"ElBaradei has long been reluctant to adopt a confrontational strategy on Iran, an approach he sees as counterproductive." Sure, and the alternative has worked so well this far -- mostly for Iran.
More on this story. "Report Says Iran Has Data to Make a Nuclear Bomb," by William J. Broad and David E. Sanger for the New York Times, October 3:
Senior staff members of the United Nations nuclear agency have concluded in a confidential analysis that Iran has acquired "sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable" atom bomb.
The report by experts in the International Atomic Energy Agency stresses in its introduction that its conclusions are tentative and subject to further confirmation of the evidence, which it says came from intelligence agencies and its own investigations.
But the report's conclusions, described by senior European officials, go well beyond the public positions taken by several governments, including the United States.
Two years ago, American intelligence agencies published a detailed report concluding that Tehran halted its efforts to design a nuclear weapon in 2003. But in recent months, Britain has joined France, Germany and Israel in disputing that conclusion, saying the work has been resumed.
A senior American official said last week that the United States was now re-evaluating its 2007 conclusions.
The atomic agency's report also presents evidence that beyond improving upon bomb-making information gathered from rogue nuclear experts around the world, Iran has done extensive research and testing on how to fashion the components of a weapon. It does not say how far that work has progressed.
The report, titled "Possible Military Dimensions of Iran's Nuclear Program," was produced in consultation with a range of nuclear weapons experts inside and outside the agency. It draws a picture of a complex program, run by Iran's Ministry of Defense, "aimed at the development of a nuclear payload to be delivered using the Shahab 3 missile system," Iran's medium-range missile, which can strike the Middle East and parts of Europe. The program, according to the report, apparently began in early 2002.
If Iran is designing a warhead, that would represent only part of the complex process of making nuclear arms. Engineering studies would have to turn ideas into hardware. Finally, the hardest part would be enriching the uranium that could be used as nuclear fuel -- though experts say Iran has already mastered that task.
While the analysis represents the judgment of the nuclear agency's senior staff, a struggle has erupted in recent months over whether to make it public. The dispute pits the agency's departing director, Mohamed ElBaradei, against his own staff and against foreign governments eager to intensify pressure on Iran.
Dr. ElBaradei has long been reluctant to adopt a confrontational strategy on Iran, an approach he sees as counterproductive. Responding to calls for the report's release, he has raised doubts about its completeness and reliability....
First
And can someone remind me why Bush didn't deal with this idiot in Iran when he had the chance, knowing full well that BHO doesn't have the guts?
Mohamed el-Baradei is a Muslim.
I have no real doubt that he has been running interference for Iran...and probably for any other Islamic regimes that might be preparing to get their claws on atomic weapons...all along. Al-Wala wa al-bara - loyalty and enmity. Loyalty to fellow Muslims; enmity toward the non-Muslims.
Sure, he's a Sunni Muslim (as far as I know) and Iran is Shiite Muslim; but the Sunni Muslims of Egypt hate Jews just as much as do the Shiite Muslims in Iran, and both Sunnis and Shiites are taught to hate *all* non-Muslims. However much they hate and attack each other, they will close ranks against the Infidels...why else has Shiite Iran been bankrolling and training Sunni Hamas?
Putting a *Muslim* at the head of the IAEA should be counted among the most stupid and destructive things that have ever been done, in the whole of human history.
Things to Do.
1. Establish an operational base in IRAQ. This will leverage Iran. Why strategically we would undertake a war at great cost and then throw away the chance to set up a base at the door of our sworn enemies, Iran, was stupidity at its height. There is all the leverage we would need to stop the Mullahs and their thug. Start building up men and material on the Iran border and see the Mullahs change their tune. If we only have a year to do this, now is the time.
2. Quit the medical isotope dance with Russia. Like Clinton said (it is the economy stupid) It was Russia, N Korea, and Germany that got the world in this hole. Make our so called allies, that have been benefiting for decades, by not having to spend on defense.. step up to the plate and put it on the line. Sarkozy and the French talk tough, but that is all it is,, is a bunch of blabber. The Germans should be made accountable for their sales of restricted products like the centrifuges to Iran. They and the Russians have put the world in this situation for the pursuit of a Mark (Germany) and an attempt to turn back the clock (Russia). When and if the time comes to invade, put their troops in the first wave. They are the ones that deserve that honor.
3. Like they said in Pulp Fiction, "Go Medieval on their Ass". Think Siege, put real sanctions in place and execute a naval and air blockade of all trade. No weak kneed humane exceptions. If you are getting the bomb, you will starve. Make your choice. That is, "Remember the Maine" big stick foreign policy. This is where slapping around a bunch of our so called allies will help also.
Putting ElBaradei in charge of the IAEA seems a bit like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. We all know whose side he's on.
Dr. ElBaradei has long been reluctant to adopt a confrontational strategy on Iran
The ummah thing?
They don't just have the data - they have the means - both in-country and with a back-up facility next door.
Putting a *Muslim* at the head of the IAEA should be counted among the most stupid and destructive things that have ever been done, in the whole of human history.
That's for sure!
And also, when they get a workable, or half workable, nuclear device together then the problems will start. Itchy fingers will be raring to hit the button because the nutjob and his cronies will not be put off by fears of "mutually assured destruction". In fact, they would look upon retaliation as a benefit that would wake up the imam Mohammad al-Mahdi sleeping in the well, who would then make Islam prevail throughout the world.
End of fairy tale, or nightmare, take your pick.
Are you stripping out links now?
I suppose we're in for another bout of stern finger-wagging from Hussein.
Why not just send in drones, to knock out their anti-air defense systems, then send in long range stealth bombers carrying MOP's(30,000 lb Massive Ordnance Penetrator) and blow the crap out of their nuclear development fascilities?
