National Intelligence Estimate - Iran ‘Halted’ Nuclear Weapons Program In 2003

[QueEx]

NIE: Iran ‘Halted’ Nuclear Weapons Program In 2003,
Unlikely To Develop A Weapon In This Decade​

​

​

Think Progress
December 3, 2007

A new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released today concludes with “high confidence” that “in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” From the report’s findings:

We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.

We continue to assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Iran does not currently have a nuclear weapon.

Tehran’s decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005.​

The intelligence community’s 2005 assessment concluded, inaccurately, that “Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons” and “could produce enough fissile material for a weapon by the end of this decade.” But as the new NIE finds, Iran is unlikely to achieve this capability until after 2015 “because of foreseeable technical and programmatic problems.”

This new NIE is long overdue. It was reportedly completed a year ago, but blocked by the White House. IPS reported:

A National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran has been held up for more than a year in an effort to force the intelligence community to remove dissenting judgments on the Iranian nuclear programme, and thus make the document more supportive of U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney’s militarily aggressive policy toward Iran.​

As ThinkProgress has documented, the White House’s manipulation of the Iran NIE bore a striking resemblance to the controversies that played out over pre-war Iraq intelligence.

But even with Cheney’s meddling, this NIE makes it clear that there is no imminent danger from Iran’s nuclear program. Newsweek’s Howard Fineman recently reported that the intelligence community is trying to send a message to “slow down what the president, most particularly the vice president” in what they “want to do in Iran.”

UPDATE: National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley “quickly issued a statement describing the N.I.E. as containing positive news rather than reflecting intelligence mistakes. ‘It confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons,’ Mr. Hadley said.” View his full statement here.

UPDATE II: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says the Iran NIE “indicates that we should do what I have talked about doing for more than a year now: Follow the Ronald Regan theory of diplomacy. … What did Ronald Reagan do? He started his diplomats working with the evil people in the Soviet people, as he referred to, to work something out. And he did. He met with the leaders of the Soviet Union he didn’t particularly like. And that’s what we should be doing with Iran. We should be having a surge of diplomacy with Iran. And based upon this, I think it would be a pretty good idea.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/03/nie-iran/

 

[QueEx]

Related Thread:

Colin Powell: Iran Far From Nuclear Weapon
http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=211148

`

 

[QueEx]

A Blow to Bush's Tehran Policy​

​

​

Washington Post
By Peter Baker and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, December 4, 2007

President Bush got the world's attention this fall when he warned that a nuclear-armed Iran might lead to World War III. But his stark warning came at least a month or two after he had first been told about fresh indications that Iran had actually halted its nuclear weapons program.

The new intelligence report released yesterday not only undercut the administration's alarming rhetoric over Iran's nuclear ambitions but could also throttle Bush's effort to ratchet up international sanctions and take off the table the possibility of preemptive military action before the end of his presidency.

Iran had been shaping up as perhaps the dominant foreign policy issue of Bush's remaining year in office and of the presidential campaign to succeed him. Now leaders at home and abroad will have to rethink what they thought they knew about Tehran's intentions and capabilities.

"It's a little head-spinning," said Daniel Benjamin, an official on President Bill Clinton's National Security Council. "Everybody's going to be trying to scratch their heads and figure out what comes next."

Critics seized on the new National Intelligence Estimate to lambaste what Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards called "George Bush and Dick Cheney's rush to war with Iran." Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), echoing other Democrats, called for "a diplomatic surge" to resolve the dispute with Tehran.

Jon Wolfsthal, a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International
Studies, termed the revelation "a blockbuster development" that "requires a
wholesale reevaluation of U.S. policy."​

But the White House said the report vindicated its concerns because it concluded that Iran did have a nuclear weapons program until halting it in 2003 and it showed that U.S.-led diplomatic pressure had succeeded in forcing Tehran's hand. "On balance, the estimate is good news," said national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley. "On the one hand, it confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons. On the other hand, it tells us that we have made some progress in trying to ensure that that does not happen."

Hadley disagreed that the report showed that past administration statements have been wrong, noting that collecting intelligence on a "hard target" such as Iran is notoriously difficult. "Welcome to the real world," he said.

And he defended Bush's World War III reference in October and repeated it himself during a briefing, saying if the world wants to avoid an Iranian bomb and "having to use force to stop it with all the connotations of World War III, then we need to step up the diplomacy."

Critics should be careful not to dismiss the threat, Hadley added, pointing to Iran's continued enrichment of uranium, which could eventually be used to assist a weapons program. "I'm sure some people will use this as an excuse or a pretext for, you know, flagging on the effort," he said. "Our argument is actually it should be just the reverse, because we need to keep the halting of the nuclear weapons program in place."

Other countries may not see it that way, though, and diplomats said the report may cripple U.S. attempts to win a third round of U.N. sanctions against Iran. Just two days earlier, Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns met in Paris with British, French, Russian, Chinese and German counterparts to seek support for a new Security Council resolution.

"You'd think that the effort to get a third resolution is dead," said Bruce Riedel, a former senior official at the CIA, Pentagon and NSC now at the Brookings Institution. "This has got to be a very serious argument to be used by opponents of a third resolution. It will say America's own intelligence community says Iran has halted its nuclear weapons program four years ago."

Michael Rubin, an American Enterprise Institute scholar and a leading Iran hawk, agreed. "Certainly it makes diplomacy a lot more difficult," he said. "It almost gives Berlin, Beijing and Moscow an excuse not to come together for a third round of sanctions."

The International Atomic Energy Agency, which was briefed on the U.S. intelligence report two hours before its release, saw the judgments as validation of its own long-standing conclusion that there is "no evidence" of an undeclared nuclear program in Iran. "It also validates the assessments of [IAEA Director General] Mohamed ElBaradei, who continuously said in his public statements that he saw no clear and public danger, and that therefore there was plenty of time for negotiations," said a senior IAEA official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

But the report included language that the administration can cite to claim success, according to some analysts. Paul R. Pillar, a former CIA official who has been critical of the Bush administration's run-up to war with Iraq, said the revelation about the halted weapons program is a "shocker" but noted that "the administration can say that Iran halted its program during our administration and this is a success for us. And with some good reason."

Others favoring a more confrontational approach to Iran were not convinced by the report. "While I was in the administration, I saw intelligence march up the hill and down the hill in short periods of time with no reason for them to change their mind," said John R. Bolton, Bush's former ambassador to the United Nations. "I've never based my view on this week's intelligence."

Still, the administration understood how explosive the new conclusions would be and kept them tightly held. Hadley said Bush was first told in August or September about intelligence indicating Iran had halted its weapons program, but was advised it would take time to evaluate. Vice President Cheney, Hadley and other top officials were briefed the week before last. Intelligence officials formalized their conclusions on Tuesday and briefed Bush the next day.

After its release, the administration abruptly canceled daily news briefings at the White House and State Department and dispatched Hadley to speak for the government. The White House also announced that Bush will hold a news conference this morning; aides said it was long planned but it will allow him to address the subject.

Presidential candidates responded as well, with Edwards and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) using the news to tweak Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) for being too willing to support the administration on Iran, an assertion she has rejected. Obama said the report is a reminder that "members of Congress must carefully read the intelligence before giving the president any justification to use military force" -- an apparent jab at Clinton, who was briefed on intelligence before the Iraq war but did not read the full report.

Republican candidates, who have expressed their readiness to attack Iran if needed to stop it from obtaining nuclear weapons, remained largely silent. "Sanctions and other pressures must be continued and stepped up until Iran complies by halting enrichment activities in a verifiable way," said former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani.

Some moderates in Washington expressed concern that this intelligence report's conclusions will be overinterpreted in one direction, just as past findings have been distorted. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), chairman of a nonproliferation subcommittee of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said Iran's uranium enrichment remains worrisome and is not dependent on U.S. intelligence because Tehran has openly acknowledged it.

The real lesson of the report, he said, is to recalibrate U.S. policy and try more diplomatic and economic levers. "It's a validation of the middle road," he said, "between going to sleep . . . and the let's-bomb-them-now approach."



