they're going to do in the future. GENIUS!


So - maybe that's like Kohmeini issuing a Fatwa on Salman Rushdie for writing a book he didn't like - I guess if you can kill anyone you like for writing something you disagree with - then you are in no position to whine if anyone else kills your people for doing something they don't approve of.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 





Hmm I guess I see your point. With Rumsfeld logic, you can easily attack anyone, anytime for something they're going to do in the future. GENIUS!


So - maybe that's like Kohmeini issuing a Fatwa on Salman Rushdie for writing a book he didn't like - I guess if you can kill anyone you like for writing something you disagree with - then you are in no position to whine if anyone else kills your people for doing something they don't approve of.

Dang! Is this all about the fatwa issued by the long dead Ayatollah Khomeini aginst the still living Salman Rushdie? Why didn't you say so? Here everyone was discussing about nukes!

Given that the Ayatollah is dead and cannot retract his fatwa, it might be useful to know who are "his" people that you feel free to wipe off if you don't like them? Just Iranians? Or all Shia Muslims? Or all Muslims? Or all human beings?


ETA: It is interesting to know that the Westerners hold the Ayatollah in such high esteem as to treat him as a role model.
edit on 11-1-2012 by Observor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Observor
 





Given that the Ayatollah is dead and cannot retract his fatwa, it might be useful to know who are "his" people that you feel free to wipe off if you don't like them? Just Iranians? Or all Shia Muslims? Or all Muslims? Or all human beings?


Muslims feel perfectly justified in calling for the death of anyone they find 'religiously' offensive - I am pointing out that they are then in no position to complain if other people kill them for whatever reason they fancy.

Or since it is a mandate of Islam to conquer the entire world, and force every single person to convert or be beheaded - then they are also in no position to moan if we infidels decide to exterminate the lot of them - after all fair is fair is it not!?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by JohhnyBGood
 





hen they are also in no position to moan if we infidels decide to exterminate the lot of them - after all fair is fair is it not!?



You really do see this as the final solution dont you? How do you think wiping out billions of men women and children, who happen to have different belief system to you will make the world a better place. Surely it makes you just as evil as any extremist Islamist.




top topics



 
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join