Get it over and done with and no more worries.
Well, there's still Ahmadinejad and his clerics...drop one or two MOP's on them while you have their defence shields down. Claim it was an errant bomb(s).
If anybody at the UN bitches about it just say "They were warned since we first heard about it and they lied again, and again, so we hurt them before they could hurt anybody else". Besides, I think the UN would be notified about it first, right? Not necessarily so. Since the UN is made up of 56 Islamic nations it would pobably be better to keep this "hush hush" until it is done. Then face the music.
No more negotiations. Let's test the MOP's on Iran and let her people go free.
Any other Arab nation that wants to develop the bombs will face the same fate. Got it? Good! Now sit down and shut up!
Maybe I should be at the UN?
No, you should not be at the UN! Why? Because your idea is too good and therefore would not fit into either of the UN-standard 'Outrage' or Condemnation responses. Best to keep this op stealth all the way.
But - ohmygawsh - what if one or two (or maybe two dozen) of those UAVs went berserker and "accidentally" took out the biggest mosques at the same time? Could we endure the shame of it all?
Too bad the mumbammapeolsireid faction in our government (all of it, I think) is too testosterone-challenged to perform any act more assertive than the hand-jive...
In 2007, Bush was President. There was speculation that BUSH was going to strike Iran's Nuclear Facilities. The "surge" was in progress. "Carrier Rotations", Jet fuel purchases...
What better way to foil any such attempt than to at least miss-represent the intelligence assessment on Iran?
Believing Iran did or may have, stopped development in 03 meant nothing 4 years later. Especially given the reality of Ineedajob wetting his pants about the end of Israel. While not forgetting the Two Military actions Israel needed to conduct against Iran's principle proxies.
I thought at the time, just how amazing can it be, that the MSM would be so eager to use such Irrelevantly dated information to make Bush out to be a "lair", once again.
It all turned out to be another of those History making MSM events where the American People, were collectively told, once again, to go back to sleep, nothing to worry about here.
Talk about Chickens coming home to Roost???
"But the report's conclusions, described by senior European officials, go well beyond the public positions taken by several governments, including the United States.
Two years ago, American intelligence agencies published a detailed report concluding that Tehran halted its efforts to design a nuclear weapon in 2003. But in recent months, Britain has joined France, Germany and Israel in disputing that conclusion, saying the work has been resumed.
A senior American official said last week that the United States was now re-evaluating its 2007 conclusions."
By gad -- says the only Carlyle Group that counts -- they'd better.
The 60 m deep penetrators are still on the assembly line, and there will be less than 20 of them.
The modifications being carried out on the B2s are so they can carry 2, not just one.
The US will be lucky if it can get one in the air by Christmas.
http://mae.pennnet.com/display_article/369712/32/NEWS/none/none/1/Massive-Ordnance-Penetrator,-a-huge-bunker-buster-bomb,-to-be-outfitted-for-B-2-stealth-bomber/
From the article to which a link is given just above:
"WASHINGTON, 4 Oct. 2009. U.S. Department of Defense leaders have found the money they sought to speed deployment of the 15-ton Massive Ordnance Penetrator bunker buster super bomb on the B-2 stealth bomber for potential use in heavily defended areas of the world, such as Iran and North Korea.
The Air Force 708th Armament Systems Group (ARSG/PK) at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., awarded a $51.9 million contract late Friday (FA8681-09-C-0280,P00002) to the Boeing Co. in St. Louis to integrate the Massive Ordnance Penetrator on a B-2 test aircraft. The Air Force has been considering fitting the Massive Ordnance Penetrator to the B-2 since early 2007."
Had the American government, had Robert Gates, not been focussed on Iraq (and now Afghanistan), had attention been rivetted as it should have been all along on Iran and its nuclear project, then perhaps the integration of Bunker Buster and B-2 (a marriage made in Infidel Heaven) might have been far further along, and several baker's dozen of those B.B.s also available. Time is everything.
How much money was thrown away on the messianic sentimentalism of bringing "freedom" to "ordinary moms and dads" in Iraq, rather than allow the Iraqis to descend into internecine warfare, which could have had its welcome repercussions (and still will, once the Americans leave, and the inevitable eventually happens) all over the Muslim lands? And how much money is being wasted in Afghanistan, as a modified version of the Iraq business -- this time with the emphasis on winning hearts and minds (Muslim hearts, Muslim minds), by lavishing aid and construction on the Afghans, in order to achieve a "victory" never made clear, never set forth in any convincing way, when Afghanistan is not the only place for Al-Qaeda to operate, nor is Al-Qaeda the only terrorist group to worry about (there are hundreds, and some don't even have names, nor need them), nor is terrorism the most effective and dangerous weapon of the Jihad -- the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest are far more threatening, but the military men who think only of military things naturally don't understand that, and we have left "the war" up to them, and to civilians who, alas, also think that "war" is somethning that the Pentagon handles. The war of self-defense against Islam requires a much greater degree of intelligence, imagination, cunning, and informed grasp of what is at stake, than anyone in public life has yet given a hint of possessing.
www.veteranoutrage.com
Why is this such a shock to anyone?
First we built the bomb in 4 years
Second the iranians have had all the help in the world
third the entire world knows obama and the democrats
are trying to surrender as fast as they can on every front
Fourth the entire world knows that obamas grand plan is to surrender and then just use unmanned drones to fly around and fire as few missles (thats easy enough to defend against)...
Fifth hell i even knew the reports from the UN were complete BULLSHIT..
Sixth everyone knows the goals of the islamic nazis is world domination and nukes would really help in the muslims qwest for genocide of the jews..
Im sorry but this is exactly why no one in their right mind trusts anything the democrats say..
Robert i love your site..
