Cyprus-Forum.com

[yialousa1971]

U.S. does not believe Iran is trying to build nuclear bomb

The latest U.S. intelligence report indicates Iran is pursuing research that could enable it to build a nuclear weapon, but that it has not sought to do so.
By Ken Dilanian, Los Angeles Times

February 23, 2012, 6:11 p.m.
Reporting from Washington— 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A highly classified U.S. intelligence assessment circulated to policymakers early last year largely affirms that view, originally made in 2007.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.

Although Iran continues to enrich uranium at low levels, U.S. officials say they have not seen evidence that has caused them to significantly revise that judgment. Senior U.S. officials say Israel does not dispute the basic intelligence or analysis.

But Israel appears to have a lower threshold for action than Washington. It regards Iran as a threat to its existence and says it will not allow Iran to become capable of building and delivering a nuclear weapon. Some Israeli officials have raised the prospect of a military strike to stop Iran before it's too late.

It's unclear how much access U.S. intelligence has in Iran, a problem that bedeviled efforts to determine whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

The assessment that Saddam Hussein had secretly amassed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and was seeking to build a nuclear weapon, cited by the George W. Bush administration to justify the invasion, turned out to be wrong.

Iran barred inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog group, from visiting Parchin, a military site, this week to determine whether explosives tests were aimed at developing nuclear technology.

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."

But he said that "pressure, sanctions and assassinations" would not stop Iran from producing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

The U.S. and European Union have imposed strict sanctions on Iran's oil and banking sectors, and unidentified assassins on motorcycles have killed several nuclear scientists in Iran, attacks for which Tehran has blamed Israel.

For now, U.S. military and intelligence officials say they don't believe Iran's leadership has made the decision to build a bomb.

"I think they are keeping themselves in a position to make that decision," James R. Clapper Jr., director of National Intelligence, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Feb. 16. "But there are certain things they have not yet done and have not done for some time."

Clapper and CIA Director David H. Petraeus told a separate Senate hearing that Iran was enriching uranium below 20% purity. Uranium is considered weapons grade when it is enriched to about 90% purity, although it is still potentially usable at lower enrichment levels.

U.S. spy agencies also have not seen evidence of a decision-making structure on nuclear weapons around Khamenei, said David Albright, who heads the nonprofit Institute for Science and International Security and is an expert on Iran's nuclear program.

Albright's group estimates that with the centrifuges Iran already has, it could enrich uranium to sufficient purity to make a bomb in as little as six months, should it decide to do so.

It is not known precisely what other technical hurdles Iran would have to overcome, but Albright and many other experts believe that if it decides to proceed, the country has the scientific knowledge to design and build a crude working bomb in as little as a year. It would take as long as three years, Albright estimated, for Iran to build a warhead small enough to fit on a ballistic missile.

Albright said a push by Iran to build a nuclear weapon probably would be detected.
Copyright © 2012, Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 7032.story

[Schnauzer]

Political Quotes and Propaganda.
by Schnauzer » Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:55 pm

Perhaps one of the most blatant misinterpretations of a political quote in recent times, was the one which the Ayatollah Khomeini made some time PRIOR to the time of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's address :- "The World Without Zion" (October 25th 2005).

Imam Khomeini actually said (Translated from Arabic to print in Farsi) :-

"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad"

Which quote is generally accepted to mean that "The regime occupying Jerusalem will vanish with the pages of time".

Another translation puts the meaning to be "That Zionism, like Nazism and Communism, will disappear from the pages of history with the passage of time"

Both of the above are acceptable due to the difficulty of translation from Arabic to English.

Neither of the above can be attributed to President Ahmadinejad, nor can the threat to "Wipe Israel off the face of the map" be presented as an interpretation of either the Ayatollah's or Ahmadinejad's addresses, UNLESS, it is the intention of those who make such interpretations to stir up ill feelings toward yet another innocent nation (remember Iraq?).

To those who depend upon that which they read in the 'Gutter Press' as a source of their political knowledge, or rely upon the words of 'Political Leaders' (severally proven to be LIARS) to form their own opinions, I can only offer my sympathy.

To those who DO think for themselves (even though your opinions may be at variance to my own) I would like to point out that in no way can the term "Wipe Israel off the face of the map" be accepted as a fair translation.

Interestingly enough, the ONLY place that has been effectively "Wiped off the map" in recent times is 'Palestine', no prizes for guessing who has done the "Wiping".