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...02210_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2007102501235

 

[MASTERBAKER]

[FLASH]http://www.liveleak.com/player.swf?token=2df_1196753301[/FLASH]good post mr.que hope you don't mind me posting vid

 

[QueEx]

Thanks for posting the video. Add anything else, including your comment, you like.

QueEx

 

[MASTERBAKER]

Thanks for posting the video. Add anything else, including your comment, you like.

QueEx

U.S. Finds Iran Halted Its Nuclear Arms Effort in 2003
By MARK MAZZETTI
December 4, 2007
The New York Times

WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies released Monday concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting a judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb.

The conclusions of the new assessment are likely to reshape the final year of the Bush administration, which has made halting Iran’s nuclear program a cornerstone of its foreign policy.

The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate that represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies, states that Tehran is likely to keep its options open with respect to building a weapon, but that intelligence agencies “do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.”

Iran is continuing to produce enriched uranium, a program that the Tehran government has said is intended for civilian purposes. The new estimate says that the enrichment program could still provide Iran with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous estimates.

But the new report essentially disavows a judgment that the intelligence agencies issued in 2005, which concluded that Iran had an active secret arms program intended to transform the raw material into a nuclear weapon. The new estimate declares instead with “high confidence” that that the military-run program has been shut down since 2003, and it concludes that the halt was imposed by Iran “primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure.”

It was not clear what prompted the reversal. Administration officials said the new estimate reflected conclusions that the intelligence agencies had agreed on only in the past several weeks. The report’s agnosticism about Iran’s nuclear intentions represents a very different tone than had been struck by President Bush, and by Vice President Dick Cheney, who warned in a speech in October that if Iran “stays on its present course, the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences.”

The estimate does not say when intelligence agencies learned that the arms program had been halted, but officials said new information obtained from covert sources over the summer had led to a reassessment of the state of Iran’s nuclear program and a decision to delay preparation of the estimate, which had been scheduled to be delivered to Congress in the spring.

The new report came out just over five years after a 2002 intelligence estimate on Iraq concluded that it possessed chemical and biological weapons programs and was determined to restart its nuclear program. That estimate was instrumental in winning the Congressional authorization for a military invasion of Iraq, but it proved to be deeply flawed, and most of its conclusions turned out to be wrong.

Intelligence officials said the specter of the 2002 estimate on Iraq hung over their deliberations on Iran even more than it had in 2005, when the lessons from the intelligence failure on Iraq were just beginning to prompt spy agencies to adapt a more rigorous approach to their findings.

The 2007 report on Iran had been requested by members of Congress, underscoring that any conclusions could affect American policy toward Iran at a delicate time. The new estimate brought American assessments more in line with the judgments of international arms inspectors.

Last month, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, reported that Iran was operating 3,000 uranium-enriching centrifuges capable of producing fissile material for nuclear weapons, but he said inspectors had been unable to determine whether the Iranian program sought only to generate electricity or to also to build weapons.

Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada and the Senate majority leader, portrayed the assessment as “directly challenging some of this administration’s alarming rhetoric about the threat posed by Iran” and called for enhanced diplomatic efforts toward Tehran. Democratic presidential candidates mostly echoed Senator Reid, but also emphasized that Iran’s long-term ambitions were still a great concern to the United States.

In interviews on Monday, some administration officials expressed skepticism about the conclusions reached in the new report, saying they doubted that American intelligence agencies had a firm grasp of the Iranian government’s intentions.

The administration officials also said the intelligence findings would not lessen the White House’s concern about the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. The fact that Iran continues to refine its abilities to enrich uranium, they said, means that any decision in the future to restart a nuclear weapons program could lead Iran to a bomb in relatively short order. While the new report does not contrast sharply with earlier assessments about Iran’s capabilities, it does make new judgments about the intentions of the government in Tehran.

Rather than portraying Iran as a rogue, irrational country determined to join the club of nations that possess a nuclear bomb, the estimate says Iran’s “decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs.”

The administration called new attention to the threat posed by Iran this year when Mr. Bush suggested in October that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to “World War III.” Mr. Cheney also said that month that as Iran continued to enrich uranium, “the end of that process will be the development of nuclear weapons.”

Yet even as Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney were making those statements, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency were well under way toward revising the earlier assessment about Iran’s nuclear arms program. Administration officials said the White House had known at the time that the conclusions about Iran were under review but had not been informed until more recently that intelligence agencies had reversed their 2005 conclusion.

In September, officials said, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the C.I.A. director, and his deputy, Stephen R. Kappes, met with Iran analysts to take a hard look at past conclusions about Iran’s nuclear program in light of new information obtained since 2005.

“We felt that we needed to scrub all the assessments and sources to make sure we weren’t misleading ourselves,” said one senior intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The estimate concludes that if Iran were to restart its arms program, it would still be at least two years before Tehran would have enough highly enriched uranium to produce a nuclear bomb. But it says it is still “very unlikely” Iran could produce enough of the material by then.

Instead, the report released on Monday concludes that it is more likely that Iran could have a bomb by the early part to the middle of the next decade. The report states that the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research judges that Iran is unlikely to achieve this goal before 2013, “because of foreseeable technical and programmatic problems.”

The estimate concludes that it would be difficult to persuade Iran’s leaders to abandon all efforts to get nuclear weapons, given the importance of getting the bomb to Iran’s strategic goals in the Middle East.

Intelligence officials presented the outlines of the intelligence estimate two weeks ago to several cabinet members, along with Mr. Cheney. During the meeting, officials said, policy makers challenged and debated the conclusions reached by the intelligence agencies. The final draft of the estimate was presented to Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney last Wednesday.

Officials said they now planned to give extensive briefings to American allies like Israel, Britain and France. Israel intelligence officials for years have put forward more urgent warnings about Iran’s nuclear abilities than their American counterparts, positing that Iran could get a nuclear bomb this decade.

Intelligence officials had said just weeks ago they were ending the practice of declassifying parts of intelligence estimates, citing concerns that analysts might alter their judgments if they knew the reports would be widely publicized.

But in a statement on Monday, Donald M. Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence, said that since the new estimate was at odds with the 2005 assessment — and thus at odds with public statements by top officials about Iran — “we felt it was important to release this information to ensure that an accurate presentation is available.”

you know you have to wonder the INTEL usa gives its people on iran iraq AND THE north koreans...thank god we did not just go in and attack these countries like we did with iraq rememember our ''UNITELLIGENCE AGENCY'' said SADDAM had WMD'S

 

[VegasGuy]

And I believe a fat man slid down the chimney, dropped off a gift and flew away via reindeer. Whatever, lets get the rhetoric down so gas prices can come down.

-VG

 

[Fuckallyall]

Good. Let's hope he doesn't get an "alternative" assesment from some other little known intelligence agency.

 

[VegasGuy]

Re: National Intelligence Estimate - Iran ‘Halted’ Nuclear Weapons Program In 2003

Good. Let's hope he doesn't get an "alternative" assesment from some other little known intelligence agency.

Yeah, like those who brought us the global warming intel.

-VG

 

[QueEx]

Good. Let's hope he doesn't get an "alternative" assesment from some other little known intelligence agency.

Well, . . .

The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate that represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies

Its certainly possible that one or more of the 16 agencies may have an alternative assessment since consensus implies something less than unanimous agreement.

QueEx

 

[QueEx]

Ahmadinejad: U.S. nuke report a 'victory' for Iran​

​

U.S. review concludes Iran halted nuclear weapons program in 2003​

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, center, greets his
supporters in Ilam province in western Iran on Wednesday


Associated Press
December 5, 2007

TEHRAN, Iran - A new U.S. intelligence review concluding Iran stopped developing an atomic weapons program in 2003 is a "declaration of victory" for Iran's nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday.

Russia's foreign minister, meanwhile, indicated that the U.S. report's findings undermined Washington's push for a new set of U.N. sanctions against Iran.

The U.S. intelligence report released Monday concluded that Iran had stopped its weapons program in late 2003 and shown no signs since of resuming it, representing a sharp turnaround from a previous intelligence assessment in 2005.

"This is a declaration of victory for the Iranian nation against the world powers over the nuclear issue," Ahmadinejad told thousands of people during a visit to Ilam province in western Iran.

"This was a final shot to those who, in the past several years, spread a sense of threat and concern in the world through lies of nuclear weapons," Ahmadinejad said, drawing celebratory whistles from the crowd.