Because you as an educated man make is so clear..
I am just an uneducated mechanic.
But even i can see all the Bullshit flying around.
just a vet
www.veteranoutrage.com
This is an emergency! I think the UN should set up a committee to discuss the possibility of discussing sanctions.
"Dr. ElBaradei has long been reluctant to adopt a confrontational strategy on Iran, an approach he sees as counterproductive."
Is releasing news that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program considered a confrontational act?
The NY Times ought to say what ElBaradei is really up to -- a cover-up.
"Mohamed el-Baradei is a Muslim." as stated by Dumbledore with his analysis following that statement are exactly correct.
Why should the world trust a Muslim to determine if Iran is dangerous to the world? This is totally stupid. This is what is wrong with the world right now. The arrogance and PC MC mentality of the West has become self delusional and totally stupid.
Hypothetically thinking only, if I were militant Muslim Iran, I would do exactly as they are doing. In addition to that, I would keep the world perception of what I am really doing to an absolute minimum. With this in mind, they may have already purchased nukes from NK or someone else by now. They may have a few warheads of their own manufacturer ready for test.
In any event, they know that the West will not challenge them and that they can continue toward their goal without any serious challenge (except for those pesky Israelis).
They are now attempting (and seemingly succeeding) at manipulating an arrogant naive Obama into politically neutralizing those pesky Israelis.
For most Israelis and for those of us who follow JW, we understand the mindset and goals of militant Islam. Nukes in the hands of Iran will completely destabilize the world and lead to the total destruction of little Satan and the Big Satan. My best hope is that those "pesky" Israelis (whom I love) will make a move on Iran. They are the world's best hope right now.
El Baradei is a Muslim. It is absurd for the West to submit to a Muslim's official opinion of another Muslim state's nuclear criminality. Of course the UN itself is a dhimmi apparatus. Ultimately, Hussein Obama will do whatever he can to appease and ensure the West's destruction via complete submission to Islamic control. I'd say it is already 50% complete. The very fact that John Bolton was removed from the UN shows that the US cannot represent its interests there and must instead bow to Islamic control.
If Iran already had 'the bomb', do you think they would tell anyone?
"Why should the world trust a Muslim to determine if Iran is dangerous to the world? This is totally stupid."
Simple: because most Muslims are harmless moderates, and only a tiny minority of "extremists" and "conservatives" are the problem. To think otherwise remains unthinkable.
If iran already had only say one bomb no they would not
For to do so would actually FORCE obama to
actually take a stand on somethng that REQUIRES BALLS..
No if i were them i would build as many as i could
say 10 - 20
then place them all over the country
some would be missle types
some bomb types
and maybe for fun and giggles i would put one
in a car (call it a Islamic NVIED) nuclear vehicle IED.
And then announce it to the entire world.
Because at that point with so many devices spread out all over the country you make it virtually impossible
to find , disable and destroy them all..
This is what i would expect iran to do because
its what i would do..
www.veteranoutrage.com
"Dr. ElBaradei has long been reluctant to adopt a confrontational strategy on Iran, an approach he sees as counterproductive. Responding to calls for the report's release, he has raised doubts about its completeness and reliability"
and when Iran nukes Israel what sort of accountability or consequences will ElBaradei have to face?
Go to the head of the class if you answered "none".
The UN, the world, N. America is doing nothing, just giving Iran more time. I hope those war-rooms in Israel are standing by, they are our only hope.
Possibly true but how do you know which Muslim is dangerous?
Spot on, my initial comment was intended to be dripping with sarcasm. I don't believe we can tell the difference sufficiently for our security. However, the opposite viewpoint prevails throughout the West. There are enormous massive obstacles, psychological and cultural, to the thought process that logically follows the data of extremism among Muslims to the conclusion that this extremism is a much broader sociological phenomenon than exists among any other people, religion or culture on the planet. The majority of Westerners, formed by PC MC, have become remarkably flexible in their yoga-logic, becoming adept at going into complex pretzels in order to avoid this rational conclusion.
Just for fun, everyone should - at least once - Google for
UN outrage and UN condemnation . The UN and its puppet mumbamma are such a joke...
...'fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me'...
yeah, we are waaaay beyond fool me twice! ...I've lost count.
Hesperado, you are correct. The depth of the PC MC problem in the West is total and probably insurmountable. WWII style thinking is dead. It would take a fight for survival over a period of time to change the PC MC mentality of the average person in the West. This is not likely to happen until it is too late. We may be living through possibly the end of an era. The PC MC mentality cannot endure and survive for an extended period of time. PC MC as it is understood today is not a competitive value system in the real hard cold world.
what gets me in order to build a little boy type bomb that basicly fires 2 sub-citical masses of u235 at each other heck info on this can be found on the net to build the fat man type is harder as it uses explosive lens to compress a sub critical mass of pu95 into a critical mass of pu94 thank god that that info is still mostly classified and that the iranians dont need centrifuges the first u-235 bombs fuel was separated with electromagnets from u238 but its slow and takes a ton of electricity heck it took the power from the TVA to run the kystorns has anyone looked at the new dams in iran to see were that power is going
Mohammad (the original one, not one of his six hundred and fifty two million intervening clones) said nothing about "nuclear bombs" anywhere in the Koran, so all is well.
"Fire", technically, is "Allah's punishment" to use, which should soothe the infidel world even more about any possible atomic fireballs.
Nothing to worry about with Iran.
Islam means peace.
Muslims are nice.
Hypnosis is cool.
With the information on the internet, probably most engineers could build a nuke IF they had the weaponized Uranium or Plutonium along with radiation protective gear as long as size is not a problem. The detonator controls, which normally are extraordinarily complex, would be easy for a suicide bomber. All they need is a simple on-off switch.
