Another shrill doomsayer has his say....

by **darkbeforedawn** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:36 pm

Well, another shrill prediction of doom. The stuff about the banks changing their policy and the interment camps is disturbing. Is this credible? I have no idea.... <a href="http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=9995">bellaciao.org/en/article....ticle=9995</a> January Saturday 21st 2006 (01h49) : Collapse of U.S. Economy Imminent 9 comment(s). In its attempt to establish a world empire dominating every nation on the planet, the U.S. has exhausted its ability to finance the expansion and the country now faces imminent financial collapse. From all indications, it looks like 2006 will spell the end for America. Consider these five important points: Point #1 The U.S., Great Britain and Israel are preparing to attack Iran. As it appears the main reason for invading Iraq was to stop it from selling oil in Euros, likewise Iran has plans to dump the dollar come March 2006. Point #2 U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow issued a warning recently that the U.S. Government is on the verge of collapse - as the statutory debt limit imposed by Congress of $8.184 trillion dollars would be reached in mid-February - the government would then be unable to continue its normal operations. Considering the current total U.S. debt stands at $8.162 trillion dollars, once the official debt ceiling ($8.184 trillion) is reached, the U.S. government’s credit abroad (its borrowing power) is gone. Those countries (mainly China) who presently keep America afloat by holding U.S. Treasury Notes, will most likely no longer continue doing so. Point #3 Bank Of America and Compass Bank managers (probably all other U.S. banks too) have been instructing their employees in the last few weeks on how to respond to customer demands in the event of a collapse of the U.S. economy - specifically telling the employees that only agents from the Department Of Homeland Security will have authority to decide what belongings customers may have from their safe deposit boxes - and that precious metals and other valuables will not be released to U.S. citizens. The bank employees have been strictly prohibited from revealing the banks’ new "guidelines" to anyone. (however, employees have been talking to friends and family) The next time you visit your bank, ask them about it - then ask yourself, why is this information being kept secret from customers and the public - what’s really going on? Point #4 FEMA has activated and is currently staffing its vast network of empty internment camps with armed military personnel - unknown to most Americans, these large federal facilities are strategically positioned across the U.S. landscape to "manage" the population in the event of a "terrorist" attack, a civilian uprising, large-scale dissent ,or an insurrection against the government. Some of these razor-wired facilities have the capacity of detaining a million people. Point #5 The Patriot Act and the US Senate’s vote to ban habeas corpus (Nov 14th) - along with George W. Bush having signed executive orders giving him sole authority to impose martial law, suspend habeas corpus and ignore the Posse Comitatus Act, have together pretty much destroyed any notions of freedom and justice for Americans. Summary: The U.S. economy is broken, the United States is bankrupt - the unchecked spending by this administration, the illegally waged wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, the cost of unprecedented weapons and military build-up - have all contributed to an irreversible emergency which is threatening our nation’s existence and our very lives. Hospitals are closing, major corporations are declaring bankruptcy and/or moving their companies overseas, the monopolized news media spews nothing but lies, and our fearless leaders have turned out to be only ruthless criminals hell-bent on destabilizing our country and robbing us all. Be aware - we stand at the threshold of total ruin - the international bankers and war profiteers care little for our lives and families - these demons worship money and all things vile and evil - they have very much to gain from war, misery, disease, famine, chaos and death (our deaths). We are right on the edge - the Treasury is already overextended - the U.S. government cannot (and will not) care for its own citizens’ needs, nor secure our borders against illegal aliens - plus, the whole "terrorist" thing is a cruel hoax perpetrated against a trusting citizenry - and only designed to instill fear and garner support for the genocide taking place in Iraq. Should America (along with British & Israeli forces) launch a war against Iran, or another country, without yet paying for, or even recovering from the current losses in Iraq and elsewhere - the costs of such of an invasion will overwhelm an already crippled economy and push the U.S. over the edge into oblivion. Question: Considering the U.S. Treasury Notes that China currently holds (which keeps the U.S. economy going)... Do you think China will continue to support a country’s economy (the U.S.) whose military launches a nuclear strike against its neighbor (Iran) - thus delivering a blanket of radioactive fallout over western Chinese provinces - killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of its citizens? I think not. Factoring in the aforementioned points of "preparation" engineered by U.S. authorities, I’d say there’s a stinking rat in the woodpile ...can you smell it too?

