Evidence of Iran's nuclear-weapons program still elusive
If you listen to White House officials, Iran's nuclear-weapons program is already a reality. There's no hesitation on the rhetoric -- the program, top administration officials say, is an unfortunate reality that demands our immediate attention. As Dick Cheney recently put it, "Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions. We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon."
With this in mind, it's probably worth taking a moment, now and again, to point out that there's no conclusive evidence that such a program actually exists.
Despite President Bush's claims that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons that could trigger "World War III," experts in and out of government say there's no conclusive evidence that Tehran has an active nuclear-weapons program.
Even his own administration appears divided about the immediacy of the threat. While Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney speak of an Iranian weapons program as a fact, Bush's point man on Iran, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, has attempted to ratchet down the rhetoric. [...]
If conclusive proof exists ... Bush hasn't revealed it. Nor have four years of IAEA inspections.
Something to keep in mind the next time we hear bluster from the White House.
No Nukes for anyone .What a curse on mankind !
Ah, yes -- the old "we'll-all-die-in-a-mushroom-cloud-if-we-don't-act-NOW" line...
When have we heard that claim before, I wonder...? Did it prove to be true? Ummmm, come to think of it...no.
You know what they say...
FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU -- FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME.
This should be the primary talking point for anyone attempting to draw a parallel between Bush's run up to war in Iraq to the current rhetoric about Iran. The certitude that Iran is making nukes (though they may be) despite actual evidence is just too much like the WMD that they knew without a doubt were there.
It's just like deja vu all over again.
But, but Iran has so much of our oil. So they must be doing something sneaky. Right?
We know where they are... north south east and west of teharian...
wmd! wmd! wmd!
that didnt work out so well....
We all know that this administration has consistently lied to us.
We know curveball was a liar, and we have seen it on the 60 Mins.
This administration knew curveball was a liar too, but they still went to UN and lied to the world about dangers of WMD.
We know the neo con openly advocate 'deception', and lie as a matter of routine.
We know neo con and Israel Lobby are pushing for this war with Iran.
We know Iran has no military nuclear programme.
We know we cannot trust the media, as we know about Judy will screw for a story Miller, lied, and knowingly lied about the Iraq WMD.
We know all of this, and do they think we will fall for their lies again?
We know Iran is no threat to US
We know Iran has not gone to war or transgressed against another nation for the last four hundred and fifty years.
We know Iran is a net importer of petroleum products.
We know Iran is no threat to any country, including Israel, as Z. Livini Israeli Foreign Minister has gone on record; 'a nuclear Iran poses no threat to Israel'.
We know Israel has four hundred nuclear bombs, including H bombs.'
All this we know, will we be made fools out of again?
Meanwhile, Pakistan, a country with nuclear weapons and radical extremists, is busily falling apart..............
I do believe that the juggernaut that neo-con/repug party was seems to be losing momentum... it seems that more people are seeing through the BS this administration and their underlings dole out....hopefully, they will leave DC all nice and quiet-like after they get their asses handed to 'em next election...if they don't we will have to show them the door. With a boot to their backsides!
Maybe "curveball" has some new info. Anybody see the story on him on 60 Minutes last night?
It won't matter to Bush/Cheney...you think they are concerned with facts?..As Darth Vader once said"full steam ahead"..Any way Bush/cheney will still be in power '09..so it really doesn't matter...we've handed them the congress and supreme court..and the justice dept..they are right now taking notes and following carefully how things are going in Pakistan..so why worry?..everyone get ready for a dictatorship...
But, George W. Bush has kept America safe, if you exclude the 9/11 attacks, the unprosecuted anthrax serial murders, the hundreds of US troops killed in Afghanistan and the thousands of US troops killed in Iraq.
Besides that he's kept us safe.
-GSD
As if we couldn't see from orbit whether they are building the kind of facility used to make bombs-with-a-capital-"B"...just like we had the same capability plus aerial recon over "Eye-rack". No 'bugs n' gas' facilities detected from orbit or recce, there, either. "Fool me twice" indeed...
Dick and Donald are the snowflake bullies.
GSD @ 12:
You forgot to Thank God for Bush.
Its not about fooling us. We're just the 'people' we have no authority here. The only people who could possibly help, indeed the people our founders intended to help us in just these kind of circumstances by guaranteeing their freedom are the press and as we've seen they are useless. Perhaps if our country were threatened by John Edward's hair, or say Britney's latest personal problems we could all relax knowing the situation is well in hand. However given the blatant cowardice of the MSM to confront the administration we're all screwed.
An analogy if I may:
The Bush admin is Shaquille O'Neal
Iran is the Hoop
MSM is the guy who mops the sweat off the court to make sure Shaq doesn't slip as he drives to the hoop.