Spot on:
You can get better information through sources like this:
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0100/012800k1.htm
BTW, the IAEA has already said that this "secret report" does not exist:
“Time and again unidentified sources feed the media and Member States with misinformation or misinterpretation“:
http://www.reuters.com/article/gc08/idUSTRE57R52H20090828
The article that dave742 links doesn't dispute any reports about Iran pursuing nuclear weapons capability -- it disputes "that it [the IAEA] had hidden information about Iran's disputed atomic program [and that] International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei withheld "evidence" of an alleged Iranian drive to obtain nuclear weapons."
This is a separate matter from whether that evidence exists and whether Iran has been unforthcoming about indications that it does exist.
Hesperado:
The NYT article linked to in this thread says:
“The report’s existence has been rumored for months, and The Associated Press, saying it had seen a copy, reported fragments of it in September.”
Here is the AP report that the NYT is talking about, which is from September 17:
google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9EVzzCsT-QwKFtWDzgF6ZLue6BgD9APALJ03
In the AP report from that date, it says:
“The document, titled ‘Possible Military Dimension of Iran's Nuclear Program,’ appeared to be the so-called IAEA ‘secret annex’ on Iran's alleged nuclear arms program that the U.S., France, Israel and other IAEA members say is being withheld by agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei — claims the nuclear watchdog denies.”
The NYT article also mentions the report as being titled “Possible Military Dimensions of Iran’s Nuclear Program.” This is the report that is being talked about in this thread, and it exists is some “secret annex” that was supposedly withheld from the IAEA report that was released on August 28:
iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2009/gov2009-55.pdf
The first time this “secret annex” of the report was mentioned in the press was in a Haaretz article sometime before August 20, which is when this article from the Australian News was written which talks about the Haaretz article:
“Citing ‘senior Western diplomats and Israeli officials’, the paper said the evidence had been submitted to the IAEA in a secret annex written by its inspectors in Iran and signed by the head of the IAEA team in Tehran.”
theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25953429-2703,00.html
The article cited the source as "senior Western diplomats and Israeli officials." Isn’t it always the case. Considering that the claim first appeared in Haaretz, I will guess that the origin of this BS “secret annex” story was from “Israeli officials.” So Haaretz accuses the IAEA of withholding information from the report sometime before Aug. 20, even though the report did not come out until Aug. 28. Can’t Israel even wait until the report comes out before whining about some “secret annex” that did not appear. How did they know it was not going to be in the report? Perhaps because they knew it did not exist?
Of course, 2 days after the report actually did come out, the Jerusalem Post was right there to accuse the IAEA all over again:
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1251145146688&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
A few days later France joined in with the baseless accusations:
“’Why doesn't he provide us with the annexes of his report?’ Kouchner asked”;
khaleejtimes.com/displayarticle.asp?xfile=data/international/2009/September/international_September148.xml§ion=international&col
At this point you should be able to understand where this story came from. It is a baseless accusation made by Israel 6 weeks ago that keeps getting recycled in the MSM. The Reuters article I linked to in the previous post is about this baseless accusation, and they say the “secret information” does not exist. Here is another article by the AFP. First, just to make absolutely sure we are talking about the same event:
“Last week, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner asked publicly why ElBaradei refuses to provide the annexes of his latest report on Iran… The accusations were made first by Israel and more recently by France.”
ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/090907/world/iaea_nuclear_politics_iran_syria?printer=1
Yes, this is the event. So what is the IAEA response?:
“UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei on Monday dismissed allegations he withheld key evidence on Iran's alleged weaponisation studies as ‘politically motivated and totally baseless…I am dismayed by the allegations of some member states, which have been fed to the media, that information has been withheld from the board’"
This entire story was fabricated by Israel, and has been recycled in the MSM for 6 weeks now. This is your “big story.” Here is another thing that was said by Baradei:
"These allegations are politically motivated and totally baseless. Such attempts to influence the work of the secretariat and undermine its independence and objectivity are in violation ... of the IAEA statute and should cease forthwith"
What this story is then, is yet another violation of the IAEA statute, but not by Iran.
Do you ever get tired of me making you look stupid?
Hesperado:
Also fro, that last AFP article:
"A number of diplomats close to the IAEA are sceptical whether such an annex really exists."
dave742, so some members of the AP saw a copy of a report that never existed and even reported fragments of this non-existent report? Fascinating!
Hesperado:
"dave742, so some members of the AP saw a copy of a report that never existed and even reported fragments of this non-existent report? Fascinating!"
Yes, it is fascinating, and it happens all the time. You think the AP saw a copy, but El Baradei denies that it exists, IAEA spokespeople deny that it exists, and "a number of diplomats close to the IAEA are sceptical whether such an annex really exists"?
If all these people have seen the report, including AP reporters and Albright of ISIS, then why isn't there a single person amongst them that will simply show the document on TV? Not excerpts, the entire thing, with IAEA stamps on it and all. Wouldn't that be the biggest story of all time? Wouldn't that be the best possible thing in the world to happen for USrael? To catch IAEA spokesmen, and Baradei himself, in an outright lie? After Baradei called them liars and said they were violating the IAEA statute? That would be a huge story! Baradei would have to resign immediately! All of a sudden everything that the IAEA ever said about Iran not having a nuclear weapons program could also be labelled a lie, and the bombing would start tomorrow! Do you know why this does not happen? Why a single person or reporter will not do this even though the report has been floating around now all over the world for 6 weeks?
THE REPORT DOES NOT EXIST.
Are you really that gullible?
dave742, are you saying that certain reporters manufactured a false document composed of fragments of a purported whole, and then lied about it?
Hesperado:
Yes, that is what I am saying. This should be clear even to you.
