“Israel is demanding that its allies set Iran’s complete surrender of its stockpile of uranium enriched to 20 percent as one of the goals of the nuclear talks scheduled for mid-April. Citing 2012 as the “year to stop Iran,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Wednesday that he has held discussions with American and European officials in recent weeks with the goal of convincing them to set clear goals for the planned talks with Iran. The talks are scheduled to begin on April 13 between Iran and representatives of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany, known as P5+1. Disagreements still exist regarding the venue although Istanbul currently appears to be acceptable to all sides. Barak revealed what Israel’s goals are for the talks: 1) transfer of all uranium enriched to 20 percent – approximately 120 kg. – out of Iran to a third party country; 2) the transfer of the majority of the 5 tons of uranium enriched to 3.5% out of Iran, leaving just enough needed for energy purposes; 3) the closure of the Fordow enrichment facility, buried under a mountain near the city of Qom; 4) the transfer of fuel rods from a third party country to Iran for the purpose of activating the Tehran Research Reactor………….”
I am almost certain that if these Likud fools get their way, if the West follows their advice, the Iranians will end up with nuclear weapons sometime within the next few years. Even if, as they claim, they have no intention to do so now (they probably mean it for now). But I suspect the Iranian nuclear program has nothing to do with all this noise. If the Iranian mullahs were Italians, of the more down to earth kind, they probably would respond: vaffanculo (in Google-ese Eyetalian), or the equivalent of it. Cheers
mhg
“First, Iran was first accused of developing a nuclear weapon in 1982, when it was predicted to have a deliverable weapon by 1984. In 1984 Jane’s Defence Weekly announced that Iran would have a bomb by 1986. This pattern has been repeated many times since, until 2009 when the ‘bomb-in-two-years’ story flashed across everyone’s news screens again. The news narrative following the latest (8 Nov 2011) IAEA report reflected again this repeated accusation. However, the report itself in effect concurred with the USA’s 2007 and 2010 combined intel reports (NIEs), that the Iranians gave up their fledgling weaponisation programme in 2003. Second, the 8 November IAEA report referred to some additional concerns arising from new information about nuclear weapons development at the site where Iran develops its conventional longer range missiles – Parchin, a site visited by IAEA inspectors a number of times. This information (since ridiculed by US experts) was said to have originated from a laptop obtained by the IAEA via Israel – a laptop that was not available for independent verification………….…”
So, the IAEA under Yukiya Amano is apparently depending on Israel to provide its “reliable” information about Iran’s nuclear intentions. This seems either stupid or just willful, probably a combination of both. The fox guarding the hen-house. As I suggested in my earlier post, why not have the IAEA also rely on the Saudi grand mufti Al Al as a source of nuclear intelligence? If Mr. Amano is, as reported, eager to please the powerful West, then as a corollary he ought to be eager to please the Wahhabi moneybags. Cheers
mhg
“Continuing the release of the US Stratfor research site’s e-mails, Wikileaks Wednesday, March 28 issued a batch of mails which indicated that Binyamin Netanyahu may have been a source of the site’s Vice President for intelligence Fred Burton (a former Deputy Chief of the Department of State’s counterterrorism division for the Diplomatic Security) from at least May 2007 up until 2010 after he became Prime Minister of Israel. The Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem has not commented on the publication. According to one e-mail from Burton, Netanyahu is said to have revealed in Dec. 2009 that “Iran has two nukes on missiles ready to go.” Burton went on to report that the White House (Barack Obama) was “doing everything possible to block Israel’s next steps. He added the view that “Israel will go it alone. Israeli subs are off Iran’s coast.” In answer to a question, Burton replied:“My source is bb (eyes only).”…………….”
If this report that originated through Wikileaks is true, it confirms many suspicions about the role of Israeli intelligence regarding the Iranian nuclear program. At this rate, why not rely on the Saudi grand mufti as a source of intelligence? He may be as reliable as Netanyahu about the Iranian nuclear program (but not an iota more reliable). The Salafi Mufti also has as much interest and eagerness for an Israeli or American (or both) attack on Iran as the best Likudnik. Cheers
mhg
“The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the nuclear watchdog at the heart of the growing Iranian crisis, has been accused by several former senior officials of pro-western bias, over-reliance on unverified intelligence and of sidelining sceptics. In November, it published an unprecedented volume of intelligence pointing towards past Iranian work on developing a nuclear weapon, deeming it credible. However, some former IAEA officials are saying that the agency has gone too far. Robert Kelley, a former US weapons scientists who ran the IAEA action team on Iraq at the time of the US-led invasion, said there were worrying parallels between the west’s mistakes over Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction then and the IAEA’s assessment of Iran now. “Amano is falling into the Cheney trap….”……… The acrid taste left by the election was heightened by the US diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks which revealed Amano’s assiduous courting of American support. In an October 2009 cable, the US charge d’affaires, Geoffrey Pyatt, wrote: “Amano reminded [the] ambassador on several occasions that he would need to make concessions to the G-77 [the developing countries group], which correctly required him to be fair-minded and independent, but that he was solidly in the US court on every key strategic decision, from high-level personnel appointments to the handling of Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program.”………..”