by **JimNelson** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:43 pm

Welcome to the TimeBomb2000 forum, circa 1999. All we need now is Gary North to provide the coup de grace.

by **Dreams End** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:15 pm

LOL. Nice Jim. And I say this as someone who fell for y2k to a certain degree. bellaciao, syzmanski, skolnick, etc...many on these forums keep finding them credible enough to at least consider their information. I discovered them on this board...so in the short time I've been aware of them, I've never seen much credible at all. Maybe they've slipped? Anyway, the constant warnings of imminent doom may be part of a larger agenda to keep certain segments of the population feeling helpless enough not to try to actually DO anything about our situation. Or maybe people just like to read that sort of thing and so they increase site stats. Who knows?

by **mushroom** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:52 pm

Wending Toward the Insanity of Total War Kurt Nimmo, Another day in the empire As if to throw another poker chip in the attack Iran (and eventually Syria) ante, "Israel accused Iran and Syria on Friday of planning and funding a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that raised tension before next week’s Palestinian election," reports Reuters. "Sharon aide Raanan Gissin told Reuters Israel had 'ample, concrete evidence’ that the Tel Aviv bombing, for which the Islamic Jihad group claimed responsibility, was bankrolled from Tehran and planned in Damascus." It was also a creation of the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization with a documented history of cooperating with MI6 and the CIA, but don’t expect "Reuters Israel" to mention this. Israel also "aided Hamas directly," according to Richard Sale of UPI and Tony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic Studies, "as a counterbalance to the PLO," that is as a way to defeat Palestinian nationalism, a more fearsome threat than Islam. It should be obvious by now that Israel, Britain, and the United States have created and selectively unleashed Islamic terrorism for decades and continue to lean heavily on this artifice now, as the Straussian plan for total war and destruction in the Middle East reaches a fever pitch. In the past, Israel has accused Iran and Syria of complicity in suicide bombings, but with the Iran attack now front and center in a big way, it is fleshing out its claim, accusing the duo of participating in an "Axis of Terror," an obvious take on and alignment with the Straussian neocon "Axis of Evil," a colorful term initially contrived by Bush chief speechwriter Michael Gerson who refashioned David Frum’s original term "axis of hatred," inspired, Frum admits, from old FDR speeches and Pearl Harbor (the parallel between this and PNAC’s "new Pearl Harbor" rhetoric is obvious). "Gissin portrayed the Tel Aviv bombing as a warning to European powers considering measures against Tehran over its nuclear program," Reuters continues. "This attack was in Tel Aviv. Tomorrow it may be in Berlin or in Paris or in London—countries that may vote against Iran on the issue of its nuclear program," Gissin said. Not only vote against Iran, but serve it up to the Straussian neocons in the Pentagon on a silver platter, ready to be devoured by rabid chicken hawks, to the satisfaction of the Jabotinsky Likudites in Israel. On Thursday, White House press secretary Scott McClellan blurred the lines further as he talked about "terrorists who are committed to a shared ideology" and then effortlessly segued into a discussion of Iran and the sort of "freedom" the Straussian neocons plan to deliver (it will be, McClellan promised, the same sort of "freedom" the Iraqis endure, viz. a freedom replete with depleted uranium, polluted water, lack of electricity, devastated hospitals, and sectarian violence). Meanwhile, additional events do not bode well for peace and prosperity. "A defiant Iran announced Friday