'Sigh of relief'
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would not directly respond to Ahmadinejad's remarks, but told reporters in the Ethiopian capital Wednesday that the U.S. intelligence report's public release showed the Bush administration was committed to transparent democracy while Iran was not.

“I am not going to comment on that comment except to say that what the National Intelligence Estimate shows, and the transparency with which the administration released it, is what it means to live in a democracy and I hope one day that the people of Iran will live in a democracy too,” she said.

Iran has touted the report as vindication of its claims that its nuclear program is peaceful and Iranian officials insist that Washington should take a less hawkish stance and drop attempts to impose new sanctions in light of the report's surprise conclusions.

Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, called the report a "sigh of relief" Wednesday because its conclusions also jibe with the agency's own findings.

"Iran has been somewhat vindicated in saying they have not been working on a weapons program, at least for the past few years," ElBaradei told reporters in Brazil's capital.

The U.S. National Intelligence Estimate was released two days after the world's major powers met in Paris on Saturday and indicated that a compromise text on a third sanctions resolution could be circulated at the U.N. as early as Friday by the six countries -- the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany.

Russia, a veto-wielding member of the U.N. Security Council, said Wednesday there was no proof that Iran has ever run a nuclear weapons program.

"We will assess the situation regarding a new U.N. Security Council resolution taking into account all these facts, including the U.S. confirmation that it has no information about the existence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told reporters.

Russia and China, another veto-wielding council member, have grudgingly approved two sets of limited U.N. sanctions against Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. But the Kremlin has bristled at the U.S. push for tougher measures, saying they would only widen the rift.

China had said Tuesday the U.S. report raised second thoughts about new sanctions.

Iran a 'dangerous power'
President Bush defended his approach Tuesday, and Rice said it would be a "big mistake" to ease any diplomatic pressure on Iran despite the new U.S. findings.

"I continue to see Iran as a dangerous power in international politics," Rice told reporters traveling with her to Ethiopia where she planned to see African leaders. "At this moment, it doesn't appear to have an active weaponization program. That frankly is good news. But if it causes people to say, 'Oh, well, then we don't need to worry about what the Iranians are doing,' I think we will have made a big mistake."

The finding comes at a time of escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, which President Bush has labeled part of an "axis of evil," along with Saddam Hussein-era Iraq and North Korea.

The United States and some of its allies accuse Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, a claim denied by Iran, which says its nuclear program aims only to generate electricity.

Iran has rejected the two U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding that it halt uranium enrichment, a process that can produce either fuel for a reactor or a nuclear warhead.

Support could crack
Rice urged nations such as China and Russia not to harden their stance against a new round of sanctions.

"People need the opportunity to absorb what they've heard," Rice said. "We have been completely transparent about what the intelligence assessment says. And people need a chance to read it. When they do that and when they read it in its detail and nuance, they will be able to see the points that I have made."

But some analysts said it may be hard to maintain support for a swift new U.N. resolution that would further restrict trade with Iran.

"An enormous effort has been invested to date in trying to bring the Russians, Chinese and Europeans on board with the current sanctions ... and this report doesn't appear to have been widely anticipated among our allies," said Suzanne Maloney, a foreign policy senior fellow at the Washington-based Brookings Institution.

"Now you have the U.S. intelligence community coming out and saying formally that Iran halted its weapons program four years ago. This will certainly undercut any push to get new sanctions," she added.

European and U.N. officials said the report bolsters their argument for negotiations, and that the international community should not walk away from years of talks with an often defiant Tehran that is openly enriching uranium for uncertain ends.

They also said sanctions are still an option to compel Iran to be fully transparent about its nuclear program.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said the new U.S. intelligence report meant that Washington's push to refer the case over Iran's nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council in 2006 was "illegal."

"One of the consequences of this report is that referring Iran's nuclear issue to the U.N. Security Council was illegal because, based on the report by U.S. intelligence agencies, Iran had no nuclear weapons program when the issue was referred to the U.N. Security Council in 2006," Hosseini said in a statement Tuesday.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22110891/

 

[QueEx]

Good. Let's hope he doesn't get an "alternative" assesment from some other little known intelligence agency.

DEBKAfile Exclusive:

Dispute over Iran’s nuclear program
throws Israel-US relations into grave crisis​

​

​

DEBKAfile
December 4, 2007,

Senior Israel security and intelligence officials report: Washington is refusing to heed the intelligence Israel has gathered on Iran’s covert military nuclear program which refutes its latest estimate, denies Israel access to authentic US intelligence and has embarked on steps detrimental to Israel in relation to Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Lebanon, without informing its government.

Defense minister Ehud Barak challenged the US intelligence estimate on Iran Tuesday, Dec. 4. He said that Iran may have stopped its military program in 2003, but has since apparently restarted it.

Prime minister Ehud Olmert, left in the dark by Israel’s senior ally, is at a loss to arrest the serious deterioration in their relations. At pains to conceal the gaping rift with Washington, the prime minister’s office released word of George W, Bush’s coming visit to Jerusalem, his first as president. However, DEBKAfile’s sources disclose Israel will be only one stop Jan. 9 along an extensive Middle East tour, which will take Bush to Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Ramallah, where he intends to make a big deal of proclaiming his support for forthcoming Palestinian statehood.

He will also visit Beirut, by which time Gen. Michel Suleiman will be installed as president. Bush will hail his administration’s diplomatic success in securing Saudi, Iranian and Syrian approval for the election of a pro-Syrian Hizballah supporter as Lebanese president.

Talking to the media Tuesday, the US president ducked the question of whether the new US Intelligence Estimate had changed Washington’s Iran policy. Next month, our sources report, he will have ample opportunity to demonstrate his abrupt, tidal policy reversals when he tours Middle East capitals.

DEBKAfile’s Jerusalem sources report Olmert, loath to admit the loss of Israel’s most powerful friend, is under mounting pressure by leading political, intelligence and military officials to stand up and articulate an independent Israeli stance in the light of the Bush administration’s actions, especially in response to the true facts of Iran’s nuclear activities. The rift with Washington is not just political, they say, but touches on critical security issues that affect Israel’s very survival.

One immediate proposal is for the establishment of a national emergency government.

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=4837

 

[nyyyyce]

The truth gets exposed for once. There were many posts by me and others who knew this claim was garbage (http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=197902). I argued with some about the validity and credibility of the weapons inspector in my post. Hmmmm.... There were Fox Noise cats lockstep with the rhetoric that was being recited. Then you just had blatant, uninformed people weighing in on this matter.


I find it quite interesting that Collin Powell, on an inside tip, came out a couple of months ago and publicly stated that Iran was not capable of nuclear weapons. No doubt, at least in my mind, that he was trying to restore some credibility by running ahead of this report. He's still a whore for not doing this at the UN.

How is it that with ONE report the Bush/necons/PNAC trust ALL back down? Because they tried to suppress this report and do everything they could, peripherally, to get us ready for another bogus attack. Whether it was Kyl-Liberman, constant reports of Iranian IED's killing our troops (when Saudi-backed combatants were really killing our troops) or the constant snubs and BS from Condi Rice.

SIDE NOTE - Were are the FN Dem's roasting Bush, Cheney, Rice and the entire cabal?!?!?!?!?

Sad to say, I am more nervous now because the neocons, according to the PNAC agenda, want regime change in that region. I see some well-time catastrophic or political breakdown engineered to put the train back on the track. Call me what you want, but I don't believe Cheney, Wolfowitz (WHO JUST GOT ANOTHER GIG AS A GOVERNMENT ADVISOR ) or Bolton are going to let this slide by no means.

 

[nyyyyce]

Only problem with this report is that - IT IS NOT NEW INFORMATION. This trips me out. The media diminishes the fact that this report has been under raps - by the government. They knew this info the whole time they had Condi lying. I have no respect for Condir Rice - F*** her being "black". She is a FN tool. She has not resigned nor done ANYTHING of note that was positive for our nation since she took her post. She sucks.

 

[muckraker10021]

Only problem with this report is that - IT IS NOT NEW INFORMATION.

Absolutely correct Darth Cheney's Neo-Con headquarters office has been suppressing this NIE for more than a year. Cipher bush not only wasn't told about the NIE, but didn't read it when it was presented to him.