Well, if it was only the Administration saying this, then you'd be right...unfortunately, people like Gen. Wesley Clark and Valerie P. Wilson are clearly saying the same thing...on Bill Maher's show, for instance, that Iran is a malevolent country seeking to build a nuclear weapon. They are hardly neo-con spokesmen, and I do believe them. Sorry folks, but Iran is not our friend...
of course there's no evidence...iran is not trying to make nucular bombs. everyone who isn't a moron knows it.
lol wesley clark is just a different flavor of bush/cheney...with a little more tact...
andrew @ 17:
Thanks for the revelation. Now about the invasion, are you signed up to go?
yeah iran is such a horrible threat....what was the last country they invaded? what govt have they overthrown? so many uneducated followers out there...
#16
"An analogy if I may:
The Bush admin is Shaquille O’Neal
Iran is the Hoop
MSM is the guy who mops the sweat off the court to make sure Shaq doesn’t slip as he drives to the hoop."
I like your analogy Harry but might I suggest that the Bush Admin is some third rate college ball player who thinks he is Shaq.
a lie repeated often enough takes on a life and a truth of its own.
Bollox in comment number eight, said exactly what I was thinking. With what is going on in Pakistan right now, this whole spooky stuff about Iran should be pushed to the back burner and left alone.
A lady called in to c-span this morning and said something that makes a lot of sense if it's true. She said that cheney tried to get Musharraf to support an attack by the US on Iran. Musharraf refused, so the bush administration was going to try to get rid of him. As a result, Musharraf has made his most recent move. Like I said, I don't know if this is all true, but it makes more sense than anything else I've heard.
Liar! Liar! Pants on Fire!!!!!
Hmmm, i wonder why Iran hates us...
Could it possibly be the Coup we orchestrated in 1953? That was the one where we killed Mohammed Mossaddeq who was democratically elected and then nationalized the oil industry so the people of Iran would benefit from the oil beneath their feet. We replaced him with Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi who Secret Police Force disapeared and tortured his fellow citizens with. He was, of course considered to be a major US ally, much like Musharraf is today and we sent him tanks and jets and lots of other toys to play with. All of that could not keep him from being overthrown.
This schtick ain't new. For nearly 30 years a dire threat from the Soviet Union was hyped mercilessly. JFK campaigned on the "missile" gap...which followed the "bomber" gap...only we had something like 160 missiles at the time, while the evil Russians had exactly FOUR...and those were all parked out in the open ready to be destroyed.
My point is that there is a longer, deeper story here. It is not just the bunk intelligence that led to Iraq. It is a very long line of bunk intelligence that has directed the very soul and direction of this nation for so long that it has become normal. Intelligence is murky, and what becomes public of it is often misleading. But, we do know that it has been regularly cooked to serve a purpose.
That men like Clark, and women like Clinton, are harping on Iran only shows where their true motives are. Its the national security state. It needs shadowy threats, preferably existential threats, to keep churning along in a constant state of Imperial war making. Most politicians have no desire to stop it, because it is the engine that keeps them running. (i know, i bad mouthed a Clinton, but take a look at the defense industry contributions she's gathered up...far more than anyone else)
and the last time this administration let factual evidence stand in the way of their preconceived plans was....? exactly. never. but will the public, congress and msm call them out before they take the drumbeat to war too far? i never thought the answer to that question would be in such great doubt.
Well, if it was only the Administration saying this, then you’d be right…unfortunately, people like Gen. Wesley Clark and Valerie P. Wilson are clearly saying the same thing…on Bill Maher’s show, for instance, that Iran is a malevolent country seeking to build a nuclear weapon. They are hardly neo-con spokesmen, and I do believe them. Sorry folks, but Iran is not our friend. -- Andrew
********************
With all due respect, seeking a nuclear weapon is not the same as having a nuclear weapon -- I know this, you know this, and anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows this. It's Bush and Cheney who are trying to convince you that the two are one and the same. Nobody ever said that Iran was our friend -- anybody else remember the hostages? -- but believe it or not, they may actually have some legitimate reasons for not being our friend (do a Google search for the phrase "Operation Condor" or the name "Mossadegh" and perhaps you'll begin to see why). Iran may not be our friend -- but this does not automatically mean that they are the imminent threat that Bush and Cheney would have us believe that they are, either. The devil is in the details, fella. If in fact Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon, the critical piece in the puzzle is how far off they are from achieving that goal. Some of those who are in a position to know claim that they may be at least ten years or more away. Does that sound like cause for immediate intervention to you? And if you're worried about them getting the technology from other sources...let's talk about Pakistan, which supposedly has leaked information to other countries in the past concerning nuclear weapons technology. For that matter, if the Bush administration was so concerned about Iranians building nuclear weapons, why is that Valerie Plame's career at the CIA was ruined when that was reportedly what she was investigating? Perhaps it wasn't retribution against her husband at all -- perhaps it was because she had information which conflicted with what the administration wants us to believe. Impossible? I don't think so -- frankly, I wouldn't put anything past this administration anymore.
