Google "Iran" and "IAEA" and do you know what you get?

[oblivious]

Continued co-operation with the IAEA!

Iran has decided, against Ahmadinejad's wishes, to continue to cooperate with the IAEA. But not one single conventional Western news source is reporting this.

Take a look. Their silence is pathetic beyond words.

http://news.google.com.hk/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=iran+iaea&btnG=Search+News

Iran not to end cooperation with IAEA
Malaysia Sun
Sunday 7th January, 2007
IANS

Iran will not end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mohammad-Ali Hosseini said Sunday.

'Cutting cooperation with the IAEA is not on the agenda,' Hosseini said in a press briefing here while also stressing Iran's commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
http://story.malaysiasun.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/b8de8e630faf3631/id/223548/cs/1/

Iran not to end cooperation with IAEA
By DPA, Tehran, Jan 7 - Iran will not end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency -, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mohammad-Ali Hosseini said Sunday.

'Cutting cooperation with the IAEA is not on the agenda,' Hosseini said in a press briefing here while also stressing Iran's commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -.

http://www.rxpgnews.com/gulf-middle-east/Iran-not-to-end-cooperation-with-IAEA_11050.shtml

Iran Won't Cut Cooperation With IAEA
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Husseini said today that Iran will not cut its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency and stressed the country's commitment to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
http://www.huliq.com/4949/iran-wont-cut-cooperation-with-iaea

Iran not to end cooperation with IAEA
Tehran, Jan 7 (DPA) Iran will not end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mohammad-Ali Hosseini said Sunday.

"Cutting cooperation with the IAEA is not on the agenda," Hosseini said in a press briefing here while also stressing Iran's commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
http://www.teluguportal.net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=27536

[cool user name]

1. Why argue with the facts?

We have a war to sell, didn't you know?

[BlueStorm]

2. Of course they aren't going to tell us....

we need their oil as well. /sarcasm

Blue

[spanone]

3. Kick and Recommend. The American Media No Longer Exists. All Infotainment All the Time.

[ChiciB1]

49. Something Really Funny About The Media... I Saw A Bumper Sticker

on a Repuke's car that said... CNN Lies! How's that for what EVERYONE is thinking about the media??

Repukes complaining about CNN! True, CNN has gotten a "little" better lately, but hardly LEFT WING LIBERAL!

[Junkdrawer]

4. ..but..but...we've given diplomacy every chance and now a military strike...

is the only option. :eyes:

[Junkdrawer]

5. well, I mean if you can call a Security Council "Stop enriching or else"...

resolution diplomacy.

[BayCityProgressive]

6. Wow

I have to admit my ignorance about Iran. I seriously thought he and the Mullah's called the shots. Thank you so much for posting this!

[burythehatchet]

10. Well you have a rabid group of misinformers and liars

telling you their "facts" so don't feel bad.

[Chulanowa]

11. Don't sweat it...

Americans - even we liberals - have been conditioned to believe that "presidents" hold all the power in their nations. Not too unsurprising that so many people think that millenialist jackhole in Iran clls all the shots and what he says goes.

[NobleCynic]

14. Keeping in mind the Mullahs might not always agree with Ahmadinejad

This doesn't mean less influence for the Mullahs necessarily, just that Ahmadinejad doesn't call all the shots.

[DearAbby]

7. We have to get this out

these people are trying to start Armageddon. They are planing to take it, or no one gets it, they'll nuke it.

[annabanana]

8. Well. . There goes their best bogus excuse to bomb Iran...

Rate this puppy up and get it out to the less controlled media...

[oblivious]

9. I say write to your local newspaper and ask why they aren't reporting this. That's what I'm doing.

I suppose they'll say there's no feed from AP, Reuters and AFP, so I'm going to email them too.

[Jcrowley]

12. Ah, back in the day when things were so much simpler

K und R

[Ian_rd]

21. OMG is that for real?

[Jcrowley]

28. Yes it's real

Here ya go:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3060229

More info in that thread. The US was actually pushing Iran to get more nuclear plants than they intended during the US-controlled Shah regime. This was because US investors were getting a big chunk piece of the action. If the current regime in Iran were to do the same we'd be heralding in the greatness of Nuclear Systems for Iran just as we see in the add.