Seymour Hersh reported about all of this months ago. The RepubliKlans and the bushits attacked him at the time.

[WM]http://crooksandliars.com/medialoader/3458/90025/video_wmv/play[/WM]

 

[muckraker10021]

Iran: Why Won't We Take Yes For An Answer?
Israel's amen corner tries to spin the NIE report


December 7, 2007

by Justin Raimondo

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12014

Israel's lobby in the US is "scrambling," as Ron Kampeas puts it in the Jewish Exponent, to defend the draconian sanctions imposed on Iran for its alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons. With a war-weary America unlikely to respond favorably to the news that President Bush has ordered an attack on Iran, the War Party has had to content itself with preparing the ground for a future conflict, including a campaign to isolate Tehran economically, diplomatically, and politically. Now, however, as Kampeas reports,

"The NIE is being held up by Congress, the presidential candidates and the media as an argument for tamping down isolation of the Islamic Republic rather than a vindication of earlier warnings that Iran indeed was pursuing a bomb. The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations organized an emergency conference call of members on Tuesday to address how the news could threaten its recent campaign to isolate Iran."

Red alert! Red alert! It looks like peace is about to break out! All hands on deck!

The Lobby is frantically calling in all its chips in a desperate effort to repair the damage and get their war-wagon rolling again. Congress recently passed a "package" of sanctions on Iran proffered by Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Tel Aviv), who phrases his advocacy of isolating us from the Iranian people in terms of "talking" to Tehran in the language of "carrots and sticks." Which means: first the stick, and then - maybe - a skinny shriveled up little carrot.

This is the same Tom Lantos, you'll recall, who gleefully told Colette Avital, a Labor party member of the Israeli Knesset, "My dear Colette, don't worry. You won't have any problem with Saddam. We'll be rid of the bastard soon enough. And in his place we'll install a pro-Western dictator, who will be good for us and for you." (Lantos denied saying that, but Ms. Avital confirmed it: the man's a liar as well as a hypocrite.)

Well, I don't know who Lantos is referring to when he says "us" - because it sure didn't turn out that way for the real "us," that is the American people, although one could make a good argument that Israel's interests have been more than served by the invasion and occupation of Iraq. We haven't installed a proper dictator, as yet, but that's just a matter of time, now isn't it?

Perhaps we just can't find a suitable candidate. In the case of Iran, the logical choice to play that role is one of the Pahlavi clan's royal pretenders. Yet the NIE on Iran has knocked over a major pillar of that dream, the mad-mullahs-with-nukes memo that worked so well in its Iraqi version. Not that there aren't plenty of other tripwires capable of triggering a war, as I pointed out the other day, and yet a major setback for the War Party is that the ticking time-bomb aspect of their propaganda has got to be abandoned.

Now we have time for diplomacy, for examining the real facts about Iran, including the historical context, and maybe we even will take the opportunity to ask questions such as "who wants war with Iran, and why?" This time, there's to be no rush to war: we can face the alleged "crisis" in light of genuinely American interests.

As for the Israelis, they have a clear enough concept of their own interests. Defense Minister Ehud Barak's carefully worded I-beg-to-differ showed just a hint of bared fangs:

"It is our responsibility to ensure that the right steps are taken against the Iranian regime. As is well known, words don't stop missiles. It is apparently true that in 2003 Iran stopped pursuing its military nuclear program for a certain period of time. But in our estimation, since then it is apparently continuing with its program."

"We cannot allow ourselves to rest," avers Senor Barak, "just because of an intelligence report from the other side of the Earth, even if it is from our greatest friend."

The other side of the earth - but not really so far away. Not when the Lobby is hard at work, pressuring US legislators, relentlessly churning out propaganda, and going on the offensive to ensure that the sanctions not only stay in place but are actually tightened - until the Iranian people really begin to hurt. It's just one more way to provoke some sort of internal convulsion that will give the Western powers a pretext for intervention.

I have to add that the New York Times report identifying the sources of the NIE as intercepted conversations between hardliners in the military complaining that the Iranian nuclear program had been scotched in 2003 - which may or may not be true - was not something the authors and shapers of the report would want leaked, and was no doubt part of the pushback. The Times report undermines the position of Iranian moderates, and feeds the suspicions of Iranian nationalists - who will naturally sympathize with the officers' bitter protests.

Seymour Hersh is telling us that the President gave the Israelis a heads up on the NIE two days before he was supposed to have first learned of it, and yet the "gotcha" aspect of this story - "Bush lied, or his brain is fried!" - is its least interesting aspect. What I want to know is why the chief executive of a foreign country gets the facts before the American people - and what, exactly, was said. I suspect the following:

"Hey, Ehud, that damned CIA is telling me you guys are wrong about those Iranian nukes - can you give me something to get them off my back?"

"Yeah, my own guys are no better: they're telling me the same thing. But, hey, that didn't stop us the last time, now did it?"

Appreciative laughter all around. "

"Yeah, but, Ehud ol' buddy, do me a favor, willya?"

"Sure, Mr. President. After all, what are friends for?"

"Don't stick me with anything like those Niger uranium forgeries again - I think they're getting wise to us."

"Oh, don't worry, Mr. President. A word to the wise is sufficient."

I'm kidding, of course, so spare me the letters of outrage. What I'm not kidding about, unfortunately, is how careless the President of the United States has been when the actual interests of this country are at stake, and how willing he is - in spite of his administration's reputation for "unilateralism" - to subordinate those interests in order to preserve our "special relationship" with Israel. Now, however, it looks like the national security bureaucracy has done an end run around him, and confronted him with a blunt declaration of independence.

What we are witnessing is a serious rebellion within key military, diplomatic, and intelligence circles against our Israel-centric policy in the Middle East. Critics of the status quo such as Michael Scheuer and professors Mearsheimer and Walt prefigured this realist "surge" by daring to break the taboo against stating the obvious: that our unconditional support for Israel has crippled our efforts to combat Islamist terrorism, threatened our security on account of our required access to oil, and cost us far more in moral and political capital than the "special relationship" was ever worth.

Here we have a real divergence between American and Israeli interests, and those who shaped the NIE report were determined that, for once, the US government was going to go to bat on behalf of the former. Israel cannot afford to cut the Iranians any slack: we, on the other hand, are able to put the issue in perspective. In this case, geography is destiny.

Yes, Israel has much to fear from an Iranian nuke - almost as much as the Iranians have to fear an Israeli first strike, which is all too imaginable. That's why a comprehensive approach to nuclear disarmament is the only one that will work: a regional solution, or nothing.

Why, after all, should the Iranians give up for good the idea of developing a nuclear deterrent to Israel's atomic arsenal? Tel Aviv hasn't even signed the Nonproliferation Treaty, while Iran has: yet we continue to send billions to bolster Israel's "defenses."

The pushback against the NIE's "high confidence" verdict is already well underway, and you can bet it will be attacked from every possible angle: it's not a sure thing, here's the parts they left out, it was written by Bush-hating axe-grinding bureaucrats who are anti-Semites to boot - expect the works. When that barrage fails to make much of a dent in the growing realization that their entire scare campaign was purest hooey, the Lobby will switch tactics and assert that this just proves we need to impose harsher sanctions. After all, the sanctions worked, didn't they? The NIE says the Iranians were pressured into abandoning their program because of the high costs imposed from outsiders, including the sanctions: yet what will be the effect of punishing them for compliance? If they get the same results from not complying, then it's all sticks, and no carrots.

Those who want to isolate Iran - let's call them "isolationists," just for the sheer fun of turning the War Party's favorite epithet on its head - have one thing in mind, and that is in ginning up a war. Isolation is just what the Iranian militarist faction wants: it feeds into their narrative of humiliation and injured pride. Our own War Party benefits from this isolationist policy, too, because Iran is singled out as a pariah among nations, and thus fair game.

It's time to lift the economic and diplomatic sanctions on Iran, and, not only that, but we must begin to establish normal relations. That means more than negotiations: it means unilaterally dropping the campaign to demonize the Iranian regime, publicly renouncing the goal of "http://www.amazon.com/dp/1560259361/?tag=vp314-20http://www.amazon.com/dp/1560259361/?tag=vp314-20," and beginning the process that will end with the return of American diplomats to Tehran. For as long as the cold war lasted, we maintained an embassy in Moscow, and in all the Eastern bloc countries: in this context, twenty-eight years after the Iranian hostage crisis, our absence from Tehran is inexplicable.