A typical example of 'Political Propaganda' (imho)

Glad to draw attention to this article since it was posted a year ago yet there are still those who cling to the "Wipe Israel off the Map" nonsense.

Since there may still be one or two who believe in the 'Old Chestnuts', it might be helpful to guide them towards the 'New Fairy Stories' which are circulating in order to put the 'Frighteners' on the general public, perhaps to serve as justification for yet another act of savagery, courtesy of Israel and it's posturing backers who have thus far shown scant regard for the welfare of innocent civilians as they spread their 'Democratic Principles' around the Middle East.

Well done 'yialousa1971', it would appear that the "Chicken Licken Syndrome" is gaining momentum once again.

[CBBB]

[Kikapu]

"The regime occupying Jerusalem will vanish with the pages of time"
"That Zionism, like Nazism and Communism, will disappear from the pages of history with the passage of time"
"Wipe Israel off the face of the map"

I'm sorry, but am I missing something, Schnauzer? If you were Israel, does it really matter which of the above quotes is closer to the truth to what the original quote in Arabic to Farsi was? Does any of the above quotes have any comforting gestures to Israel what so ever? Surely you are not saying what you believe to be what the meant quotes are to be any reassuring to the Israelis and their security, taken at 100% accuracy, even if we were to dismiss the "Wipe Israel off the face of the map" quote? What so comforting to the Israelis with the other two quotes? I personally do not find any to be honest with you.

[Schnauzer]

"The regime occupying Jerusalem will vanish with the pages of time"
"That Zionism, like Nazism and Communism, will disappear from the pages of history with the passage of time"
"Wipe Israel off the face of the map"

I'm sorry, but am I missing something, Schnauzer? If you were Israel, does it really matter which of the above quotes is closer to the truth to what the original quote in Arabic to Farsi was? Does any of the above quotes have any comforting gestures to Israel what so ever? Surely you are not saying what you believe to be what the meant quotes are to be any reassuring to the Israelis and their security, taken at 100% accuracy, even if we were to dismiss the "Wipe Israel off the face of the map" quote? What so comforting to the Israelis with the other two quotes? I personally do not find any to be honest with you.

One has to consider whether or not Israel is entitled to any 'Comforting Remarks' given that they are intent upon the destruction of the Palestinians.

The regime occupying Jerusalem, is regarded as a 'Terror Regime' by the Palestinians and anyone who has been there will know why. (it SHOULD vanish).

It fitted their pistol nicely that the propaganda about 'Map Wiping' was accepted as representative of Iran's attitude toward them, however, since the true translation is now widely known, they have found another excuse to discredit that peaceful nation.

As to "Zionism like Nazism and Communism will disappear from the pages of history with the passage of time", the sooner the better (imho) and I strongly suspect that ANY person (or nation) that would wish to face a future which embraces peace and freedom, would think likewise.

I do not think you have missed anything, you have just turned a blind eye to it, that's all.

[yialousa1971]

The sectarian gulf between the Sunni Arabs and Shia Iranians runs deep. Recent reports suggest that Arabs, while being motivated by their abhorrence of the Shias, appear willing to support Israel in her not-so-covert plans to attack Iran.

Peter Cohan, writing in Forbes.com, reports that “Saudi Arabia’s rage against the Shias exceeds its dislike of its Jewish neighbors” so much so that Saudis are willing to provide Israel logistics support to attack Iran later in June. Other Arab states including Jordan and Egypt may also stand behind Israel’s foray into Iran.

It was only in November 2010 when WikiLeaks revealed that Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz was egging the American leadership to take out Iran’s nuclear programme. In April 2008, WikLeaks exposed US diplomatic cables in which the current Saudi Ambassador to the United States, Adel al-Jubair, told an American diplomat about King Abdullah’s “frequent exhortations to the US to attack Iran and so put an end to its nuclear weapons program.” According to the leaked cables Ambassador al-Jubair, while referring to Iranians, asked Americans to “cut off the head of the snake”. The Saudis never denied making these comments and observed that they could not verify the veracity of these documents.

The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is on a whistle stop tour of the western capitols to win their support for an Israeli military foray into Iran. The American newspapers, such as New York Times, have willingly become cheerleaders encouraging Israel to follow through on its threats by publishing speculations about when and how Israel will or should attack Iran. In the past three months alone, the New York Times has published over 32 stories flirting with the idea of an Israeli attack on Iran.