[nealmhughes]

13. Read what Ignacio Ramolet has to say in Le Monde Diplomatique

as of June of 2006:
Note that the Iranians had already threatened to mine the Straits of Hormuz then, that the US was worried about Iran as its ally against the Sunni in Iraq, etc.

A bunch of sabre-rattling old stories have been dusted off to scare us into a nuclear scenario with Iran.
Here is the link:
http://mondediplo.com/2006/07/01iran

This is the best source, bar none to get the straight scoop in intl. affairs, the articles are originally in French, but a lot are translated into English, and this one is, but the French isn't too difficult, actually...for French.

[Bluebear]

15. "Furniture shopping in Tehran?" Oops, typed in IKEA....nt

[eridani]

16. Please put this in the research section too

Thanks.

[ellisonz]

17. This a distortion. Iran is playing the same game that NK played.

-----------

Implementation of Safeguards in the Islamic Republic of Iran
The report on the implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran is before you. As you are aware, the Agency over the last three years has been conducting intensive investigations of Iran´s nuclear programme with a view to providing assurances about the peaceful nature of that programme.

During these investigations, the Agency has not seen indications of diversion of nuclear material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Regrettably, however, after three years of intensive verification, there remain uncertainties with regard to both the scope and the nature of Iran´s nuclear programme. As I mentioned in my report, this is a matter of concern that continues to give rise to questions about the past and current direction of Iran´s nuclear programme.

For confidence to be built in the peaceful nature of Iran´s programme, Iran should do its utmost to provide maximum transparency and build confidence. Only through clarification of all questions relevant to Iran´s past programme and through confidence building measures can confidence about Iran´s current nuclear activities be restored. This is clearly in the interest both of Iran and of the international community.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2006/ebsp2006n003.html#iran

----------

Article III: Each non-NWS party undertakes to conclude an agreement with the IAEA for the application of its safeguards to all nuclear material in all of the state's peaceful nuclear activities and to prevent diversion of such material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_...

The UN has imposed sanctions for exactly that reason, they cannot verify that Iran does not have a weapons programs because Iran is not cooperating with IAEA inspectors and has violeted safeguard seals on the enrichment process: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6205295.stm

DICKEY: Do you have any indication that there is some other completely separate Iranian nuclear-weapons program?

ELBARADEI: No, we don´t. But I won´t exclude that possibility.

DICKEY: But there´s another problem. Even if the declared nuclear research is all that Iran has going, there´s nothing in the Non-Proliferation Treaty itself to prevent them from enriching uranium - which they say is their right. They could get to the point of producing their own nuclear fuel, or bomb material, then tell you, "We´re pulling out of the treaty."

ELBARADEI: Sure. And if they have the nuclear material and they have a parallel weaponization program along the way, they are really not very far - a few months - from a weapon. We need to revisit the treaty, because that margin of security is unacceptable. But specifically on Iran, the board is saying, "You have a right under the treaty to enrich uranium, but because of the lack of confidence in your program and because the IAEA has not yet given you a clean bill of health, you should not exercise that right. In a way, you have to go through a probation period, to build confidence again, before you can exercise your full rights."

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2006/newswee...

Iran is "cooperating," not full cooperation, which is what is required by the NPT. This is why Iran has been sanctioned: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6205295.stm

I'll take Mohammed El-Baradei, a Nobel Peace Prize Winner over Ahmadinejad in Iran anyday of the week.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_ElBaradei

Even the Iranian public is turning against Ahmadinejad's policy: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/12/19/iran.elections.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Ahmadinejad either needs to shit or get off the pot. I hope they'll shit. They are playing a very serious game with the possibility of very serious reprecussions.

[oblivious]

18. You missed the point. Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation has rejected Ahmad's bill.

There is no parallel with NK. NK expelled the inspectors in 2002. Iran has never done this. IAEA inspectors have been supervising the enrichment research all along. In ElBaradei's Nov 23 statement to the Board of Governors, he even gave Iran a bit of a compliment on its renewed cooperation:

To that end I should inform you that I have received in recent days communications from Iran, in which it agreed to an Agency request to take further environmental samples from the equipment already sampled at a technical university. It also agreed to provide access to the operating records of the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant. These are steps in the right direction.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2006/ebsp2006n021.html#dprk

Now Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation appears to have given Ahmad a slap in the face by ignoring his bill re revising cooperation with the IAEA.

