Propaganda SpinMasters At Work?

[Winstonm]

It just gets better and better, doesn' it?

 

Julian Borger

London Guardian

Thursday, February 22, 2007 

Much of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by US spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, diplomatic sources in Vienna said today.

 

The claims, reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war, coincided with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran was defying a UN security council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear programme.

 

That report, delivered to the security council by the IAEA director general, Mohammed ElBaradei, sets the stage for a fierce international debate on the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran and raises the possibility that the US could resort to military action against Iranian nuclear sites.

 

At the heart of the debate are accusations - spearheaded by the US - that Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons.

However, most of the tip-offs about supposed secret weapons sites provided by the CIA and other US intelligence agencies have led to dead ends when investigated by IAEA inspectors, according to informed sources in Vienna.

 

"Most of it has turned out to be incorrect," a diplomat at the IAEA with detailed knowledge of the agency's investigations said.

 

"They gave us a paper with a list of sites. [The inspectors] did some follow-up, they went to some military sites, but there was no sign of [banned nuclear] activities.

 

"Now [the inspectors] don't go in blindly. Only if it passes a credibility test."

 

One particularly contentious issue was records of plans to build a nuclear warhead, which the CIA said it found on a stolen laptop computer supplied by an informant inside Iran.

 

In July 2005, US intelligence officials showed printed versions of the material to IAEA officials, who judged it to be sufficiently specific to confront Iran.

 

Tehran rejected the material as forged, and there are still reservations within the IAEA about its authenticity, according to officials with knowledge of the internal debate in the agency.

 

"First of all, if you have a clandestine programme, you don't put it on laptops which can walk away," one official said. "The data is all in English which may be reasonable for some of the technical matters, but at some point you'd have thought there would be at least some notes in Farsi. So there is some doubt over the provenance of the computer."

 

IAEA officials do not comment on intelligence passed to the watchdog agency by foreign governments, saying all such assistance is confidential.

 

A western counter-proliferation official accepted that intelligence on Iran had sometimes been patchy, but argued that the essential point was Tehran's failure to live up to its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty.

 

"I take on board on what they're saying, but the bottom line is that for nearly 20 years [the Iranians] were violating safeguards agreements," the official said. "There is a confidence deficit here about the regime's true intentions."That deficit will be deepened by yesterday's IAEA report, which concluded bluntly that "Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities", in defiance of a December UN ultimatum to stop.

 

Don't you love that last paragraph? Sounds exactly like Iran - first, it's an imminent danger, but now it's because of a 20 year history of violating safeguard agreements.... and next, it will be to bring freedom to the Iranian people....

[Winstonm]

Here is an interesting tidbit - two OPEC countries threatened to switch to the Euro from the dollar as the international currency of choice for the oil trade. One of these countries made the switch while the other has been threatening to make the switch.

 

What countries are these? Iraq made the switch in 2000; Iran is threatening.

[mike777]

Not sure why you use such a loaded word as threaten.

 

I assume they will do whatever is in their best interests.

Just as China will do whatever is in their best interests. If it is too not loan money to the USA and buy Treasuries, so be it.

[Winstonm]

The fine art of taking out of context. You can pull out this quote and make the words sound very different: "If the Holocaust took place".

 

From Letter to President Bush, May 9, 2006

 

[…] Well, then we have stirred up a very concrete discussion. We are posing two very clear questions. The first is: Did the Holocaust actually take place? You answer this question in the affirmative. So, the second question is: Whose fault was it? The answer to that has to be found in Europe and not in Palestine. It is perfectly clear: If the Holocaust took place in Europe, one also has to find the answer to it in Europe. […]

 

When you place the words in context, all you have is a coherent argument that Europe and not the Middle East should have paid the land price for the creation of Israel.

[Winstonm]

Not sure why you use such a loaded word as threaten.

 

I assume they will do whatever is in their best interests

 

That is the point, is it not? Iraq made the switch and was invaded. Will Iran be allowed to do whatever is in their best interests, or would such a switch place them on the invade list, too?

 

The impact of a major switch of oil trade currency would have devastating impact on the U.S. enonomy - and that is the threatening part. It is an interesting note that the two countries predominantly advocating such a switch are in the "war" spotlight.

[mike777]

I am unsure what you mean by the phrase Iran "advocates" that Iran switch to the Euro in pricing oil. If they really want to do it, do it. I have no idea if that is best or not for Iran but I assume they do know.

 

If it is best for Iran and they do not switch that seems idiotic. Why do something that is worse for your country in the long run. Again I have no idea what is best for Iran's long term interests. Hard enough guessing what the answer is for the USA. :blink:

[Winstonm]

Here's another interesting fact from Wikpedia:

 

Iran has a legal right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the NPT. Iran, and many other developing nations who are signatories to the NPT, believe the Western position to be hypocritical, claiming that the NPT's original purpose was universal nuclear disarmament. Iran also compares its treatment as a signatory to the NPT with three nations that have not ratified the NPT. Each of these nations developed an indigenous nuclear weapons capability: Israel by 1968, India by 1974, and Pakistan by 1998.

 

According to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has a perfect legal right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

[Winstonm]

For all the talk about how much a threat Iran is due to its president, Ahmadinejad, this should be a wake up call as to who runs that country:

 

TEHRAN, Iran - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad faced a new round of sharp criticism at home Monday.  The criticism came even as new signs have arisen that Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is growing discontented with Ahmadinejad, whom he is believed to have supported in 2005 presidential elections.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Last week, Khamenei voiced rare criticism of the domestic performance of Ahmadinejad's government, and the president was notably absent when a group of Cabinet members and vice presidents met with Khamenei, who has the final word in all political affairs in Iran, including the nuclear issue.

 

But all we hear is how a crazy madman runs this country.....

[mike777]

For all the talk about how much a threat Iran is due to its president, Ahmadinejad, this should be a wake up call as to who runs that country:

 

TEHRAN, Iran - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad faced a new round of sharp criticism at home Monday.  The criticism came even as new signs have arisen that Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is growing discontented with Ahmadinejad, whom he is believed to have supported in 2005 presidential elections.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Last week, Khamenei voiced rare criticism of the domestic performance of Ahmadinejad's government, and the president was notably absent when a group of Cabinet members and vice presidents met with Khamenei, who has the final word in all political affairs in Iran, including the nuclear issue.

 

But all we hear is how a crazy madman runs this country.....

Hmm....and who elected this so called madman or at least permits him to stay in power. :)

 

right the American people elected GW. ;)

[Winstonm]

Hmm....and who elected this so called madman or at least permits him to stay in power.

 

That is the point - the man has no power. The only one in Iran with power is the Supreme Leader, and the SL ain't too frickin' thrilled with Ahmadnejed's antics.