- Here we go again. Everything that goes around, comes
around. We've seen it all before, each time fake. Nothing's different now.
-
- Previous articles said US intelligence assessments through
March 2011 found no evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons development.
-
- During his December 1, 1997 - November 30, 2009 tenure
as IAEA director general, Mohamed ElBaradei concurred. He carefully avoided
anti-Iranian rhetoric and baseless charges.
-
- After his departure, agency policy changed. IAEA was
established as an intergovernmental scientific and technical cooperation
forum. It was also to insure safe, peaceful nuclear technology applications.
Initially independent, it now reports to the General Assembly and Security
Council.
-
- Current head, Yukiya Amano, politicized IAEA policy for
Western interests, mainly Washington's. Doing so plays with fire, given
nuclear technology stakes.
-
- Lies launch all wars, including America's post-WW II.
Israel's also.
-
- Bogusly accusing Iran of developing nuclear weapons refutes
known evidence claiming otherwise.
-
- Washington enlisted Yamano to lie. He didn't disappoint.
Ahead of his report's release, he visited Washington for instructions.
Exposing his duplicity is vital.
-
- War must be prevented at all costs. Hopefully world leaders
won't tolerate it.
-
- On November 8, former Pentagon official Michael Maloof
told Press TV:
-
- "There are some very serious questions (about Yamano's)
study. It's obviously a basis for creating an atmosphere for launching
an attack on Iran."
-
- "My sources tell me here in Washington that they
monitor Israeli activities, and they see (things happening) unabated. There
are preparations for cancellation of civilian leave, not only these tests,
but also fueling and arming missiles. It's building up to a crescendo!"
-
- "I have not seen, and no one has convinced me, that
Iran is going beyond just enriching uranium for the purpose of medical
and other (nonmilitary) purposes."
-
- "I'm really concerned that some accident is going
to create another hostility."
-
- He worries most about Israeli recklessness, regardless
of whether Washington approves. Whether war winds target Iran isn't known.
Only the fullness of time will tell.
-
- Iraq - the Last Deception
-
- Robert Abele discussed it in his book titled, "Anatomy
of a Deception: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Decision to Invade
Iraq."
-
- Reconstructing public dialogue, he explained events ahead
of bombing, invading and occupying Iraq. No casus belli existed. Inventing
one followed. Alleged evidence was fabricated. The cradle of civilization
was destroyed.
-
- Abele discussed manipulating public opinion four ways
relating to:
-
- Washington's imperial ambitions;
-
- major media support, cheerleading US wars;
-
- public ignorance, lack of critical thinking, and indifference;
and
-
- violations of international law and ethical principles.
-
- All wars follow similar patterns based on lies, misinformation
and deception, including World Wars I and II.
-
- Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber's book, titled "Weapons
of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq" covered
similar ground, including how professional PR strategies, euphemisms, and
jargon manipulate public thinking.
-
- When evidence doesn't exist, it's invented. Later when
discovered untrue, it's too late. People are persuaded to think wars make
them safer. They never did and don't now. Wars beget more of them, benefitting
profiteers and duplicitous politicians only.
-
- James Bamford's book titled, "A Pretext for War:
9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies" discussed
destruction, detection and deception in three parts.
-
- Part three covered manipulative Washington and Israeli
duplicity used to justify attacking Iraq, oust Saddam, install a pro-US
puppet regime, benefit Israel by removing a rival, and change the Middle
East map.
-
- September 11, the war on terror, WMDs, mushroom shaped
cloud hysteria, manipulated intelligence, the Al Qaeda connection, and
more hyped nonexistent threats to generate fear and enlist public support.
-
- Patterns repeat in all wars. Only aggressors, targets,
and language change. Aims and tactics are consistent. Death, destruction
and human misery follow.
-
- Definition of WMDs
-
- Weapons of mass destructions (WMDs) include chemical,
biological and radiological devices capable of causing widespread death
and destruction.
-
- Wikipedia defines them as weapons able to "kill
and bring significant harm to a large number of humans (and other life
forms) and/or cause great damage to man-made structures (e.g. buildings),
natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere in general."
-
- "The scope and application of the term has evolved
and been disputed, often signifying more politically than technically."