This is pretty significant, yet it hasn't been mentioned in any Western newspapers in two days now.


Iran not to end cooperation with IAEA
By DPA, Tehran, Jan 7 - Iran will not end its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency -, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mohammad-Ali Hosseini said Sunday.

'Cutting cooperation with the IAEA is not on the agenda,' Hosseini said in a press briefing here while also stressing Iran's commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -.

His remarks came after the Iranian parliament approved a bill last week obliging the government to revise cooperation with the IAEA as retaliation for the sanctions to be imposed on Iran in line with UN Security Council resolution 1737.

The majority of MPs in parliament are close to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and observers believe that ignoring the parliamentary bill could lead to a rift within the Ahmadinejad faction.

Gholam-Reza Aqazadeh, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, had said earlier this week that the current policy by the state was not to end cooperation with the IAEA but to continue within NPT and IAEA regulations.
http://www.rxpgnews.com/gulf-middle-east/Iran-not-to-end-cooperation-with-IAEA_11050.shtml

[ellisonz]

19. Rhetoric. They are playing games.

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

VIENNA, Austria (CNN) -- Iran has broken the seals on equipment at an atomic processing facility amid Western fears Tehran could use its technology to build a nuclear bomb.

The fact that International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) seals had been in place until Wednesday indicates the equipment at the nuclear plant had not been used up to now.

Removal of the seals means the uranium conversion plant is now capable of being fully operational, a state-run news agency reported.

.......

But Mark Gwozdecky said the plant at Isfahan, located 410 kilometers (255 miles) south of Tehran, "is fully monitored by the IAEA" and "is not a uranium enrichment plant."

"Their uranium enrichment plant in Natanz remains frozen, and they have indicated it will remain that way," he said. "This plant (Isfahan) produces feed material that could one day be used in enrichment."

.......

"This is a process of confidence building," he said. "Iran built a nuclear program for 18 years and concealed it from the international community.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/08/10/iran.iaea.1350/index.html

Iran is playing the role of a greedy spoiler IMHO. They said that because they got sanctioned so now the goalposts are being moved again and they are trying to get back into a position where they can finish what they started. Don't believe the hype about nuclear energy, Iran has enormous oil reserves so really its about nationalism and saber rattling.

[rman]

25. That was more than a year ago.

The fact that Iran was not cooperative once does not prove they are not being cooperative now - perhaps unless one is looking for reason to bomb Iran.

[ellisonz]

30. No. It shows a pattern of deceptive behavior.

The IAEA is unable to verify that they have not diverted material for the weapons program. Oh, please...cut the crap, no one on DU wants us to bomb Iran, including me. I'm just not naive enough to not believe that Iran doesn't want nuclear weapons and they are willing to do anything and say anything to get it done. I'm well schooled in the politics of nuclear proliferation (more so NK, than Iran, but the situations are very similar). But that is the reality and its almost laughable that people here make claims about Iran without any foundation. They are pissed at Ahmadinejad because he's brought down too much heat on their program. All that has happened is the Iranian Atomic Energy Commission and Iran have decided to not effectively begin a withdrawal from the NPT.

They are not cooperating in full, they haven't cooperated in full, and there is no reason to believe that they will cooperate in full, which is what the NPT clearly requires. Until the IAEA says they are in compliance and that has not happened, they are non-compliant. The UN sanctioned Iran for exactly these reasons not more than a month ago. I stand with the young people of Iran in demanding a democratic and free Iran, who do you stand with? Please do your homework before you spout off unfounded claims at me, people here have bought the Iranian distortions bait and sinker.

:P

[LynnTheDem]

32. Oooh a "pattern of deceptive behaviour"! Just like bush said about

Iraq!

:eyes:

[ellisonz]

34. Strawman.

:eyes:

[LynnTheDem]

35. "strawman" is "pattern of deceptive behaviour"

:eyes:

[ellisonz]

36. Reality:

http://www.armscontrol.org/country/iran/iranchronology.asp

Do your damn homework before opening your mouth.