it has begun pulling its foreign currency accounts out of European banks to protect its assets from possible U.N. sanctions over its nuclear program," reports the Associated Press. In short, Iran expects the worst. "As analysts estimated the amount of those funds at up to $50 billion, Iran also called for a reduction in OPEC oil production—raising the possibility that the country would deploy its oil prowess in its standoff with the West," a prospect real enough to freak out currency investors. As well, the move may catapult oil prices astronomically upward into the $80 per barrel range as "early as this quarter," Ashraf Laidi, chief currency analyst with MG Financial, told Reuters. Earlier today, oil prices "surged past $ 67 per barrel" and the stock market was "unnerved" by "reports that Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden has threatened new attacks against the United States," according to Sify Finance. It is of course no coincidence al-Qaeda and Islamic Jihad issued rhetoric and a suicide bomb at roughly the same time. Naturally, at the moment the rubber stamp Security Council imposes sanctions on Iran, in preparation for the Straussian neocon and Jabotinsky Likudnik attack in March, Iran will undoubtedly play the oil card. "Emboldened by strong prices and stretched global supplies, Tehran could retaliate by removing all or part of its daily crude sales of 2.4 million barrels from thirsty world markets," reports Reuters, and "actual disruptions would be hard, if not impossible, for the world to cover with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries holding only 1.5 million barrels per day in reserve… Iran, OPEC’s second biggest producer, has warned that world oil prices would be driven higher if the U.N. slaps on sanctions." Moreover, after the United States attacks Iran, the oil market will go into terminal shock, especially if Iran starts pinging oil tankers in the Straits of Hormuz, as feared, and possibly attacking neighbor oil producing states where the U.S. military shelters. For further details on how the Iranians will react to the coming attack, read Kaveh L Afrasiabi’s How Iran will fight back. Most troublesome, especially for the youth of America, is the following: "Iran’s counter-psychological warfare … seeks to take advantage of the 'death-fearing’ American soldiers who typically lack a strong motivation to fight wars not necessarily in defense of the homeland. A war with Iran would definitely require establishing the draft in the US, without which it could not possibly protect its flanks in Afghanistan and Iraq; imposing the draft would mean enlisting many dissatisfied young soldiers amenable to be influenced by Iran’s own psychological warfare focusing on the lack of motivation and 'cognitive dissonance’ of soldiers ill-doctrinated to President George W Bush’s 'doctrine of preemption’, not to mention a proxy war for the sake of Israel." Of course, conscription-slavery is precisely what the Straussian neocons desire, as well as a further militarized and indoctrinated society at large, as these will be required if the interminable "clash of civilizations" crusade is to be successful. It is wise to keep in mind that these chicken hawk sociopaths envision "World War Four" and this is precisely why they are preparing to attack Iran and inflame the Muslim Middle East—to force the reality of continual war waged against the Muslim masses on the American people, who are after all, the neocons are convinced, too soft and decadent and need above all to have war and the idea of dead relatives and neighbors foisted on them in order to toughen them up for the generations of war to come, as promised by Bush and Cheney. "This attack was in Tel Aviv. Tomorrow it may be in Berlin or in Paris or in London – countries that may vote against Iran on the issue its nuclear program," Mr Gissin said. Heil Discipline The bombing was the first in the Jewish state since an 11-month truce expired at the end of last year. Heil Timing