-
- WMDs - Pretext for Attacking Iraq
-
- Iraq had no nuclear weapons. After Operation Desert Storm,
UNSCOM inspectors destroyed its chemical and biological ones. In June 1999,
chief weapons inspector Scott Ritter told an interviewer:
-
- "When you ask the question, 'Does Iraq possess militarily
viable biological or chemical weapons?' the answer is no! It is a resounding
NO."
-
- "Can Iraq produce today chemical weapons on a meaningful
scale? No! Can Iraq produce biological weapons on a meaningful scale? No!
Ballistic missiles? No! It has 'no' access across the board."
-
- "So from a qualitative standpoint, Iraq has been
disarmed. Iraq today possesses no meaningful weapons of mass destruction
capability."
-
- Nonetheless, Bush administration officials, Ahmed Chalabi,
other duplicitous Iraqis, fake intelligence sources, paid-to-lie experts,
PR manipulators, and media scoundrels like New York Times writer Judith
Miller falsely claimed Saddam maintained covert WMD stockpiles.
-
- Britain's Dodgy Dossier cooked the books to fit Bush
administration policy to attack, invade and occupy Iraq without cause,
using fake intelligence.
-
- Later evidence confirmed no WMD threat when it was too
late to matter. Pre-war claims were false. Mushroom shaped cloud threats
were bogus. Mobile biological weapons production was nonexistent.
-
- Documents alleging Saddam bought Niger yellowcake uranium
power were forged. He used aluminum tubes for artillery shells, not nuclear
weapons. No evidence proved uranium centrifuge designs, development or
production.
-
- Nonetheless, lies justified lawless aggression against
a nonbelligerent country posing no threat. Neither was Afghanistan, Libya,
other post-WW II targets, and Iran.
-
- Iran hasn't attacked another country in over 200 years.
It's been targeted numerous times. America today covets its oil and gas
resources. It wants its current regime replaced by another it controls.
Bogusly calling Iran an existential threat, Israel wants a regional rival
eliminated.
-
- Whether or not war's planned isn't known. Discounting
it ignores a threat too serious to ignore. Haaretz military affairs writer
Amos Harel believes sanctions, not conflict, is likely, saying:
-
- "The vast majority of the information in (IAEA's)
report has been in the hands of Western intelligence agencies for a relatively
long time."
-
- America's National Intelligence Estimate refuted claims
about an alleged nuclear weapons program and Iranian threat. Stiffer sanctions,
not war, may follow Amano's report, Harel believes. Israel wants them to
be "paralyzing, delivering a deadly blow to the Iranian banking system
as well as to the country's oil industry."
-
- Whether China, Russia and other nations will agree is
doubtful. Washington pressure may impose them anyway.
-
- National Journal writer Marc Ambinder headlined, "White
House: IAEA Report Doesn't Change Assessment of Iran's Nuclear Ambitions,"
saying:
-
- An unnamed senior administration official told reporters
on a conference call that:
-
- "The IAEA does not assert that Iran has resumed
a full scale nuclear weapons program nor does it have a program about how
advanced the programs really are."
-
- IAEA, however, claims Iran carried "out activities
relevant to the development of a nuclear device" with no evidence
proving it.
-
- The Washington Post headlined, "Obama administration
readies new Iran sanctions in light of UN report on Tehran's nuclear aims,"
saying:
-
- IAEA's report wasn't "a game-changer." Nonetheless,
unilateral sanctions and others with international partners are planned.
Efforts to isolate Iran and harm its economy will intensify. War perhaps
will follow.
-
- On and off threats persisted for years. Current rhetoric
is more shrill than earlier. Whether or not replicating Libya is planned
isn't known. Iran represents a much greater prize.
-
- In 2010, it had the world's third largest proved oil
reserves after Saudi Arabia and Canada. Libya has less than a third as
much. After Russia, Iran has the second largest gas reserves. Washington
covets control to deny enemies and rivals free access.
-
- On Russia Today (RT.com), former CIA officer Philip Giraldi
discounted IAEA's report, saying:
-
- "I would be very skeptical about this report that
is coming out of the International Atomic Energy because the IAEA doesn't
really have any intelligence capabilities of its own. It is relying on
reports that are coming from other people. I would rather suspect these
reports are coming from the US and Israel."
-
- "You may have a piece of evidence of some kind,
but that piece of evidence is subject to your interpretation. When they
saw aerial photographs in Iraq showing certain things, they interpreted
those photographs to mean something which was not correct."