[LynnTheDem]

37. I have done, dear.

;)

[ellisonz]

38. Obviously, you haven't been reading the right stuff.

How do you explain this? Why are the French and the Germans supporting it? This is the last major development.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=21102&Cr=Iran&Cr1=

[rman]

40. Interesting how the UN makes it seem as though "nuclear activities" equals

development of nuclear weapons.
Iran got its knowledge about nuclear physics from the US - that's not a secret. So Iran has had a nuclear program ever since. And nothing that Iran is revealed to be doing now is evidence they are developing nuclear weapons. They need enriched uranium for nuclear power plants. So what exactly has Iran supposedly been concealing for the past 18 years?

[ellisonz]

43. Here's your answer:

Iran Develops Nuclear Technologies in Secret for 18 Years
A report issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency describes technological advances and a policy of concealment.

On November 10, 2003, the International Atomic Energy Agency issued a 30-page confidential report on Iran's nuclear activities. The report, which the agency sent to its board of governors and to 20 governments, reveals that for the past 18 years Iran has secretly developed technologies for producing weapon-usable highly enriched uranium and plutonium. During that time, the report says, Iran violated its Nonproliferation Treaty obligations and falsified declarations to the agency regarding safeguards required under the treaty.

According to the report, "Iran's policy of concealment continued until last month, with cooperation being limited and reactive, and information being slow in coming, changing and contradictory. While most of the breaches identified to date have involved limited quantities of nuclear material, they have dealt with the most sensitive aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle, including enrichment and reprocessing."

Despite these findings, the report goes on to say that no evidence exists of a current weapons project in Iran, a conclusion that NRDC's nuclear experts dispute. "It's dumbfounding that the IAEA, after saying that Iran for 18 years had a secret effort to enrich uranium and separate plutonium, would turn around and say there was no evidence of a nuclear weapons program," said NRDC nuclear program director Tom Cochran in an interview with The New York Times. "If that's not evidence, I don't know what is."

http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/iaeairan.asp

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) <1> is a New York City-based, non-profit, non-partisan environmental advocacy group, with offices in Washington, D.C., San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Founded in 1970, NRDC today has 1.2 million members and online activists nationwide, and a staff of more than 250 scientists, attorneys, and other specialists. Along with Sierra Club and Earthjustice, NRDC is widely considered to be one of the leading environmental groups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Resources_Defense_Council

[The Stranger]

48. The other poster pointed out "technologies" are not weapons.

And if you are posting it on the internet, how can is it being "done in secret"?

[oblivious]

27. It is definitely about nationalism, but not sabre rattling. Have you seen this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3060229

[ellisonz]

33. Yes. It's saber-rattling against the EU(who have been negotiating) and Israel especially.

By saying what they're not going to do, they're saying what they're going to do.

Question: Why did France and Germany vote for sanctions? Neither of these countries support the Iraq War.

[oblivious]

39. 1. There's no sabres involved 2. France and Germany voted to pacify the US.

1. If this was about nuclear weapons you could call it sabre-rattling, but it is about enriching uranium legally for peaceful purposes. For Iran it is now a matter of national pride. At least Ahmad seems to have had some success pitching that line domestically and among the non-aligned nations, all of whom support Iran's position.

2. The Security Council's sanctions are laughable, and will have almost no effect whatsoever on Iran. Their only purpose was to give the US some face, so people like you could say "See! The SC voted against Iran, so Iran must be wrong." France and Germany were looking for anything to stop US sabre-rattling. So they got something to allow the US to back down a bit from its embarrassingly strident position.

In fact, the sanctions are useless.

[ellisonz]

41. You are oblivious!

Do you really think the only reason France and Germany voted the way they did because of our face? If that's the case then why aren't they in Iraq w/us? If you won't listen to me listen to the IAEA chief, because I'm not saying anything different than he is fundamentally.