Here's another mannufactured story someone alerted me to on a blog last week. Many news outlets have quoted Ahmadinejad as saying this:
"Some European countries insist on saying that Hitler killed millions of innocent Jews in furnaces....although we don't accept this claim..."
One example is this Jerusalem Post article:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1145961229110
The original source of this quote is the following article from Iran:
"Ahmadinezhad told Al-Alam if the European countries admit to the fact that they killed the Jews in World War II and Hitler was responsible for burning and annihilating the Jews, why then they won’t give a part of Europe to Zionists to set up any government they wish? Europeans believe they should support the forces which occupies Qods, since the Jews were victimized in World War II. We, however, don’t accept this. It is one thing for Europe to continue to insist on this point, but why should it try to give part of the Palestinian land to them? Germany and Austria can give two or three of their provinces to the Zionists regime, so it can set a country. This would be a real solution to this problem. Why the Europeans insist on supporting a tumour in the Middle East through imposing their will on other powers. This will prolong the conflict and tension. In any event, this is a proposal that has our support."
BBC Monitoring Middle East - Political
Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring
December 8, 2005 Thursday
Iran president proposes “creation of Zionist state” in Europe
I emphasized the crucial parts. I will leave it to you as an excercise to figure out how the MSM outlets used those three dots very creatively to completely chage the story. You are lied to every day.
dave742,
No link for the article you quoted --
BBC Monitoring Middle East - Political
Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring
December 8, 2005 Thursday
Iran president proposes “creation of Zionist state” in Europe
?
I did a Google search for one bit of it --
"since the Jews were victimized in World War II. We, however, don’t accept this" --
and found only two hits, your post above here, and a post of yours on the Hot Air blog. Where did you get that article from? And why isn't it on the Net?
Hesperado:
I thought I mentioned to you before, but I have access to Lexis Nexis. The article is available there. In a previous thread, you had access to an article by Marin that we discussed at length. I assumed that since you got a copy of that article that you had E-library access. If you don't, I will simply cut and paste the entire article here. Unless you think I would sit here and fabricate this article, I guess you will have to believe me. (When I detailed the history of this "secret appendix" story from the beginning to end, complete with links, did you think I did it by using Google? That would be impossible. It is quite easy using Lexis. I am able to search the history of any fabricated story and trace where it came from. Lexis article are not just dated, but time-stamped. It is very interesting to watch how a story appears initially, and then watch it get "edited" from then on. The media is pure propaganda. At least the Russians knew they were being lied to). Here is the whole thing:
BBC Monitoring Middle East - Political
Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring
December 8, 2005 Thursday
Iran president proposes "creation of Zionist state" in Europe
LENGTH: 911 words
Text of report by Iranian Mehr news agency
President Mahmud Ahmadinezhad has proposed that the Europeans should allocate some of their territory to the Zionists to establish whatever sort of state they wish.
In an exclusive interview with Al-Alam network [Iranian television network in Arabic], he added: If the Europeans claim that the Zionists were suppressed during the Second World War, they can place a part of Europe at their disposal. This would be the best solution for the Palestinians and we will support it.
According to Mehr News Agency, Dr Ahmadinezhad who has gone to Mecca in order to attend the OIC's extraordinary summit, also said: Today, the Zionists kill the people in the streets and market places of Palestine. They fire on women and children and drop bombs on cities. Moreover, they demolish the houses of the native people who have lived there for hundreds of years. They assassinate individuals under false excuses. They are threatening the entire region. And all these demonstrate the danger of the Zionist regime's existence.
The president, spoke about the founding objectives of the Organization of Islamic Conference and stressed the need for the organization to support the people of Palestine as one of the most important issues facing the Islamic world and the Middle East.
He said: In finding a solution to the Palestinian issue, two questions can be raised towards resolving the problem. First, where have these people come from, i.e. the people who allow themselves to commit all these criminal acts in Qods? Where were they born? Where were their parents born? Where is their homeland? What is their nationality? None of the Zionists are Palestinian. They have all come from distant lands. We want to know why the Israelis have the right to rule Palestine, commit crimes and do what they want but the people of Palestine who have been living in that region for hundreds and thousands of years don't have the right to determine their own destiny instead of being doomed for ever.
Ahmadinezhad told Al-Alam if the European countries admit to the fact that they killed the Jews in World War II and Hitler was responsible for burning and annihilating the Jews, why then they won't give a part of Europe to Zionists to set up any government they wish? Europeans believe they should support the forces which occupies Qods, since the Jews were victimized in World War II. We, however, don't accept this. It is one thing for Europe to continue to insist on this point, but why should it try to give part of the Palestinian land to them? Germany and Austria can give two or three of their provinces to the Zionists regime, so it can set a country. This would be a real solution to this problem. Why the Europeans insist on supporting a tumour in the Middle East through imposing their will on other powers. This will prolong the conflict and tension. In any event, this is a proposal that has our support.
Dr Ahmadinezhad added: There is also another proposal, namely that Palestine has its own indigenous population. After all there is the United Nation and its charter which allows indigenous people of a country to determine their own fate. We propose that the indigenous people of Palestine to take part in a referendum, under the UN supervision, and elect their own government. Why do they make exceptions and institute special laws in matters concerning the world of Islam and oppressed nations?
President told Al-Alam that the officials of the Zionist regime announce which Palestinians they plan to assassinate before doing it, and in return are given Nobel Peace Prize. But the person who has been assaulted in his own home and assassinated is called a terrorist. This cannot continue. They cannot deceive countries as they did 50 or 60 years ago. We think that the economical and peaceful approach to solving the Palestinian problem is to allow the indigenous people of Palestine to elect their own government.