That's for starters. An opening of relations, both diplomatic and economic, would pave the way for a comprehensive settlement of the outstanding issues between the US and Iran, including not only the nuclear question but Tehran's relations with Iraq, Israel, and Lebanon. None of this can happen, however, until and unless there is resistance to the power of the Lobby, which has thus far successfully superimposed Israeli interests on US policy initiatives, effectively making us Israel's instrument in the region.

The resistance is on the rise, that's the real meaning of the NIE, and that is cause for celebration - and yet much more remains to be done. The national security community has done its part, and now it is time for the politicians to step up to the plate and show their own independence from the most powerful lobby in the foreign policy realm. As a species, politicians are hardly known for their courage - and yet, now more than ever, we need patriots to come forward and make their views known. HR 1400, introduced by Rep. Lantos and passed by the House in late September, bars all Iranian products in the US and greatly narrows the range of allowable exports. This must be rescinded, at the very least, in response to this new information: or are we saying that the Iranian people must be punished no matter what their government does?

Where are the presidential candidates on this? Only two have said all along that Iran poses no threat to us, and that we must trade goods, not threats, with a nation of some 50 million souls. Only two have spoken out and said the Iranian people are not our enemies, and denounced the rush to war: Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. Will at least some of the other Democrats now step up to the plate and give us their unvarnished assessment in light of this new evidence from our own government? I'm afraid they must be talking in awfully low voices, because I can hardly hear a peep out of any of them....

[/color]

 

[QueEx]

Muckraker,

What do you have in your research on what happened between 2005 and now that caused the conclusions in the estimate to change? Are the conclusions in the 2007 estimate based on the same or new evidence? I haven't been able to find what 'new' evidence there might be that caused the estimate to change.

QueEx

 

[nyyyyce]

Absolutely correct Darth Cheney's Neo-Con headquarters office has been suppressing this NIE for more than a year. Cipher bush not only wasn't told about the NIE, but didn't read it when it was presented to him.

Seymour Hersh reported about all of this months ago. The RepubliKlans and the bushits attacked him at the time.

[WM]http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/24058/1/tsr-sy-hersh-120407.wmv[/WM]

You know what is really tripping me out is how all the Iran bashing, by FALSE NEWS, the administration, et al. has almost completely ceased. Besides a few super neo-cons trying to "discredit" the report, all rhetoric has ended. This is some shady S*** 4real. Something is not right. Darth Cheney (love this title BTW) and his crew could have sat on this report longer, but hey did not. Hmmmm.

More importantly, WTF is going on with the Dem's man?!?!?!? I understand the destruction of the torture tapes, but Bush LIED (AGAIN) , invoked WWIII and had the nation talking about taking military action against Iran. Where is the special investigation or he hearings on this S***?!?!?!? If it were not for Keith Olbermann, and a few of you on this board, I swear I'd go crazy yelling at the TV alone.

 

[nyyyyce]

Muckraker,

What do you have in your research on what happened between 2005 and now that caused the conclusions in the estimate to change? Are the conclusions in the 2007 estimate based on the same or new evidence? I haven't been able to find what 'new' evidence there might be that caused the estimate to change.

QueEx

I know this question was not directed towards me, but Que..., are you really posing this as a legitmate question?

From a couple months back:


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone that matters: Germany, Russia, China, France (even though the newly elected guy there is kissing Bush's @$$), the UK. All the industrialized countries know because there has to be a certain amount of resources, technology, scientist and nuclear material available to create the weapons. Former weapons inspectors know about Iran's current nuclear capabilities:


[FLASH]http://youtube.com/watch/v/XctgkYj5aVk[/FLASH]



So there is not need to article swap.

Iran is too far behind to be considered a threat. Did you see the article posted on this board aabout the banks in Iran getting rid of all their US cuurency? It's not about nukes. It's the PNAC doctrine - new imperialism.

Back in 1953, when the world was a lot larger - infowise - the US lead a coup in Iran. That was small. Now we are telling countries we will invade. It has and always will be, under this administration, regime change for "America's best interest".

 

[QueEx]

Bruh,

Have we not gone over that video before??? Nevertheless, I asked "What Changed" between the 2005 and 2007 estimates to warrant a different conclusion with respect to Iran's military nuclear program. Are you telling me that 16 American intelligence agencies reversed course based on that video ???

QueEx

 

[nyyyyce]

Bruh,

Have we not gone over that video before??? Nevertheless, I asked "What Changed" between the 2005 and 2007 estimates to warrant a different conclusion with respect to Iran's military nuclear program. Are you telling me that 16 American intelligence agencies reversed course based on that video ???

QueEx

Umm...Bruh,

I've read some of your other commentary so I am going to state that I think your more intelligent to believe that the NIE was developed based on this video. On the other hand, for you, or anyone else to sit here wide-eyed and believe that this information is new and altered the NIE is absurd. What I am telling you is that 16 "independent" agencies, for once, did not cave into Cheney and Bush. Therefore you got a REAL report. So much so that they are discussing hearings on why this report was delayed. Bush could of had us in another conflict spitting known faulty and erroneous information to the masses.

The NIE was based on evidence and findings that were already known to the scientific community well before Bush, Cheney and Condi started the drumbeat for war. This is the point of the "RE"-introduction of the video. To jog your memory. To make you ask yourself: "Hmmm, if this guy knew this, and he has not been a weapons inspector for years, there probably was a host of other information out there that could have stopped the WWIII rants and war posturing a loooooong time ago".

I have talked with you about PNAC and their mission for regime change in that region and how events that are unfolding ARE NOT isolated occurrences, but linear. You keep telling me you know what PNAC is and their mission then you should know that the path to conflict with Iran was inevitable because they want regime change - period. How they get it is inconsequential to the deaths, money and lies that have to be told to achieve this goal (hello Iraq). So you really don't understand PNAC. You and others, look at the NIE and go "WOW, What changed? What "NEW" evidence brought this about".

WTF man?!?!? Cheyney, et al sat on this report for months, Cy Hersh reported on this A YEAR AGO, Ritter (in the video) made these claims a year ago. I knew the information the government was feeding the masses was wrong TWO YEARS ago. I only started posting it here this summer though - before the NIE. Why is this still a news flash to you?!?!? I am blown by your quest-for-fire-esque drive to want to have a breakdown of more information to validate your obvious befuddlement.

I have a question for you. After no WMD's, the US not being hailed as liberators, the oil money form Iraq NOT funding the war, the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, never capturing bin Laden, declaring "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED", telling our enemies to "Bring it on" (more violence, that is), outing Valerie Plame, threatening to fire ANYONE in the administrations who did the outing, commuting Scooter Libbey's sentence, Blackwater contracts, Alberto Gonzales, The Patriot Act, sitting on this NIE and LYING to the public for more than a year about Iran's nuclear capabilities (I could go on but my fingers hurt) Why do you still need MORE information to support the NIE's findings?!?!?! What has been credible by this administration up until this point? Hint: There is no magic-bullet piece of information. It is scientific data, research, expected levels of progress based on the technology we know the Iranian's possess, some spying and freaking common (scientific) sense.

This government keeps cats napping 4 real.

 

[nyyyyce]

For you Que (and anyone else). When your not busy.


http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=msnbc&vid=42f67d00-1c82-41cb-94e1-10eac10b64a1

Can anyone give me an assist on the msnbc video embed? Thanks.

Peace

 

[nyyyyce]

For you Que (and anyone else). When your not busy.


http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=msnbc&vid=42f67d00-1c82-41cb-94e1-10eac10b64a1

Can anyone give me an assist on the msnbc video embed? Thanks.

Peace

 

[nyyyyce]

Bruh,

Have we not gone over that video before??? Nevertheless, I asked "What Changed" between the 2005 and 2007 estimates to warrant a different conclusion with respect to Iran's military nuclear program. Are you telling me that 16 American intelligence agencies reversed course based on that video ???

QueEx

Looks like you and your boy need to be further convinced.