While Israel’s loud threats against Iran are increasing by the day, the deafening silence of the Arab leadership on threats against Iran, a supposedly brotherly Muslim country, is also becoming hard to ignore. At the same time one is at loss to understand why Iran continues to antagonise the West who is concerned about Iran’s hard stance against Israel and her unqualified support for Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Over the past three decades Iran has taken a leading role in mobilising Muslims against Israel. However, while Iran has become a pariah for supporting the Arabs in the Arab-Israeli conflict, Arabs on the other hand continue to treat Shia Arabs and Iranians with contempt.

The brutal repression of Bahraini Shias, who are in majority, by the minority Sunni rulers was aided and abetted by the Saudi regime who sent the Saudi army (including retired non-commissioned soldiers from Pakistan) and heavy armaments across the causeway to help the Bahraini regime. Rulers in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia blamed Iran for the uprising by the majority Shias in Bahrain against the Khalifa and his clan who are Sunni Muslims. Similarly, Saudi Arabia continues to suppress Shias in the south and deprives them of the opportunity to practice their faith freely.

While Hamas has profited from the Iranian support over the years, it too is equally hostile to Shias living in Gaza. Earlier in January, armed men belonging to Hamas attacked Shias in a house in the Sheikh Zayyad neighbourhood (between Beit Lahia and Jabalya) who were commemorating Arbaeen, the end of the 40-day mourning period for Imam Hussain. The London-based Al-Hayat newspaper quoted a Gazan residence Rafik Hamad whose brother was tortured by Hamas. “The police said my brother was a heretic [Shia] and asked me to keep him at home and not let him out,” Al-Hayat quoted Hamad.

The sectarian strife is ever so obvious in the Arab-Israeli conflict where Sunni Arabs are distrustful of the Lebanon-based Hezbollah, which is dominated by Shia Arabs. A survey conducted in Lebanon by the Pew Research Center in 2010 revealed that while 94 per cent Lebanese Shias held a favourable view of Hezbollah, only 12 per cent of Sunni Lebanese felt the same way. Surprisingly, Christians in Lebanon were more responsive than the Sunnis to Hezbollah where one in five Lebanese Christians reported holding a favourable view of Hezbollah. Even as they faced off against a common nemesis, the Shias and Sunnis in Lebanon remained polarised along the sectarian lines.

http://www.dawn.com/2012/03/07/united-against-iran.html

[Superstar]

Isn't it odd that Israel is allowed to wave the stick at anybody it feels like with impunity, while they maintain a monopoly on nuclear weapons in the Middle East? The same country that has threatened all the capitals of Europe?

And are you so gullible to think that Saddam, Gaddafi Get Real or any other Arab wouldn't have used any nuclear weapons if they'd had them? Luckily Israel (GCP) being of human status had the resolve not to be rushed into using them when under missile attack by Saddam.

[yialousa1971]

Isn't it odd that Israel is allowed to wave the stick at anybody it feels like with impunity, while they maintain a monopoly on nuclear weapons in the Middle East? The same country that has threatened all the capitals of Europe?

And are you so gullible to think that Saddam, Gaddafi Get Real or any other Arab wouldn't have used any nuclear weapons if they'd had them? Luckily Israel (GCP) being of human status had the resolve not to be rushed into using them when under missile attack by Saddam.

You're just a Wog Jew boy, cut from the same cloth as the Arabs.

[kurupetos]

Isn't it odd that Israel is allowed to wave the stick at anybody it feels like with impunity, while they maintain a monopoly on nuclear weapons in the Middle East? The same country that has threatened all the capitals of Europe?

And are you so gullible to think that Saddam, Gaddafi Get Real or any other Arab wouldn't have used any nuclear weapons if they'd had them? Luckily Israel (GCP) being of human status had the resolve not to be rushed into using them when under missile attack by Saddam.

You're just a Wog Jew boy, cut from the same cloth as the Arabs.

This calls for an update of my list.

[yialousa1971]

Isn't it odd that Israel is allowed to wave the stick at anybody it feels like with impunity, while they maintain a monopoly on nuclear weapons in the Middle East? The same country that has threatened all the capitals of Europe?

And are you so gullible to think that Saddam, Gaddafi Get Real or any other Arab wouldn't have used any nuclear weapons if they'd had them? Luckily Israel (GCP) being of human status had the resolve not to be rushed into using them when under missile attack by Saddam.

You're just a Wog Jew boy, cut from the same cloth as the Arabs.

This calls for an update of my list.

Make sure you send a copy to Iran.