Pointing out to the West's all out support for Israel, the president said: The Qods occupier regime [Israel] serves as the guardian of the West's interest in the heart of the Islamic world. For this reason, the West issues thousands of protest statements and attack anyone or country if it criticizes the Zionists. But they turn a blind eye to the Zionists' killings of native Palestinians. We draw a bold line between the Jews and the Zionists. Fortunately, today, the path of world's Jews is completely different from that of the Zionists. The West devised a plot, what we call "in the name of Jews to serve Zionism", to impose the occupier regime [Israel] on the region. The fact is that Judaism plays no role. Zionism is not religious, nor after [implementing] the prophets' beliefs. It is a terrifying capitalist gang aimed at influencing and dominating the world.
President stressed: The issue of Palestine is not peculiar to a group. Palestine is the concern of the Islamic world. Palestine is not a phenomena which a few people, a group or a party can make a decision about in order to gain short-term goals. Any decision must take into consideration the future of the Islamic world and interest. It must support the right of Palestinians to determine their fate, independence and liberty. We believe the best approach for Palestinians is resistance. Because it will force their enemies to recognize the rights of Palestinian Nation and accept the truth.
Source: Mehr news agency, Tehran, in Persian 1347 gmt 8 Dec 05
Ladies and gentlemen (I address in particular any non-Muslim person who may be new to this site and to this subject)
just to cut through the cr*p, and save time and bandwidth, I would like to share with you my conviction, based on reading all of his postings since he first turned up here, that 'dave742' is a Shiite Muslim mohammedtroll or dementor, tasked with trying to prevent new and less well-informed readers here from waking up to Islamic Iran's assorted nefarious activities (many of which are intended to destroy that pesky little state of the Evil Joooz). He is most active on threads to do with Iran, with Iran's nuclear project, and threads to do with Israel. On IntenseDebate he chose the Hezbollah ('party of allah') flag as his avatar. QED.
Now - since the Shiites, according to Muslims themselves, wrote the book on taqiyya, strategic deception/ dissimulation - it seems to me that pretty much everything he says may be assumed to be, more or less, a lie. At best a half-truth; at worst, a lie direct; all wrapped up in masses of padding.
Ignore him.
On any thread on which he appears throwing sand all over the place, I advise that you make a habit of going straight back up, the moment he appears, to the top of the thread, and re-reading the main article, plus whatever Hugh, joeblough, gravenimage, hesperado, and traeh may have to say about it in the comments. Resolutely ignore his attempts to discredit Hugh (Mr Fitzgerald). BTW - Hugh is perfectly delightful; 'dave' is a crashing bore.
New visitors to this site who are unfamiliar with the concept of taqiyya may like to get themselves to a good library and track down 'Jane's Islamic Affairs Analyst', the issue published September 26 2008, which contains an article by Raymond Ibrahim, entitled "Islam's Doctrines of Deception".
In it Mr Ibrahim mentions, among other things, "the authoritative Arabic text Al-Taqiyya fi Al-Islam", on p. 7 of which the following statement appears (Mr Ibrahim's translation):
'Taqiyya [deception] is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it.
'We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream. … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era'.
Bear this unpleasant fact resolutely in mind, O new Infidel reader, when dealing with Mohammedans. They are permitted, even encouraged, to lie to you, if such lying will serve the interests of Islam - which can of course be fairly loosely interpreted to mean serving their own interests.
Nonie Darwish, apostate from Islam, warned, in a speech given in October 2007:
Nonie Darwish, in October 2007, had this to say on lying in the Islamosphere:
"On Arab TV, I once saw a Muslim preacher telling little children that lying is not allowed *except under three conditions*
1- Lying to non-Muslims when it is in the best interest of Islam 2- Lying to Muslims if it will end conflict between them.
And
3rd: Lying to one’s wife to improve the relationship.
'Lying thus has become an obligation in international relationships, Muslim relationships and family relationships.
'Any wonder why Muslims were silent after 9/11?
'Those who expose the lying game are considered traitors.
'By allowing lying, Muslims have created a culture unable to distinguish between lies from truth; truth has become a convoluted game of *saving face for the best interest of Islam* {my emphasis added - dda}."
dave742,
I choose to scoff at the veracity of the Iranian Mehr news agency. Objectively, I have (at the very least) no less of a good reason to do so than you do to scoff at the mainstream media controlled by a sinister "Usreal" cabal. Trusting an Iranian news agency for truth in this regard strikes me as being like trusting Goebbels.
Hesperado:
"I choose to scoff at the veracity of the Iranian Mehr news agency"
JESUS H CHRIST!
Sometimes I think you do this to me on purpose to drive me crazy. The point is not that it is an Iranian source, but that it is the ONLY source. Did you know that sources like the Washington Post do not have reporters in Iran? ALL stories that come out of Iran are either reported by Iranian sources first, and then copied by the West, or are reported by BBC Monitoring, and then are copied by the West. The Iranian report that I showed you is THE ONLY ORIGINAL SOURCE THAT EXISTS. Everything else written on this story by the West is simply drawn from this source (first they "creatively edit" it, which is my point). Here is the WaPo report on this story:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/08/AR2005120801788.html
Notice how it says:
"Ahmadinejad was quoted by Iran's official IRNA news agency..."
If you don't beleive Iranian sources, then don't believe any Western reports that say "quoted by Iranian sources" either.
This Iranian report is THE ONLY SOURCE. The point has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH THE "VERACITY" OF THE SOURCE. My point is that when Western sources copy it, THEY MODIFY IT (i.e., THEY LIE).
Hesperado:
"I choose to scoff at the veracity of the Iranian Mehr news agency"
JESUS H CHRIST!