Bush demands Iran explain nuke program

By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 33 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - President Bush on Tuesday called on Iran to explain why it had a secretive nuclear weapons program, and warned that any such efforts must not be allowed to flourish "for the sake of world peace."


"Iran is dangerous," Bush said after an Oval Office meeting with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano. "We believe Iran had a secret military weapons program, and Iran must explain to the world why they had a program."

Bush's comments came after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that it was "a step forward" that U.S. intelligence agencies had concluded that Tehran stopped developing its nuclear weapons program four years ago.

Ahmadinejad told reporters that an "entirely different" situation between the United States and Iran could be created if more steps like the intelligence report followed.

"We consider this measure by the U.S. government a positive step. It is a step forward," Ahmadinejad said.

"If one or two other steps are taken, the issues we have in front of us will be entirely different and will lose their complexity, and the way will be open for the resolution of basic issues in the region and in dealings between the two sides," he said.

Iran has said its nuclear program is peaceful, but until last week, the United States and Western allies had countered that Iran was hiding plans for a bomb.

"Iran has an obligation to explain to the IAEA why they hid this program from them," Bush said, referring to the nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency.

"Iran is dangerous, and they'll be even more dangerous if they learn how to enrich uranium," Bush said. "So I look forward to working with the president," Bush said, referring to Napolitano, the Italian leader, "to explain our strategy and to figure out ways we can work together to prevent this from happening for the sake of world peace."

Bush's comments amounted to a renewed effort to keep pressure on Iran after the release of last week's National Intelligence Estimate. That report found that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, and administration officials worry it could weaken their ability to build global pressure on Tehran to stop its uranium enrichment program.

That estimate cautioned that Tehran continues to enrich uranium and still could develop a bomb between 2010 and 2015 if it decided to do so.

It also concluded that it may be difficult to ultimately dissuade Tehran from developing a nuclear bomb because Iran believes such a weapon would give it international prestige and leverage to achieve its national security and foreign policy goals, the assessment concluded.

Iran is still enriching uranium for its civilian nuclear reactors that produce electricity. That leaves open the possibility that fissile material could be diverted to covert nuclear sites to produce highly enriched uranium for a warhead.

Napolitano said he and Bush broadly "share the same concerns, and we express a common commitment" on a variety of issues.

"We want to discuss, constructively, our positions on all questions in all tracks," he said. "We just want to give our contributions and our ideas on how to face, successfully, all threats, including the very serious threat of nuclear weaponization of Iran."

On Tuesday, diplomats from the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany are to discuss a draft plan for new United Nations sanctions against Iran. If passed by the Security Council, the plan would slap a third round of sanctions on Iran for defying international demands that it halt its enrichment of uranium.

"The agency report and the NIE are before the eyes of the international public opinion," Ahmadinejad said in Tehran on Tuesday. "There is no reason for the continuation of enmities and hostilities. The threats failed, they were not effective."

Bush took no questions from reporters after his meeting with Napolitano.

 

[nyyyyce]

[FLASH]http://www.youtube.com/v/aqzDsdrGan4&rel=1[/FLASH]







Why is the "Democratically " controlled Congress not in Bush and Cheney's @$$ over this blatant deception and lies?!?!?

 

[muckraker10021]

Muckraker,

What do you have in your research on what happened between 2005 and now that caused the conclusions in the estimate to change? Are the conclusions in the 2007 estimate based on the same or new evidence? I haven't been able to find what 'new' evidence there might be that caused the estimate to change.

QueEx

What’s stunning Q is that nothing changed between 2005 – 2007.

There was NO NEW information uncovered about Iran from 2005 - 2007.
Cheney and the neo-con cabal didn’t like the ‘facts’ and ‘best estimates’ that the coordinated 16 US intelligence agencies were uncovering that said that “Iran WAS NOT an immediate, eminent or current threat” to produce a nuclear bomb.

Cheney has blocked the NIE report and its conclusions that was released last week from becoming public FOR MORE THAN 18 months.

Remember who had the Director of National Intelligence job in 2005? John Negroponte.
Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, who was the US leader of American trained & funded 1980’s Latin American death squads, angered Cheney & the Neo-Cons by telling the press in April 2006 that the intelligence community believed that it would still be "a number of years off" before Iran would be "likely to have enough fissile material to assemble into or to put into a nuclear weapon, perhaps into the next decade."

..…Neoconservatives immediately attacked Negroponte for the statement, which merely reflected the existing NIE on Iran issued in spring 2005…..

Negroponte was essentially fired by Cheney and moved to the State Department and replaced by the current Director of National Intelligence Vice Admiral John Michael "Mike" McConnell.

….. "McConnell will go along with whatever [Cheney tells him to do] and make sure that no objective NIE comes out," one former senior intelligence officer said…..

Use the story links below to read all the sordid details about the Machiavellian skullduggery lies & malfeasance of the bush crime family as it pertains to the NIE.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Intelligence_officials_believe_White_House_chose_0108.html

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39978
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/12/03/get-ready-for-rightwing-blowback/
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/120307.html#When:04:35PM
http://seesdifferent.wordpress.com/...ional-intelligence-before-mcconnell-over-nie/

 

[nyyyyce]

What’s stunning Q is that nothing changed between 2005 – 2007.

There was NO NEW information uncovered about Iran from 2005 - 2007.
Cheney and the neo-con cabal didn’t like the ‘facts’ and ‘best estimates’ that the coordinated 16 US intelligence agencies were uncovering that said that “Iran WAS NOT an immediate, eminent or current threat” to produce a nuclear bomb.

Cheney has blocked the NIE report and its conclusions that was released last week from becoming public FOR MORE THAN 18 months.

Remember who had the Director of National Intelligence job in 2005? John Negroponte.
Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, who was the US leader of American trained & funded 1980’s Latin American death squads, angered Cheney & the Neo-Cons by telling the press in April 2006 that the intelligence community believed that it would still be "a number of years off" before Iran would be "likely to have enough fissile material to assemble into or to put into a nuclear weapon, perhaps into the next decade."

..…Neoconservatives immediately attacked Negroponte for the statement, which merely reflected the existing NIE on Iran issued in spring 2005…..

Negroponte was essentially fired by Cheney and moved to the State Department and replaced by the current Director of National Intelligence Vice Admiral John Michael "Mike" McConnell.

….. "McConnell will go along with whatever [Cheney tells him to do] and make sure that no objective NIE comes out," one former senior intelligence officer said…..

Use the story links below to read all the sordid details about the Machiavellian skullduggery lies & malfeasance of the bush crime family as it pertains to the NIE.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Intelligence_officials_believe_White_House_chose_0108.html

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=39978
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/12/03/get-ready-for-rightwing-blowback/
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/120307.html#When:04:35PM
http://seesdifferent.wordpress.com/...ional-intelligence-before-mcconnell-over-nie/

exactly. there is no "new" news. to suggest there is or question what events lead to the NIE are baffling to me. this information is readily available IF you really want to look for it or know the truth.


good drop.

 

[MASTERBAKER]

Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="370" wmode="transparent" data="http://www.liveleak.com/player.swf?autostart=false&token=0c5_1200427611"><param name="movie" value="http://www.liveleak.com/player.swf?autostart=false&token=0c5_1200427611"><param name="wmode" value="transparent"><param name="quality" value="high"></object>

Scott Ritter, a former UNSCOM weapons inspector speaks about Iran's nuclear program, or the lack thereof!

IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY!

 

[nyyyyce]

Re: Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

Scott Ritter, a former UNSCOM weapons inspector speaks about Iran's nuclear program, or the lack thereof!

IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY!

CO-SIGN

 

[QueEx]

Re: Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

ALARMING TEST RESULTS

<font size="5"><center>Iran Could Have Enough Uranium
for a Bomb by Year's End</font size></center>

Speigel - International
By Markus Becker
February 21, 2008

New simulations carried out by European Union experts come to an alarming conclusion: Iran could have enough highly enriched uranium to build an atomic bomb by the end of this year.

Could Iran be building an atomic bomb? When the US released a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) late last year, it seemed as though the danger of a mullah-bomb had passed. The report claimed to have information indicating that Tehran mothballed its nuclear weapons program as early as autumn 2003. The paper also said that it was "very unlikely" that Iran would have enough highly enriched uranium -- the primary ingredient in atomic bombs -- by 2009 to produce such a weapon. Rather, the NIE indicated "Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough (highly enriched uranium) for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 timeframe."