The Security Councils sanctions are proportionate to the current situation:

1. The sanctions ban the supply of nuclear-related technology and materials and impose an asset freeze on key individuals and companies.
2. The resolution demands that Tehran end all uranium enrichment work, which can produce fuel for nuclear plants as well as for bombs.
3. The draft resolution was amended several times after objections from both the Russians and Chinese. But after parts of the resolution were watered down, both Russia and China - who have close financial ties with Iran - backed the proposals.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6205295.stm

Iran got diplomatically smacked by the UN and IAEA is going after the transfer of enrichment materials and expertise. The IAEA will be meeting again soon and they may cut off all technical assistance.

Iran is slowly being backed into a diplomatic corner where they're either going to have to submit to IAEA control or pull out of the NPT.

I would say it is much more a matter of pride of the conservatives and Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Everyone else is in the street is just parroting the line because they don't want to go to jail or lose their job. Ahmadinejad is not the real source of power in Iran, he's just the face of it for the naive West.

You have a very biased position that betrays its own partisan political conception. This is not about the left vs. right in America. This is about whether or not Iran will be able to build a nuclear weapon in violation of the NPT, if they haven't started already and they very well may have taken some steps. Pakistan has nukes, India has nukes, Israel has nukes, so why wouldn't Iran want nukes? A nation with enormous oil reserves that are tapped is dying for a nuclear program because of energy needs? Please tell me, I'm begging to hear a logical answers.

Ahmadinejad is a smart man and realizes that his position will be alot stronger if he flips the American and European left to his side of the nuclear ball game. He is having a good deal of success in doing that. Please take a step back and think about what's really going on here, because it is not just an extension of Iraq, and it in fact predates the Iraq debacle by quite a bit. This is very much about the politics of nuclear weapons and frankly I'm sick to death of all the paranoia here about the US/Israel attacking Iran. It's just not going to happen.

Bottomline: Iran has not allowed the IAEA full access to all sites, has violated some safeguard procedures, and continues to blow off even the UN, the IAEA, and much of the international community of experts on international nuclear politics. It is very much not in the interest of Iran to go down this road. The real reason they are is because it plays well in Iran among young men, who had been increasingly turning against the old guard in the late 1990's, and because building a nuclear weapon is sadly a matter of pride.

Someone who hates Bush says it so it must be true!:silly:

[oblivious]

42. Can't you do anything but parrot right-wing talking points?

1. Why aren't France and Germany in Iraq with you, you ask?
Because they're not stupid. And they're trying to stop your attacking another country by pretending to take a tough line with Iran. I repeat, the sanctions are useless. They haven't deterred Iran in the slightest.

2. Listen to the IAEA chief, you say.
OK. His most recent comments on Iran - Nov 23 report to Directors (after the sanctions)
To that end I should inform you that I have received in recent days communications from Iran, in which it agreed to an Agency request to take further environmental samples from the equipment already sampled at a technical university. It also agreed to provide access to the operating records of the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant. These are steps in the right direction.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2006/ebsp2006n021.html#dprk

3. You say the Security Councils sanctions are proportionate to the current situation.
I agree. The sanctions are unnecessary since there is no proof whatsoever that Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons. So the SC cobbled together a suitably worthless set of sanctions that will have no effect on Iran, but allow the US a much needed face-saving measure.

4. You say the resolution demands that Tehran end all uranium enrichment work, which can produce fuel for nuclear plants as well as for bombs.
Wrong. Current enrichment work is not suitable for bombs.

5. You say the IAEA is going after the transfer of enrichment materials and expertise and that the IAEA will be meeting again soon and they may cut off all technical assistance.
So what? Iran is doing this internally. That's the point. Iran wants to be able to provide its own fuel for its THE PEACEFUL GENERATION OF ELECTRICITY without having to worry about sanctions and consequent supply problems. Who could blame them after what they've been subjected to, not being even able to buy replacement parts for civilian airliners.

Under the sanctions Russia can conduct legitimate nuclear activities in Iran, including the Bushler reactor, so what has really changed as far as transfer of technology?

6. You say Iran must now submit to IAEA control or pull out of the NPT.
That is the point of this thread -- to point out that Iran continues to cooperate with the IAEA. You totally missed the point of the OP.

7. You say everyone else is in the (Iranian) street is just parroting the line because they don't want to go to jail or lose their job.
Can you provide us with any evidence that this is so?