Sometimes I think you do this to me on purpose to drive me crazy. The point is not that it is an Iranian source, but that it is the ONLY source. Did you know that sources like the Washington Post do not have reporters in Iran? ALL stories that come out of Iran are either reported by Iranian sources first, and then copied by the West, or are reported by BBC Monitoring, and then are copied by the West. The Iranian report that I showed you is THE ONLY ORIGINAL SOURCE THAT EXISTS. Everything else written on this story by the West is simply drawn from this source (first they "creatively edit" it, which is my point). Here is the WaPo report on this story:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/08/AR2005120801788.html
Notice how it says:
"Ahmadinejad was quoted by Iran's official IRNA news agency..."
If you don't beleive Iranian sources, then don't believe any Western reports that say "quoted by Iranian sources" either.
This Iranian report is THE ONLY SOURCE. The point has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH THE "VERACITY" OF THE SOURCE. My point is that when Western sources copy it, THEY MODIFY IT (i.e., THEY LIE).
“This Iranian report is THE ONLY SOURCE.”
What is interesting is that BBC Monitoring will often print the entire text of a speech by Ahmadinejad, sometimes 5 thousand words or more, and when you read it is perfectly reasonable. The West will then take a 5 word quote from the entire speech that they can take out of context in order to demonize him, and they will alter it to achieve the desired effect, like I just showed. Here is an example where you can read the entire text yourself;
Some Western sources reported the following quote by Ahmadinejad:
“Soon Islam will become the dominating force in the world, occupying first place in the number of followers amongst all other religions.” (1)
(The source I use here is from a think tank called Realite)
This quote is supposedly from a speech given in Malaysia on March 3, 2006 at a seminar titled "Outstanding International Issues and the role of the Muslim World.” The speech was reported on by both the AP and the BBC, but Realite decided to go to a Russian newspaper to find a sufficiently mangled translation. The AP reports the same quote as follows :
“…a wave of awareness is sweeping the fragmented Muslim world and ‘will turn into a gigantic force’ that will engulf current political alliances…” (inside quote from Ahmadinejad) (2)
This is quite different from the Russian version, and that version can be considered nearly a complete fabrication. This is why Realite decided to use that version instead of the AP version. Even in the AP version, only 6 words are directly translated from Ahmadinejad. They do, however, give some context, which is the issue of US opposition to Iran’s nuclear program. First Amadinejad says this about the IAEA:
“Regrettably, most international organizations have turned into political organizations and the influence of great powers prevents them from taking fair and legally sound decisions…It is just a democracy in name. In reality it is not a democracy. They do as they please...They have found another pretext to put pressure on my nation.” (3)
The AP report then goes on to say:
“In his speech, Ahmadinejad said that the U.S. opposition to Iran's nuclear program is an example of Western bullying that is frustrating the entire Muslim world. But a wave of awareness is sweeping the fragmented Muslim world and ‘will turn into a gigantic force’ that will engulf current political alliances, he said. ‘Domination and bullying will not last much longer,’ he said. ‘Bullies and Zionists beware! You are going to fall!’ Ahmadinejad attributed most of the problems faced by the Muslim world to the ‘hegemonic tendencies’ of bullying powers, an apparent reference to the United States and Europe.”
Ahmadinejad is simply saying that Islam is a unifying factor which will not allow Western powers to dominated Muslim countries any longer.
When we look at the BBC report, we find a more complete version of the statement, which you can compare to the Russian version directly:
“There is no doubt that the new wave of religious awakening, which has engulfed not only the Islamic world but other divine faiths, will turn into tumultuous floods and hurricane soon to smash all the political equations and international calculations based on the system of hegemony.” (4)
So when the AP says that the “wave of awareness” that is “sweeping the fragmented Muslim world”, which will “engulf current political alliances,” it is misleading. According to the more complete quote, Ahmadinejad did not say that all current political alliances will be engulfed, but those that are “based on the system of hegemony.” This fits in with the context of his speech, which was an attack on hegemonic nations who are “[dominating] and bullying” other nations. Also note that Ahmadinejad says it is not just Islam that is going through this “religious awakening,” but “other divine faiths” as well.
The BBC also quoted Ahmadinejad as saying:
“Islam is the religion of harmony, sincerity and peaceful coexistence; and contrary to the claims of Islam's enemies, our faith is still growing, and it shall throw into question the existence of the hegemonists.”
Interestingly, we are able to compare the BBC, AP and Kommersant quotes directly with that actual speech that Ahmadinejad gave, because the Malaysian Ministry of Foreign Affairs printed the speech given by Ahmadinejad on its website. (5) We have the pleasure of being able to check the quotes directly with the original speech. For example, this AP quote: “Regrettably, most international organizations have turned into political organizations and the influence of great powers prevents them from taking fair and legally sound decisions” can be found in the actual text of the speech, as can the quote: “But domination and bullying will not last much longer. Bullies and Zionist beware! You are going to fall!” When we look for a quote containing “will turn into a gigantic force” or “wave of awareness” or “Islam will become the dominating force in the world,” we find nothing. The closest I find to this in the speech is this:
“The innate justice and God seeking nature of man has been awakened. Nations no longer tolerate tyranny and harassment and protest against them. The people of the world are tired of, and dissatisfied with, the status quo. The people of the world are increasingly more aware and awake. People are increasingly heeding the call to Monotheism and faith in the Almighty. People thirst for justice and positively respond to cries for justice.
This awakening is on the increase and its signs can be seen all around the world. Look at the people of the Middle-East, talk to the Europeans. Contact scholars and social commentators. You will appreciate this truth that if Monotheism and faith prevail, selfishness and hegemonic tendencies will fail. If faith exists, selfishness will seize to exist and the rights of others will be respected. There will be no wars, aggression, sedition and oppression and justice will prevail. With justice comes peace. With peace comes security.”