-
- Iran Answers Critical Questions
-
- Press TV said Iran's IAEA envoy Ali-Asghar Soltanieh
offered Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) members "critical information about
Iran's nuclear program" to cool current hysteria following Amano's
report.
-
- Attending an extraordinary NAM session, he answered "20
critical questions" and related issues.
-
- Question 1: After 4,000 inspection days, has IAEA detected
"even one gram of uranium being diverted for military purposes?"
-
- No!
-
- Question 2: Has IAEA found any nuclear activities and
materials used for military activities?
-
- No!
-
- Question 3: "Was Iran ethically obliged to declare
Natanz enrichment facility before 2003?"
-
- No, given nothing introduced there until 2003!
-
- Question 4: "Was Iran legally obliged to declare"
Arak's (IR40) heavy water research reactor before 2003?
-
- No!
-
- Question 5: Under the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement
to report Arak's heavy water production before 2003, was Iran obliged to
do so for the IAEA?
-
- No!
-
- Question 6: Was Iran legally obliged until 2003 "to
declare uranium conversion Facilities (UDF)?"
-
- No!
-
- Question 7: Was Iran legally obliged "to declare
uranium mines including Gachin and Saghand....?"
-
- No!
-
- Question 8: Did IAEA inspections detect any nuclear material
or activity used as part of a nuclear weapons program?
-
- No!
-
- Question 9: Did IAEA's Action Plan announce "no
other issue in addition to what was listed in 2007?"
-
- Yes!
-
- Question 10: Was IAEA obliged to submit "Alleged
Studies" documents to Iran?
-
- Yes!
-
- Question 11: Did IAEA fulfill its obligations regarding
submitting alleged evidence?
-
- No!
-
- Question 12: Did IAEA confirm its "Alleged Studies"
authenticity?
-
- No!
-
- Question 13: What was Iran's INFOSIRC/711 obligation?
-
- Per Paragraph III, it was to study the document and report
its evaluation to IAEA.
-
- Question 14: Was Iran obliged to hold meetings, interviews
or allow sampling regarding the "Alleged Studies?"
-
- No!
-
- Question 15: Did Iran implement the Additional Protocol?
-
- Yes!
-
- Question 16: Did Iran implement the Subsidiary Arrangement
of the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement Modified Code 3.1?
-
- Yes!
-
- Question 17: When and why did Iran halt its voluntary
implementation of the Additional Protocol and Modified Code 3.1?
-
- Voluntary implementation stopped after two and a half
years because Iran's technical nuclear case was unfairly referred to the
Security Council in 2006.
-
- Question 18: Have all Iranian nuclear materials been
measured and remain supervised to assure safe, peaceful operations?
-
- Yes!
-
- Question 19: Did Iran cooperate with unannounced inspections?
-
- Yes, including on two hours notice!
-
- Question 20: "Why does Iran deem" the Board
of Governors and Security Council illegal?
-
- Because its legal nuclear program was politicized. Hostile
countries manipulated the IAEA, turning the agency into a US-dominated
Security Council watchdog to deprive Iran and other developing countries
"of their 'absolute right' to use peaceful nuclear energy as stipulated
in the IAEA Statute."
-
- Other relevant questions include why nuclear programs
of other countries aren't as closely scrutinized as Iran's?
-
- Why aren't nuclear armed and dangerous nations like America
and Israel inspected?
-
- Why haven't nuclear armed Israel, India and Pakistan
been sanctioned for not signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
-
- Why wasn't Iran given credit for signing and abiding
by its provisions?
-
- Why does IAEA let America, Israel and other Western allies
bully Iran unfairly?
-
- Why does IAEA under Amano do it?
-
- Why isn't Iran's peaceful nuclear program accepted as
fact when no evidence suggests otherwise?
-
- Why are secret US and Israeli nuclear weapons development,
production, and testing unmentioned and unmonitored?
-
- Why doesn't IAEA fulfill its peaceful nuclear energy
use mandate unpoliticized?
-
- Under Amano, it's a Washington controlled tool. As a
result, Iran's unfairly targeted while real nuclear outlaws freely terrorize
other nations lawlessly!
-
- Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
-
- Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and
listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive
Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central
time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy
listening.
-
- http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
|