8. You say "this is about whether or not Iran will be able to build a nuclear weapon in violation of the NPT, if they haven't started already and they very well may have taken some steps"
If that were so, don't you think the IAEA would have found at least a hint of such activity in over 3 years of inspections?

9. You say "Pakistan has nukes, India has nukes, Israel has nukes, so why wouldn't Iran want nukes? A nation with enormous oil reserves that are tapped is dying for a nuclear program because of energy needs? Please tell me, I'm begging to hear a logical answers."

This has been explained in several recent DU threads. Honestly, you're not very curious not to have found the answer to your question yet, but ok, here are some reasons:
- a booming population
- rapid industrialisation
- imports large amounts of gasoline and electricity
- massive fossil fuel use is damaging the environment
- Iran argues oil is too valuable to be used for mere electricity generation; it should be used instead for high value products, and to get foreign exchange
- developing nuclear power would cost a fraction of the cost of fully developing its industry, especially since Iran has lots of uranium ore.
- oil field declines

Iran 'needs nuclear power'
27/12/2006

Iran could run out of oil to export in eight years without significant investment in infrastructure, according to a new study.

The report, published by the US National Academy of Sciences, suggests that Iran's nuclear programme could be a "genuine" opportunity for investors as oil production has failed to bridge oil field losses and domestic demand growth.

Roger Stern of Johns Hopkins University in Maryland said: "I'm not saying that Iran will have no oil in eight years. I'm saying that they will be using all of it for themselves."

The data published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences said Tehran could become "politically vulnerable" from the decline in exports as these account for about 70 per cent of government revenue.

"It therefore seems possible that Iran's claim to need nuclear power might be genuine, an indicator of distress from anticipated export revenue shortfalls," Mr Stern said.
http://www.manchester.com/National_News/Iran_needs_nuclear_power-18018436.html

Iran may need nuclear power, study says
By Jim Wolf
REUTERS

7:26 a.m. December 26, 2006

WASHINGTON – Iran's claim to need nuclear power may be genuine, given that it could run out of oil to export as soon as eight years from now, according to an analysis published Tuesday by the National Academy of Sciences.

The study's author, Roger Stern, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland, said investment in Iranian oil production had been inadequate to offset oil field declines and the explosive growth in domestic demand.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20061226-0726-iran-nuclear-study.html

10. You say (a) "This is very much about the politics of nuclear weapons and (b) frankly I'm sick to death of all the paranoia here about the US/Israel attacking Iran."
(a) No this is not about nuclear weapons. The Bush-neocon propaganda machine has very effectively made this about nuclear weapons but Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. If you say they are, then provide some proof. I trust the IAEA more than I trust you.

(b)Perhaps the paranoia is caused by constant statements by leaders in the US and Israel that they are considering attacking Iran?

11. You write: "Bottomline: Iran has not allowed the IAEA full access to all sites, has violated some safeguard procedures, and continues to blow off even the UN, the IAEA, and much of the international community of experts on international nuclear politics."
Oh what a crock of shit. The IAEA has similar problems with many countries. Yet the only one the warmongers bring up is Iran. I wonder why that is.

23 November 2006 | Vienna, Austria
IAEA Board of Governors
Introductory Statement to the Board of Governors by IAEA Director General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei

There are 30 States that have not fulfilled their legal obligation, under the NPT, to conclude a comprehensive safeguards agreement - and over 100 States that have yet to bring an additional protocol into force.
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2006/ebsp2006n021.html#dprk

The fact is, Iran is cooperating with the IAEA and working towards fulfilling its obligations under the NPT. And this is being ignored by the Western propaganda press.

[ellisonz]

44. I'm quoting mainstream and liberal organizations (please see #43).

1. My point stands. Your interpretation is just that, and you haven't really refuted me in the least bit unless we are to believe Germany and France (!!!) are pawns of the US, which they very obviously do not.
2. Just above your post: "The report before you makes clear that Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities. In addition, the IAEA has not been able to make any further progress on resolving the outstanding issues. This is due to the decision by Iran to limit its cooperation with the Agency to the implementation of the safeguards agreement, and to link any further cooperation - particularly the needed transparency measures - to the on-going consideration of Iran´s nuclear programme by the Security Council. The IAEA is therefore unable to move forward in its efforts to confirm the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran. This naturally continues to be a matter of serious concern."