It didn't take long for experts to question the report's conclusion that Tehran was no longer interested in building the bomb. And now, a new computer simulation undertaken by European Union experts indicates that the NIE's time estimates might be dangerously inaccurate as well -- and that Iran might have enough fuel for a bomb much earlier than was previously thought.

As part of a project to improve control of nuclear materials, the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) in Ispra, Italy set up a detailed simulation of the centrifuges currently used by Iran in the Natanz nuclear facility to enrich uranium. The results look nothing like those reached by the US intelligence community.

For one scenario, the JRC scientists assumed the centrifuges in Natanz were operating at 100 percent efficiency. Were that the case, Iran could already have the 25 kilograms of highly enriched uranium necessary for an atomic device by the end of this year. Another scenario assumed a much lower efficiency -- just 25 percent. But even then, Iran would have produced enough uranium by the end of 2010.

For the purposes of the simulation, the JRC modelled each of the centrifuges individually and then hooked them together to form the kind of cascade necessary to enrich uranium. A number of variables were taken into account, including the assumption by most experts that Iran isn't even close to operating its centrifuges at 100 percent efficiency. What is known, however, is that the Iranians are operating 18 cascades, each made up of 164 centrifuges. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad himself said last April that the country had 3,000 centrifuges in operation. At the time, most Western observers discounted the claim as mere propaganda. But the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed Ahmadinejad's assertion in November.

Centrifuges from Pakistan

Another variable is the type of centrifuge Iran is using. For its simulations, the JRC assumed cascades using 2,952 P1 centrifuges -- the P stands for Pakistan, where the centrifuges were manufactured. But recent reports indicate that Iran might be in the process of installing so-called "IR2" centrifuges. These centrifuges -- the IR stands for Iran -- are made out of carbon-fiber instead of aluminium and are an estimated 2.5 times as powerful as the P1 devices.

It remains unclear, however, if the new centrifuges can be used in the same way as the old ones. Independent experts doubt whether Iran is able to produce the old-style aluminium centrifuges themselves. Given the strict embargo currently in place against Iran, it is possible that the centrifuges currently in use are still from the stock delivered to Iran by Pakistan. The Pakistani government admitted in March, 2005 that Abdul Qadir Khan, the scientist responsible for the Pakistani bomb, sold centrifuges to Iran.

Despite the uncertainties, however, the scientists at the Joint Research Centre are confident that their simulations are realistic. But, the group is quick to point out, they are theoretical. They don't make any claim to know whether Tehran is currently working toward the production of an atomic bomb.

Just why the new simulations came to such a different result than the National Intelligence Estimate issued by Washington is "a good question," a JRC expert told SPIEGEL ONLINE. The American government, he points out, wasn't clear about the technical details upon which its report was based.

Thin Line between Military and Civilian

Another possible reason for the differences could be the fact that the US intelligence report focused solely on uranium enrichment done in secret and on possible steps taken toward the production of a bomb -- but not on Tehran's claimed civilian nuclear power program. But the line between civilian and military nuclear programs is a thin one, as a number of states have demonstrated. The atomic weapons programs in Israel, South Africa, Pakistan and China all grew out of civilian nuclear programs.

There are a number of indications that Iran isn't just interested in civilian nuclear technology. Just on Wednesday, an exiled Iranian opposition group published satellite images it claims shows an Iranian atomic bomb-making facility. In January, physicist Richard Garwin, who is also a US government adviser, calculated that the Natanz facility -- even were it to reach its maximum capacity of 54,000 centrifuges -- could not produce enough low-enriched uranium for a nuclear power facility. But, he said, the 3,000 centrifuges currently in operation could be sufficient to produce enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon.

Iran's successful launch of a ballistic "research rocket" into space at the beginning of the month is likely doing little to reduce concerns. A rocket that can carry a satellite into space, after all, could be modified to carry a nuclear warhead.

Roland Schenkel, the director-general of the JRC, says it is time for European politicians to re-evaluate. It is time, he said in Boston during a weekend meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, for the world's atomic powers to allow inspections of their nuclear facilities and to take steps toward disarmament instead of modernizing their nuclear arsenals. Both the US and Great Britain have recently invested large amounts of money in their nuclear weapons caches.

Industrial Capacity

Schenkel would also like to see more competencies for the International Atomic Energy Agency. "The IAEA needs a real weapons control program," he told SPIEGEL ONLINE. As it stands now, the IAEA must focus solely on fissile material and on nuclear facilities. "The goal should be checks in the service of non-proliferation," Schenkel says. "The checks need to have more bite."

Many experts likewise believe that more checks need to be carried out in Iran itself -- a position that was not changed at all by the US intelligence report. "We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program," the report reads. But it is not this conclusion that is the most decisive one in the report. Rather, it was the final sentence: "We assess with high confidence that Iran has the scientific, technical and industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to do so."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,536914,00.html

 

[nyyyyce]

Re: Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

IAEA: Iran disputes nuclear arms evidence


Third set of sanctions imposed against Iran over its nuclear activities
updated 3:22 p.m. ET, Fri., Feb. 22, 2008


VIENNA, Austria - Iran says the U.S. and its allies provided false information saying Tehran's missile and explosives experiments were part of a nuclear weapons program, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Friday.

As expected, an IAEA report also confirmed that Iran continued to enrich uranium despite two sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions to punish it for defying council demands to freeze the program, which can generate both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

That set the stage for a third set of sanctions, although permanent council members Russia and China will likely oppose tough new measures.

The United States said the international community could have "no confidence" that Iran's nuclear program was for peaceful purposes until Tehran meets demands to suspend uranium enrichment activities.

Kate Starr, a spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council, said based on a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United States was "disappointed" with Iran's failure to fully comply with its obligations and would continue a push for further U.N. sanctions.

The 11-page report obtained by The Associated Press gave Iran a relatively clean bill of health on explaining the origin of traces of enriched uranium in a military facility; experiments with polonium, which can also be used in a weapons program; and purchases on the nuclear black market.

In such cases, "the agency has been able to conclude that answers provided by Iran ... are (either) consistent with its findings (or) ... not inconsistent with its findings," said the report, in careful language that would allow it to renew its investigation into the issues.

But it said Teheran had rejected as irrelevant some material forwarded by the agency that purportedly shows it working on tests of missile trajectories and high explosives, and research on a missile re-entry vehicle — activities that would most likely be part of weapons development. Questions also remained on how and why Iran came to posses diagrams showing how to mold uranium metal into warhead shape.

Iran dismisses nuclear work for weapons
Such "weaponization" themes remain "the one major remaining (unresolved) issue relevant to the nature of Iran's nuclear program," said the report. It noted that among the evidence reviewed — and rejected as irrelevant by Tehran — were diagrams showing a missile re-entry vehicle that would be "quite likely ... able to accommodate a nuclear device."

Diplomats say the United States provided most of the material that led in recent months to an accelerated IAEA investigation of Iran's purported weapons program activities.

Ahead of the confidential report's release to the 35-nation IAEA board and the U.N. Security Council, U.S. officials had repeatedly insisted that the IAEA probe would be incomplete unless Iran acknowledged trying to make nuclear arms in the past. That stance is shared by Canada, Japan, Australia and U.S. allies in Europe.

A senior IAEA official, who demanded anonymity as a condition of discussing the report, said that if the material provided by the U.S. and other agency members on the alleged activities was genuine, most of Iran's work was "most likely for nuclear weapons." But he said the agency was not reaching any conclusion until the Iranians went beyond rejection of the purported evidence and concretely addressed the issues it raised.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23296555/

 

[QueEx]

Re: Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

<font size="5"><center>ElBaradei's Real Agenda</font size></center>

Wall Street Journal
By DANIELLE PLETKA and MICHAEL RUBIN
February 25, 2008

On Friday, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed ElBaradei submitted a report on Iran's nuclear program to the IAEA's Board of Governors. It concluded that, barring "one major remaining issue relevant to the nature of Iran's nuclear programme" -- including a mysterious "green salt project" -- Iran's explanations of its suspicious nuclear activities "are consistent with [the IAEA's] findings [or at least] not inconsistent."