The real problem is that the administration has put us in something of a Catch-22. Some argument can perhaps be made for the idea that we can't afford not to look into this (although the IAEA supposedly already has and found nothing, and when have we heard that before?) -- but an equal if not even greater argument can be made for the fact that we can't afford to, not unless we want to irretrievably sink our reputation with the rest of the world to the very bottom of the tank. Let's say that we go forward and attack Iran as Bush wants us to do -- only to find out that he was wrong and/or lying, again. As I said before -- fool me twice...
It would be a good time for an "Inconveinient Truth" movie to come out about the History of the Middle East and the Cold War. This is just an extension of the power grab that has been going on since the end of World War II but has its roots in European Colonialism from three hundred years ago and the Crusades.
Ok, it would be a long movie.
andrew @ 17:
The difference is the same as the one in Iraq. Many people thought Saddam had WMD's but the Administration claimed it knew it as a fact
Same here. It's not unreasonable to think Iran may want a nuclear weapon program, If I were a country with brown non-christians in it and I shared a globe with America, I'd want nukes too. But the admin treats this supposition as fact. That the admin doesn't allow any leeway in its thinking on this issue is the clue you need to know they plan to attack.
j swift @ 22:
Yes thank you, you are correct, however I would modify that you're third rate collage player is at least the size of Shaq who lumbers across the court and demands everyone's attention merely due to his size despite lack of skill at something so basice like, oh say, free throws. :)
I always wondered how the imbedded reporters during the Iraq invasion managed to be in the right place at the right time when their units began to move. There were some big name reporters who were right there when it all started. How much did they know about the invasion in advance?
Which leads me to wonder if members of the media will get a heads up before we attack Iran. Will a CNN or Fox News reporter magically appear on the deck of an aircraft carrier whose aircraft are flying missions over Iran? For the Bush Administration, invasions are media events.
Stephanie Miller played Michael Savage's rant about wanting to bomb Iran. Neocon rabies is always in fashion in sister-diddling circles
andrew @ 17:
We can't invade countries just because they aren't our friends, and "seeking to" is not the same thing as "actually building".
Did you every notice that every time the president talks about war with Iran the oil price goes up. More money in the pockets of Bush & Cheny. They do not want the talk of war to stop the price of oil may go down to seventy dollars a barrel. They would be losing money and there companies would not like that
Proof is elusive because it doesn't exist. The pro-war lobby should just level with us and say they want to kill a large amount of Iranians because they are racist against them.
You'll find Iran's nukes right where Iraq's were, crammed in Bush's fevered brain.
Too bad they're not jammed up his other end, that would solve a big problem.
"AIPAC is pushing us to war with Iran for Israel." - a statement made by Eric Alterman.
Gosh, it's almost as if the Iran WMD scare is a crock of shit or something, isn't it!
So we're 'doing nothing' about Pakistan (Condi taking time out of a trip to Israel to make a comment about 'returning to democracy' doesn't amount to much), but we're wetting ourselves for the second time about a country that does not have nuclear weapons.
We're not even sure they have a program, and George Waaaaaah Bush has established that we're seeking to prevent the [i]knowledge[/i] from reaching their hands.
Pakistan has nukes NOW. Whether Musharraf fumbles, or Bhutto sails in to play the voice of reason and saves the day, possession of those weapons is going to be a critical part of any outcome.
Bush's policy of ignoring al-Qaeda - the [i]real[/i] al-Qaeda, not some convenient scapegoat to justify a disastrous foreign policy after the fact - is now reaping serious consequences.
But we all know how Bush handles consequences - he blames someone else and blathers about being vindicated by history.
Man, do I ever hate filthy repugs.
Wasn't this tried tactic used to invade, tried to destroy and occupy Iraq? Wasn't Inspector Blitz told to hurry up and find a hint of a nuke or hurry up and leave Iraq so chimpy could get it on? darth (this fool actually believes referring to him as "darth" is a good thing. The old white crowdy stupid arrogant old batfart) is a liar, a danger to those who believe him, a fascist, a racist, a top notched hypocrite, murder, ugly and a hitler wannabe.
