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.

 

Why IAEA researches in Iran and why Iran is not cooperating ?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I just know some thing for sure and wanted to share.

You know that Iran has been cooperating much with IAEA before .

Iran's nuclear timeline

But do you know why Iran is not letting IAEA inspectors visit every where ?

The answer is simple , it is because US and other major countries are not doing so.

By letting those spies researching every where they want , by getting the list of staff and scientists working there , there will be no security left for Iran. All the vital information will be known by countries.

Superpowers like US are not letting inspectors for investigation in their countries and want other countries to do so.

Then , those countries come with freedom and other big words that is much bigger than their mouth.




posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by hmdphantom
 

Dear hmdphantom,

Good to see you again, and thank you for posting a thought provoking thread. I can answer your question, but your not going to like it.
dtirp.dtra.mil...

Start with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Signing it gives the IAEA the right to poke around. Israel didn't sign it, so IAEA can't inspect. Iran did sign it, they're supposed to be letting IAEA in.

Now, among the states that have signed the NPT, five are acknowledged as Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) UK, US, China, France, and Russia. These have negotiated National Security Exclusions (NSE), allowing the country to keep IAEA out of certain araeas.

So if Iran wants to keep IAEA out, it can abrogate the NPT, or declare itself a NWS and negotiate its own NSE. (I just thought it would be cool to use all those abbreviations in one sentence.)

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by hmdphantom
 

Dear hmdphantom,

Good to see you again, and thank you for posting a thought provoking thread. I can answer your question, but your not going to like it.
dtirp.dtra.mil...

Start with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Signing it gives the IAEA the right to poke around. Israel didn't sign it, so IAEA can't inspect. Iran did sign it, they're supposed to be letting IAEA in.

Now, among the states that have signed the NPT, five are acknowledged as Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) UK, US, China, France, and Russia. These have negotiated National Security Exclusions (NSE), allowing the country to keep IAEA out of certain araeas.

So if Iran wants to keep IAEA out, it can abrogate the NPT, or declare itself a NWS and negotiate its own NSE. (I just thought it would be cool to use all those abbreviations in one sentence.)

With respect,
Charles1952



good to see you Charles1952 (even if I can't really see you).

I think all the problem is that those countries don't want Iran to be scientifically progressed country .

It really scares them that some oil exporting country stops exporting oil for their use . And it scares them even more when they see that country is not using it even for itself.

Kissinger Admits Iran Attack Is About Oil

I hope you know Kissinger , he speaks better about what I mean.

with high respect
hmdphantom



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by hmdphantom
 


It looks like your article cut Henry Kissinger's quote short.


"An Iran that practices subversion and seeks regional hegemony -- which appears to be the current trend -- must be faced with lines it will not be permitted to cross. The industrial nations cannot accept radical forces dominating a region on which their economies depend, and the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is incompatible with international security."

Note that Kissinger prioritizes Iranian (or "radical") control over regional oil supplies over concern about the country acquiring nuclear weapons.


www.huffingtonpost.com...

So, yes, why wouldn't the entire region be concerned about Iran "seeking regional hegemony", since it's so "RADICAL"? Yes, it does affect international security. Funny how your article left that little bit of quote out.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


I think I should add that , you should rememeber the time when they found out about our nuclear activity , they were threatenning to attack Iran

And the former government was so scaredd and did every thing to prevent the attack.

When Ahmadinejad came it was to late to reject NPT and it would make the situation worse to reject it.

I don't know how much you know about international policy , rules are not applied equally .

IMO there is an animal farm out there which some people claim " we are all equal ".

but at the end of the day , you see them saying some countries are more equal than others.

And about Iran it is a complete hypocrisy that they let an illegal regime kill the locals , wreck their homes , have un-numbered nuclear warheads , reject any resolution approved in UN. But when it comes to Iran , they say " Iran is radical".

And beware that we don't want Zionist think that we are not their enemy.

To them , surrendering guns means slavery.

Maybe you wonder why I always refer to Zionist as the root of our problems , because they are here to spread US none-religious , Zionists bowing , regime.

They don't accept any international law and they are the ones with big plans to take over the earth by any mean necessary.

The whole Jew killing , Jew hating games Hitler played was a plan for a NWO and one world government that they are here to start.

But , whether they like it or not , they are doomed to fail.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by hmdphantom
 


It looks like your article cut Henry Kissinger's quote short.


"An Iran that practices subversion and seeks regional hegemony -- which appears to be the current trend -- must be faced with lines it will not be permitted to cross. The industrial nations cannot accept radical forces dominating a region on which their economies depend, and the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is incompatible with international security."

Note that Kissinger prioritizes Iranian (or "radical") control over regional oil supplies over concern about the country acquiring nuclear weapons.


www.huffingtonpost.com...

So, yes, why wouldn't the entire region be concerned about Iran "seeking regional hegemony", since it's so "RADICAL"? Yes, it does affect international security. Funny how your article left that little bit of quote out.



The industrial nations cannot accept radical forces dominating a region on which their economies depend, and the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is incompatible with international security."


Means that Iran should extract oil for industrial countries and bow to them for the money those industrial countries pay them.

And it is clear that Islam is not letting us bow to none-muslim oppressors , so you will not be seeing Iran giving up it's nuclear program.

And the big lie is that the ones who used nukes on other nations are the agents for keeping peace on this planet.

Nazis are always in an illusion and they think others are Nazis , too. It is how Satan has played with them.




top topics
 
2

log in

join