The report represents Mr. ElBaradei's best effort to whitewash Tehran's record. Earlier this month, on Iranian television, he made clear his purpose, announcing that he expected "the issue would be solved this year." And if doing so required that he do battle against the IAEA's technical experts, reverse previous conclusions about suspect programs, and allow designees of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad an unprecedented role in crafting a "work plan" that would allow the regime to receive a cleaner bill of health from the IAEA -- so be it.

Mr. ElBaradei's report culminates a career of freelancing and fecklessness which has crippled the reputation of the organization he directs. He has used his Nobel Prize to cultivate an image of a technocratic lawyer interested in peace and justice and above politics. In reality, he is a deeply political figure, animated by antipathy for the West and for Israel on what has increasingly become a single-minded crusade to rescue favored regimes from charges of proliferation.

Mr. ElBaradei assumed the directorship on Dec. 1, 1997. On his watch, but undetected by his agency:

• Iran constructed its covert enrichment facilities and, according to the 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, engaged in covert nuclear-weapons design.

• India and Pakistan detonated nuclear devices. A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani nuclear godfather, exported nuclear technology around the world.

• In 2003, Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi confessed to an undetected weapons effort. Mr. ElBaradei's response? He rebuked the U.S. and U.K. for bypassing him. When Israel recently destroyed what many believe was a secret (also undetected) nuclear facility in Syria, Mr. ElBaradei told the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh that it is "unlikely that this building was a nuclear facility," although his agency has not physically investigated the site.

The IAEA's mission is to verify that "States comply with their commitments, under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and other non-proliferation agreements, to use nuclear material and facilities only for peaceful purposes." Yet in 2004 Mr. ElBaradei wrote in the New York Times that, "We must abandon the unworkable notion that it is morally reprehensible for some countries to pursue weapons of mass destruction, yet morally acceptable for others to rely on them for security."

• IAEA technical experts have complained anonymously to the press that the latest report on Iran was revamped to suit the director's [ElBaradei's] political goals.

• In 2004, Mr. ElBaradei sought to purge mention of Iranian attempts to purchase beryllium metal, an important component in a nuclear charge, from IAEA documents.

• He also left unmentioned Tehran's refusal to grant IAEA inspectors access to the Parchin military complex, where satellite imagery showed a facility seemingly designed to test and produce nuclear weapons.

Other shortcomings of the Latest Report

• The IAEA's latest report leaves unmentioned allegations by an Iranian opposition group of North Korean work on nuclear warheads at Khojir, a military research site near Tehran.

• It also amends previous conclusions and closes the book on questions about Iran's work on polonium 210 -- which nuclear experts suspect Iran experimented with for use as an initiator for nuclear weapons, but which the regime claims was research on radioisotope batteries.

• In 2004, the IAEA declared itself "somewhat uncertain regarding the plausibility of the stated purpose of the [polonium] experiments." Today it finds these explanations "consistent with the Agency's findings and with other information available."

The IAEA director seems intent on undercutting Security Council diplomacy. Just weeks after President George Bush toured the Middle East to build Arab support for pressure on Tehran, Mr. ElBaradei appeared on Egyptian television on Feb. 5 to urge Arabs in the opposite direction, insisting Iran was cooperating and should not be pressured. And as he grows more and more isolated from Western powers intent on disarming Iran, Mr. ElBaradei has found champions in the developing and Arab world. They cheer his self-imposed mission -- to hamstring U.S. efforts to constrain Iran's program, whether or not the regime is violating its non-proliferation obligations or pursuing nuclear weapons.

In working to undermine sanctions, however, Mr. ElBaradei demeans the purpose of his agency and undercuts its non-proliferation mission. He also makes military action all the more likely.

Ms. Pletka and Mr. Rubin are, respectively, vice president for and resident scholar in Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120389990086289395.html?mod=opinion_main_commentarieshttp://

 

[nyyyyce]

Re: Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

Iran dismisses nuke documents as fakes

By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer 19 minutes ago

VIENNA, Austria - The U.N. nuclear monitoring agency presented documents Monday that diplomats said indicate Iran may have focused on a nuclear weapons program after 2003 — the year that a U.S. intelligence report says such work stopped.
ADVERTISEMENT

Iran again denied ever trying to make such arms. Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, the chief Iranian delegate to the International Atomic Energy Agency, dismissed the information showcased by the body as "forgeries."

He and other diplomats, all linked to the IAEA, commented after a closed-door presentation to the agency's 35-nation board of intelligence findings from the U.S. and its allies and other information purporting to show Iranian attempts to make nuclear arms.

A summarized U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, made public late last year, also came to the conclusion that Tehran was conducting atomic weapons work. But it said the Iranians froze such work in 2003.

Asked whether board members were shown information indicating Tehran continued weapons-related activities after that time, Simon Smith, the chief British delegate to the IAEA, said: "Certainly some of the dates ... went beyond 2003."

He did not elaborate. But another diplomat at the presentation, who agreed to discuss the meeting only if not quoted by name, said some of the documentation focused on an Iranian report on nuclear activities that some experts have said could be related to weapons.

She said it was unclear whether the project was being actively worked on in 2004 or the report was a review of past activities. Still, any Iranian focus on nuclear weapons work in 2004 would at least indicate continued interest past the timeframe outlined in the U.S. intelligence estimate.

A senior diplomat who attended the IAEA meeting said that among the material shown was an Iranian video depicting mock-ups of a missile re-entry vehicle. He said IAEA Director General Oli Heinonen suggested the component — which brings missiles back from the stratosphere — was configured in a way that strongly suggests it was meant to carry a nuclear warhead.

Other documentation showed the Iranians experimenting with warheads and missile trajectories where "the height of the burst ... didn't make sense for conventional warheads," he said.

Smith and the senior diplomat both said the material shown to the board came from a variety of sources, including information gathered by the agency and intelligence provided by member nations.

"The assumption is this was not something that was being thought about or talked about, but the assumption is it was being practically worked on," Smith told reporters.

He said the IAEA presented a "fairly detailed set of illustrations and descriptions of how you would build a nuclear warhead, how you would fit it into a delivery vehicle, how you would expect it to perform."

The U.N. agency released a report last week saying that suspicions about most past Iranian nuclear activities had eased or been laid to rest. But the report also noted Iran had rejected documents linking it to missile and explosives experiments and other work connected to a possible nuclear weapons program, calling the information false and irrelevant.

The report called weaponization "the one major ... unsolved issue relevant to the nature of Iran's nuclear program."

Most of the material shown to Iran by the IAEA on alleged attempts to make nuclear arms came from Washington, though some was provided by U.S. allies, diplomats told the AP. The agency shared it with Tehran only after the nations gave their permission.

The IAEA report also confirmed that Iran continued to enrich uranium despite demands by the U.N. Security Council to suspend the work. The council has sanctions on Iran for continuing enrichment, which can produce the material needed to make atomic bombs.

Iran says its enrichment program is intended solely to produce lower-grade material for fueling nuclear reactors that would generate electricity.

Iran's ambassador to the United Nations, Mohammad Khazee, said the intelligence information turned over to the IAEA was "baseless" and alleged it was fabricated by an Iranian opposition group.

"I'm afraid to say that, according to my information, some of these allegations were produced or fabricated by a terrorist group, which are listed as a terrorist group in the United States and somewhere else in Europe," Khazee said told the AP in New York.

He appeared to be referring to the Mujahedeen Khalq, also known as the People's Mujahedeen Organization of Iran, which was listed as a foreign terrorist group by the U.S. government in 1997 and the European Union last year.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080226/ap_on_re_eu/nuclear_iran;_ylt=AnhYwLVzURJfHwOedEAb1XiROrgF

 

[QueEx]

Re: Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

<IFRAME SRC="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21112" WIDTH=750 HEIGHT=1500>
<A HREF="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21112">link</A>

</IFRAME>

 

[nyyyyce]

Re: Iran HAS NO NUKES, Bush is a warmongering imp!

^^^^This sounds like a rational and intelligent approach to take. Attributes not possessed by Bush and the PNAC faithful. Therefore, it will be dismissed, ignored or deemed too passive a way to deal with Iran by the current administration.