Let another attack happen under chimpy's watch, on our precious soil. There will be a revolt unlike no other from the people. After all what do we have to lose?
andrew @ 17:
And when was the last time they gathered evidence for the US? A long time ago.
Also they may not be our friend but they aren't the threat you are scared of either.
Iz @ 36:
Yeah, I noticed that too.
It's all a game to them. Our lives are a game to these assholes.
Decider Musharraf.
Bluestocking @ 2:
or in the words of our old pal GW "Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again"
what's the use?
Sounds like a good time to employ the services of a capable, experienced CIA analyst to help sort this mess out ... oh ... yeah ... they already outed her.
Earthlings, your time on this planet is coming to a close.
xoites defends Constitution @ 30:
... and a heartbreaking one.
"You’ll find Iran’s nukes right where Iraq’s were, crammed in Bush’s fevered brain.
Too bad they’re not jammed up his other end, that would solve a big problem."
preacher bob: they would not fit in that end simply because that is where his head has always been and there are also so many repube apologist with their puckered up lips standing in line to suck up to and kiss the same area.
if anyone is going to start WWIII it's the fucking delusional bush and cheney.
they are the terrorists we should really be concerned with. they have lied
continually from the start of their illegally gotten positions as pres/vp.
if they were not criminals and terrorists, then this administration would not
have kept EVERYTHING SECRET. they have violated the law and the Constitution
from the very first day they stole the whitehouse. both bush and cheney should
be IMPEACHED NOW.......!!!!!!!!!!!!
The evidence is "still elusive", which insinuates that it's there, we just haven't found it yet.
How 'bout telling the truth.
There is no evidence of any evidence. "Nothing" cannot be elusive, because it doesn't exist.
Comprende'?
Describing something that does not exist as "elusive" seems rather strange to me. But I see now that Dimples (and probably others?) have already pointed out that obvious inaccuracy in the post title.
Anyone remember how this started?
Iran said they wanted Nuclear Energy. Ya know, for power.
"What?" said the A.P.? "Your declaring yourself a nuclear power?"
"No, we want Nuclear power for our homes" -Iran
"Your a nuclear power building nukes! I'm gonna tell everyone!"- A.P.
"Oh shit, don't send us back to the stone age... AGAIN..." -Iran
Don't want to watch the deaths of more innocents.
Do Not Want.
Nobody can ever trust the Reslugs again after they lied about everything to go to war in Iraq just for oil.
Bush has spent his credibility. I wouldn't believe him if he flew me over in Air Force One and showed their nuclear weapons plant to me. Sad. Any elected official so naive as to buy into Bush's fear-mongering won't get my vote next year.
Maybe the should send in dickless chainey to go hunting for those wascally weactors.
It is always said that the constituency has a short memory. It seems like the plan of attack on Iran depends upon it. It is literally play by play the same as the lead up to Iraq.
You'd think in the days of recording speech & images you'd be able to get past this sort of thing. I'm suprised no-one has labeled the administration a bunch of scared chicken littles or little boys who cried wolf.
To offer them any credibility is to entirely ignore only recent past history. So can someone remind me again: How do they maintain power?
=my2c
BC
The "cakewalk in Iraq" zealots started beating this drum immediately after the pre-emptive invasion of Iraq. Micheal Ledeen James Woolsey, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Cheney, they were repeating the unsubstantiated claims about Iran everywhere. Hell I heard John Bolton on NPR's Talk of the Nation and Neil Conan let him repeat these unsubstantiated claims endlessly and Conan did not challenge him once.
The only MSMers who have challenged these unsubstantiated claims have been Chris Matthews , Alex Chadwick and Diane Rehm.
All the while Iaea's El Baradei has been out there for four years saying that Iran poses no imminent threat and that there is no hard evidence to back up the claims. He has also asked that the "inflammatory rhetoric" be turned down. But no No these psychopaths go on repeating this horseshit, the majority of the mainstreamers do not challenge them and the majority of the American people sit there sucking this hogwash up.
A new wing in hell is being built for these liars and killers
go to General Clarks "no war on Iran" website
http://www.stopiranwar.com/
StopIranWar.com
All Americans want to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons and interfering on the ground inside Iraq. Yet President Bush’s saber rattling gives the US little additional leverage to engage and dissuade Iran, and, more than likely, simply accelerates a dangerous slide into war. The United States can do better than this.
More to the point, there is no evidence yet that Iran is doing anything that is against international laws or treaty.
Maybe Iran will start lacing their weapons with depleted uranium dust- like what we are doing in Iraq. That is a growing concern- yes- but we should stop pointing our finger at Iran when it is quite clear we have three fingers pointing right back at us. Iran is not a concern of ours. Isreal can fight their own battle.
Comments are closed on this entry