It is possible that something along the lines of the BBC quote was said after the prepared speech. It is similar to what I quoted above, and seems consistent. The BBC quote, however, especially in the context of the entire speech, is nothing close to the Russian, mangled version. It should be noted that the Malaysian News media also did not report anything resembling the BBC quote either. (6)
Read the entire speech by Ahmdinejad. It is a very good example of how the MSM (and especially obscure Russian media sources) can take a rational, reasoned, and in my view completely accurate speech, and twists it to death in order to demonize someone whose country has already been slated to be bombed.
1) realite-eu.org/site/apps/nl/content3.asp?c=9dJBLLNkGiF&b=2315291&ct=4058419 quoting kommersant.ru/news.aspx?NewsID=95536
2) AP Worldstream, “Iran's president says U.N. nuclear watchdog biased, predicts fall of ‘Zionists’”, March 3, 2006, by Vijay Joshi
A severely edited version of the AP report is here:
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1139395528628&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
3) See note 2. Because the Jerusalem Post version of the AP report is edited, it does not include this quote. However, the “regrettably…” quote can be found here:
edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/03/03/iran.nuclear/index.html
The rest can be found in the original AP report.
4) BBC Monitoring International Reports, “Iran’s President Questions Existence of Israel Again”, March 3, 2006, Text of report by Iranian radio on 3 March
5) www.kln.gov.my/?m_id=25&vid=29
6) bernama.com/bernama/v3/news_lite.php?id=183591
"The PC MC mentality cannot endure and survive for an extended period of time. PC MC as it is understood today is not a competitive value system in the real hard cold world."
In light of the comments by Muslims here, I would like to complete my statement shown above.
IF the PC MC West falls at any time in the future, Muslims, after their initial round of taking thousands of retalitory nukes, they will go back to their nomad days of origin due to the poverty inflicted upon them by themselves. The backward cult called Islam, is dependent on the West for money, training, and motivation (someone to hate). With out someone to hate they will turn on each other to kill and maim. The end result will be chaos similiar to a "tribe" of baboons which has suddenly lost all self control and order. The end will not be good for Islam, and there most assuredly will be an end to Islam.
dave742,
"The point is not that it is an Iranian source, but that it is the ONLY source."
It's not the only source. There is the other source you choose to scoff at and dismiss, the AP reporters you think fabricated their fragments of a whole. It's one thing to scoff and dismiss: it's quite another to eliminate from your memory banks. Congratulations to your Big Brother.
Hesperado:
"There is the other source you choose to scoff at and dismiss, the AP reporters"
You are confused again. I brought up another story, which is unrelated to the story being talked about on this thread. I started this other subject when I said:
"Here's another mannufactured story someone alerted me to on a blog last week"
This unrelated manufactured story is what we have been talking about in the last few posts. Now, it seems, you have bounced back to the original story. Once again, I wonder if you do this deliberately, or if you are really that thick. This separate story I brought up had nothing to do with the "secret annex" story, and that should have been painfully clear.
Anyway, now you are back on the story of this thread, and the nameless AP reporters who have seen the "secret annex". Considering that Baradei has denied its existence, and has charged countries that have brought it up with violating the IAEA statute, I would suggest to these AP reporters that they release photocopies of the "secret annex," and prove Baradei a liar. They would win a Pulitzer. I don't think it will happen. Make you alst comment, and we can be done.
dave742,
Yes I see I confused the two. However, the latter story of the alleged Ahmadinejad Holocaust-denial statement also has two sources claiming opposite things -- not "only one source" as you asserted. You choose to dismiss one source, I choose to dismiss the other source. If you are trying to argue that the Iranian Mehr source is the only reputable source and that the other source should be eliminated from consideration at all because it is disreputable, that would be fallacious because tendentious.
Hesperado:
"Ahmadinejad Holocaust-denial statement also has two sources claiming opposite things"
THERE IS ONE SOURCE!!! Are you claiming that the Jerusalem Post is a source?? You think the JP had a reporter in Mecca on December 8, 2005, and he didn't mention what Ahmadinejad sais until over 4 months later, on April 26, 2006?? Or do you claim that WaPo is another source, and they had a reporter in Mecca? Do you think it is a coincidence that JP, WaPo, and every other news agency in the world reported the same quote that Mehr did (after alterations) by coincidence? Please, oh please tell me what the other source is.
Addressing any newbie at this site, now or in the future, who may be foolish enough to read 'dave742's labyrinthine effusions, and become confused: please do not forget that the 'Jerusalem Post' (and other Israeli entities engaged in news or in strategic analysis) has its own excellent sources of information There are Jews in Israel who are fluent in Farsi and are perfectly capable of listening to radio broadcasts and watching satellite TV from Iran 'raw' and can watch and listen to a speech by someone like Ahmadinejad in its entirety, and then translate and analyse it on their own, without having to rely on what anyone else says it means.
If the Israelis are worried about what Ahmadinejad and others in the current Islamic Persian regime have been saying, then I believe them. Pretty well every Jewish person currently alive today is alive because generations of his or her forebears paid attention either to that little voice in the gut that says 'Run! They say they're going to kill you, and they mean it', or to that other little voice in the gut that says, 'Grab that weapon and FIGHT LIKE HELL, because they're coming to kill you'.
dave742 can rattle on all he likes; I'm not listening. I'm through with him.
I may add that, speaking as an Australian, I am deeply proud that my country boycotted 'Durban II' in Geneva, being therefore absent when Ahmadinejad made his horrid speech ; and I am deeply proud that my country walked out of the UN assembly in the middle of Ahmadinejad's equally horrid speech, there.
I only wish we Aussies would follow up by really showing some guts, and publicly stating that we recognise undivided Jerusalem - ALL of Jerusalem - as the capital of the Jewish state of Israel, and move our Aussie embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, forthwith.