To me it has always sounded like déjà vu all over again (as the baseball man said). Like the buildup to the Iraq war (that I supported). Domestic American right-wing pressure, Israeli pressure, Arab princes applying pressure, shadowy exiles making wild claims, terrible intelligence (George Tenet’s “slam dunk), even more terrible analysis and interpretation of the terrible intelligence. It is so similar, almost a breathtaking repeat of the exact same steps. Then the years of demonization and Hitler-izing the prospective enemy. It is amazing how most people are not recalling that earlier deception of 2002-2003. Cheers
mhg
“A U.S. non-proliferation expert said on Tuesday he has identified a building at the Parchin military site in Iran suspected of containing, currently or previously, a high-explosive test chamber the U.N. nuclear watchdog wants to visit. David Albright, founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, said he studied commercial satellite imagery and found a building located on a relatively small and isolated compound at Parchin that fit a description in the November 2011 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report. The building has its own perimeter security wall or fencing and there is a berm between the building and a neighboring building, Albright said in a report. The compound is located more than four kilometers away from high-explosive related facilities at Parchin which the IAEA visited in 2005, Albright’s report said………..” Cheers
mhg
“Even as the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog said in a new report Friday that Iran had accelerated its uranium enrichment program, American intelligence analysts continue to believe that there is no hard evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear bomb. Recent assessments by American spy agencies are broadly consistent with a 2007 intelligence finding that concluded that Iran had abandoned its nuclear weapons program years earlier, according to current and former American officials. The officials said that assessment was largely reaffirmed in a 2010 National Intelligence Estimate, and that it remains the consensus view of America’s 16 intelligence agencies. ……..At the center of the debate is the murky question of the ultimate ambitions of the leaders in Tehran………..” It is possible that the Iranians don’t like Western “experts” poking around in their facilities: after all, when was the last time the French or British allowed some Iranian inspectors to poke around in their facilities? So there is no evidence, no smoking gun, that the mullahs are building a bomb. No Dick Cheney to swear that Saddam had a beer with Bin Laden as they plotted 9/11. Only a judge (George Daniels) in New York or was it DC who seems to believe that Ali Khamenei plotted 9/11 with Bin Laden over a pitcher of Mojito (Islamic no-mojo style). But it all helps in the West Bank, as the settlements keep expanding and the prospect of two states dims into a distant future. Odd how Western officials and media, especially in the USA, assaulted the IAEA under Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei when they cast doubts about Bush and Cheney and WMD in Iraq, yet they hang onto every word of it about Iran.So what has changed other than the new man doing their bidding? Cheers
mhg
“As U.S. and Israeli officials talk publicly about the prospect of a military strike against Iran’s nuclear program, one fact is often overlooked: U.S. intelligence agencies don’t believe Iran is actively trying to build an atomic bomb. A highly classified U.S. intelligence assessment circulated to policymakers early last year largely affirms that view, originally made in 2007. Both reports, known as national intelligence estimates, conclude that Tehran halted efforts to develop and build a nuclear warhead in 2003. The most recent report, which represents the consensus of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, indicates that Iran is pursuing research that could put it in a position to build a weapon, but that it has not sought to do so………. An IAEA report in November cited “serious concerns” about “possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program,” but did not reach hard conclusions. Another IAEA report is imminent. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, insisted Wednesday that Tehran had no intention of producing nuclear weapons. In remarks broadcast on state television, he said that “owning a nuclear weapon is a big sin.”……….”
Ayatollah Khamenei just called nuclear countries sinners. Which confirms what I have been writing here, and what others have written: that they may acquire the technology but they will not actually produce a nuclear bomb. The mullahs don’t like sinning, I think. That is not to say there are no sections of the diverse Iranian regime that would like to sin, to develop nuclear weapons. In the end it is Ali Khamenei who is supposed to have the final say, provided that he knows exactly what is going on. I mean he can be calling nuclear weapons a sin, but some branch of his government may be tempted to try a bit of sinning (the flesh is weak after all). All this is contrary to all the whining by Israeli officials and Saudi princes, egging the United States toward another futile war in our region. (The Israelis don’t really want a war, they just want to divert attention away from the West bank and their expanding settlements. The Saudi princes and their Salafi proxies, on the other hand, would love a war fought by Americans, or any other ‘heathens’, on their behalf). Cheers
mhg
“Yet another deadline passed late last month in the Israeli-Palestinian “peace process,” this time over the initial exchange of proposals on border and security issues. Palestinian negotiators were (and remain) under pressure on a number of fronts. The Quartet still holds to a resumption of talks under the current guise and a recent visit from Ban Ki-Moon called for “a gesture of goodwill by both sides” in order to create a positive atmosphere for continuing negotiations……….”