That's the issue.

3. This is about the absence of proof, and we have proof of that.

4. You need a link.

5. It's more diplomatic. Do you have any respect for the UN and the IAEA?

6. Yes, but Iran is not cooperating in full, which is their treaty obligation. The IAEA has to approve and they haven't. Plus, you don't have a single Western source cited backing up this claim. Please study up on the NPT, you'd benefit greating.

7. Why are you buying the Iranian talking points bait and sinker? http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/irn-summary-eng

8. No. You overestimate the power and scope of IAEA investigations. Plus they violated IAEA safeguard seals...so....get a grip.

9. If thats the case, they are going about it entirely the wrong way. I mean, denying visas to Western journalists? Breaking IAEA seals? C'mon.

10. I'm not even going to wade into that mess again. It's amplified on DU too in excess.

11. North Korea? And how many of those are building/have nuclear reactors? Besides, India/Pakistan/Israel.

- Maybe because the lesson of history is that they will likely back off the closer they get to having testable weapons.

:shrug:

[malaise]

47. Would you tell me about Israel's nuclear activities

or will those remain top secret?

[robertpaulsen]

50. Don't believe the hype about the "enormous oil reserves".

Iran has reached Peak Oil as we did in 1970, and their production is declining at a staggering rate:

Iran oil industry founders, report says

By BARRY SCHWEID

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Iran is suffering a staggering decline in revenue from its oil exports, and income could virtually disappear by 2015 if the trend continues, according to an analysis published Monday in a journal of the National Academy of Sciences.

Iran's economic problems could make the country unstable, with its oil industry crippled, Roger Stern, an economic geographer at Johns Hopkins University, said in the report and in an interview.

Iran earns about $50 billion a year in oil exports. The decline is estimated at 10 to 12 percent annually. In less than five years exports could be halved and then disappear by 2015, Stern said.

more...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003494872_iranoil26.html

It looks to me like the Iranian drive for nuclear energy is out of economic necessity.

[rman]

24. Is that why it is not being reported by the western mass media?

It seems to me that it's rather newsworthy regardless of whether it is cooperation or playing games on part of Iran.

[ellisonz]

31. Well I would suggest three reasons.

1. Iran has stopped issuing visas to all Western journalists.
2. As such, the MSM (including the more credible outlets) have no way to check and verify their stories.
3. There are much more pressing stories to be run, news outlets have limited resources.

Edit; Three, not two.

[annabanana]

20. kicking this back up becasue IT'S IMPORTANT

No more blind marching up to a preemptive war...

[Jacobin]

22. You can't possibly mean that the neo-cons are manufacturing a case

for a pre-emptive war!!!

They've never done anything like tha....nevermind

[Junkdrawer]

23. There's a full court press going on right now...and what's eerie...

is that it's being done just under the surface. And that's scary because it means that the plan is to bring the US public along at a later date.

So I ask myself "After what?"..

[donkeyotay]

26. Yep, they are definitely sowing the seeds of the next thing we all know. nt

[No Exit]

29. Kick!! America--don't say we didn't warn you!!

If the people of this country allow themselves to be fooled yet again by false, lying, made-up bullshit propaganda in favor of an elective war, they are not worth counting as our fellow citizens.

[oblivious]

45. Update: 2 days later Reuters has reported it, but picked up only by TVNZ and Iranmania.

No one must know that Iran is cooperating. That would just ruin everything.


Reuters international, Jan 9:
Iran says has no plan to quit nuclear pact: agency
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2007-01-09T190644Z_01_L09175142_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-NUCLEAR-NPT.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsHome-C3-worldNews-3

Reuters India, Jan 10: Iran says has no plan to quit nuclear pact - agency
http://in.today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2007-01-10T102545Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_India-282907-3.xml

Reuters NZ, Jan 10: Iran has no plan to quit treaty
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/955795

Reuters in Iranmania, Jan 11: Iran says has no plan to quit nuke pact: agency
http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=48779&NewsKind=Current%20Affairs

[The Stranger]

46. K&R