This looks like just a way to keep Tony Blair doing something other than making a lot of money serving various Middle East potentates and Central Asian petroleum dictators. He is right here: it is time for Tony should to form a new quartet, a barbershop Quartet of Persian Gulf potentates and Central Asian dictators. (I don’t think Tony is on the payroll of J P Morgan anymore; that was during ‘the deal’ with Qaddafi). Then he, and they, can sing their hearts out away from the media. Then we won’t have to see his deceptive sanctimonious face and his asinine statements and platitudes about world affairs. Moony at the UNshould declare the Quarter dead and done with because in fact it is deader than a doornail. Cheers
mhg
BFF
Watched the UN Security Council “debate” on the Syria resolution. A lot of hypocrisy and grandstanding on both sides:
No doubt the Syrian regime is killing many people, most likely not as many as the “opposition” claims and reporters like Anderson Cooper immediately accept and repeat. The number of 260 killed for today is most likely exaggerated.
(There I just said it: the Syrian opposition lies as the regime lies; no thunder, no lightening has struck me yet. Not yet).
First hypocrisy prize goes to the French ambassador. He waxed nostalgic and sad and shocked about the Hama massacre some thirty years ago, about those responsible. A reporter asked the Frenchy why one of the Assads responsible for Hama massacre 1980(1?) has been living free in France even as he talked bout it. His stupid response: “We are a hospitable country”, and a quick exit.
Second hypocrisy prize goes to U.S. ambassador Susan Rice, who said with a straight face that the United States government stands with the people of Syria as they seek freedom and democracy. The same U .S. administration that supports the repression in Bahrain and supplies the regime with tear gas and guns and armored vehicles for crowd control. She did not comment on the Saudi regime, which is as repressive, and would kill as many people if need be to stay in power.
Third hypocrisy prize goes to the British ambassador waxing indignant about repression in Syria and countries that enable it. Even while his own government has been supporting repression and killings and arrests by the Bahrain regime.
The Mother of all Hypocrisy prizes goes to the Arab League, which represents some of the most despotic regressive corrupt regimes on earth. Yet it goes to the UN with a resolution to deal only with the repression in Syria: not in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, etc, none of whose people chooses its regime. The Syrian ambassador made a silly remark about Saudi women not being allowed to attend football (soccer) games while their regime talks about human rights. He was right on that point.
One American academic suggested that maybe now (after the Russian and Chinese vetoes) the Arab League should think of intervening a la NATO in Kosovo. I tweeted my favorite retort: that the Arab League, especially on the military side, can’t organize a piss-up in a brewery (as some Americans would say) let alone a military campaign. Cheers
mhg
“The head of Hezbollah’s Shura Council Sheikh Mohammad Yazbek said over the weekend that U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, who is scheduled to arrive in Lebanon Friday, is not welcome.“The visit of United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to Beirut is not welcome, neither is the phony [U.N. Special Envoy Terje Roed] Larsen or the messenger of evil [Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs] Jeffrey Feltman,” Yazbek was quoted by local media as saying. Yazbeck accused Larsen, who is tasked with overseeing the implementation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, of being biased toward Israel. UNSCR 1559 was adopted in 2004 and calls for the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon and the disarmament of Hezbollah. The latter has defended its arms as the only means to fend off Israeli aggression…………”
Hezbollah
and Jeffrey Feltman are old pals, they go way back to the good old days when Mr. Feltman was US ambassador to Beirut. The Lebanese opposition at the time claimed he was the true leader of the March 14 right-wing movement. They nearly claim that he led the March 14 and the old Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir and the Saudi ambassador in daily prayers for an Israeli victory in the summer war of 2006. They also strongly suspect that many Arab oligarchs joined that prayer, via teleconferencing or Skype. I fully agree with this last assessment: the princes were doing their rain dance, in vain, for a right outcome that war.
Lebanese-American relations have been in a sort of twilight zone for some years. For years U.S. secretary of state Clinton reportedly has not met with her Lebanese counterparts, the successive foreign ministers, even when she visited Lebanon. The foreign minister has been from the Hezbollah bloc. This has led to an interesting diplomatic dance by Hillary Clinton to meet some Lebanese leaders but not their foreign minister, nor their most important leader (you know who that is, don’t you?).
I suppose
this Lebanese opposition to the visits by these foreign dignitaries and international bureaucrats is somewhat fair. After all Hassan Nasrallah is probably not welcome in Washington (DC), and I don’t just mean at the AIPAC or its offshoot Washington Institute for Near East Policy. I doubt that Mr. Nasrallah is welcome at the UN either. Besides, all these gentlemen no doubt wish that the current Lebanese government would just vanish and be replaced with the pliable Saudi regime of Saad Hariri and his sidekick Fouad Saniora. They no doubt also wish that Hassan Nasrallah would also vanish, but then where would he go? Dearborn? Cheers
mhg
BFF 
Rattlesnake Ridge 
BFF