by **Byrne** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 2:47 pm

<img src="http://www.globalresearch.ca/images/middleastmap.jpg" style="border:0;"/> Copyright Eric Waddell, Global Research, 2003 See <a href="http://www.medialens.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1320" target="top">www.medialens.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1320</a> for info on the chain of events/maneuvers leading up to the present situation with Iran. In particular the article: A 'Legal' US Nuclear Attack Against Iran - The real reason for the IAEA Iran resolution, by Jorge Hirsch which explains that a strike against Iran has been 'legitimized' by the affectations of the US in their choice of resolution wordings. With Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank, and <a href="http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Hannity_Colmes_Bolton.wmv" target="top">John Bolton</a> in place as US ambassador to the UN, the players are in place to enact their plans. God Help US

by **finishedqq** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 3:39 pm

"With Wolfowitz as president of the World Bank, and John Bolton in place as US ambassador to the UN, the players are in place to enact their plans. " Yes and the crazy Iranian leader with the apparent death wish. It's almost as if he was placed there by MI6 /CIA/Mossad.

by **StarmanSkye** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:01 pm

Finishedqq said: "Yes and the crazy Iranian leader with the apparent death wish. It's almost as if he was placed there by MI6 /CIA/Mossad." Holy ShIT! I've mildly wondered why in hell the Iranian leader has been acting and speaking so recklessly, almost like Saddam who seemed unaware of the forces massed against him, unable to believe the US and GB and hordes of 'allies' would actually invade and bomb Iraq into the stone age. But how impossible would it be for the DoD/Pentagon to use its black ops bag of high-tech gadgets to manipulate the Iranian leader into acting like a dangerous reckless fool -- never mind how tenuous Iran's nuclear 'threat' really is. Watching this slo-mo geopolitical/military coalescing of of an 'inevitable' war has the same obscene quality as the run-up to the Iraq war -- has the whole world gone mad, and all the world's leaders standing-by meekly accepting another impending horror and war-crime atrocity will occur? Are the reprehensible neocon idiots really going to provoke Russia and China to the brink of all-out war? Iran isn't even a signatory to the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty -- which in any case the US as a signatory has violated. Doesn't China have a keen National Security interest in defending Iran -- or at least defending its access to Iranian oil? What we have is nothing less than a profound, chronic failure of competant government and leadership. I almost suspect the whole nation has been conditioned by black-ops weapons like low-frequency microwaves via HAARP (and Chemtrails?) to make it complacent and disconnected from reality -- so the White House/PTB can impose their OWN version of The Way Things Are. Fucking Nutz. Are the neocons just playing Chicken or are they actually planning the next phase of Armageddon? Somehow, I can't accept the Middle East and Eurasia or China won't object, violently, if the neocons unleash nuclear fallout contamination on their people through their insane quest for war. But one thing's for sure -- the neocons don't play by the same civilized rules of the rest of the world. Hasn't the US refused to directly talk with Iran -- So how can these idiots say war is the 'last' resort? This also looks like a stage in the runup to a eventual UN takeover of a dangerous, out-of-control rogue-state failed-leadership America threatening global security. What in hell IS going on? I get the idea these PTB racketeer-gangster-killers would rather incinerate the world than be indicted for their decades of murder and theft and treason. But, is the house-of-cards ponzai-scheme-scam they've been micromanaging for so long really so close to collapse that they're willing to bet it all on one last desperate gamble? Starman

by **manxkat** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 10:49 pm

Starman, you certainly asked all the pertinent questions regarding Iran. Scary times. My hope is that all the rhetoric is simply political posturing -- i.e. scare tactics to keep the Amerikan people in fear so they'll vote Repugnican in the fall, and thereby allow the continued one-party dictatorial dominance of the U.S. The seemingly obvious solution to the Iran "problem," from a Condi Rice point of view, would be a coup to overthrow the current government and install a puppet government -- one that would stop the coming Oil Bourse as well as any Iranian plans for nuclear armaments. Iran has already threatened to use oil as a weapon: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/9q7s5" target="top">Iran threatens oil crisis in nuclear standoff</a> You asked: "Are the reprehensible neocon idiots really going to provoke Russia and China to the brink of all-out war?" That's what everyone is concerned about, and rightly so. The neocons have shown, over and over again, that they'll do whatever they want, without concern for consequences. My sense is that they will continue down their path of destruction until and unless they are stopped. And, since they're still in power after the most overt lies and scandals of probably any administration in history, they're probably just chuckling behind the scenes. Here's my question. Do the Amerikan people have any say anymore? If we actually do, then there might be a smidgeon of hope in the simple "Fool me once..." saying. After all, Iraq is a fresh disaster (as opposed to Viet Nam) and many people who supported the war initially are now questioning it. Won't it be a much harder sell to scare the public a second time so soon after all the lies regarding Iraq have been exposed? More opinions here, in no particular order: <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0118-27.htm" target="top">The West Has Picked A Fight With Iran That It Cannot Win</a> by Simon Jenkins, The Guardian/UK <a href="http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_437.shtml" target="top">Echoes of war</a> by Ghali Hassan, Online Journal <a href="http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_436.shtml" target="top">Avoiding a war with Iran</a> by Mike Whitney, Online Journal <a href="http://tinyurl.com/cqnk2" target="top">Nuclear War against Iran</a> by Michel Chossudovsky, GlobalResearch.ca <a href="http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010906I.shtml" target="top">Attack on Iran: A Looming Folly</a> by William Rivers Pitt, truthout <a href="http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/121205_world_stories.shtml" target="top">Israel readies forces for strike on nuclear Iran</a> comment by Michael C. Ruppert, FTW <blockquote>Quote:<hr>The US does not dare participate in this attack, if it occurs. And we had all better pray that it doesn’t. That would mean the end of the world as we know it, because China, India, Europe and most of the rest of the world would have to defend their access to Iranian oil. Ahmadinejad is behaving like a madman but there is an even more frightening shrewdness in having groups like Hezbollah step up attacks. Iran would likely retaliate by shutting down the Straits of Hormuz or stopping oil sales to Europe. It would certainly stage multiple retaliatory attacks throughout the region, which would threaten to destabilize Saudi Arabia and plunge the Gulf into utter chaos. These are some of the most alarming developments I have seen in a long time. – MCR<hr></blockquote> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=manxkat@rigorousintuition>manxkat</A> at: 1/22/06 7:51 pm

by **finishedqq** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:23 pm

Let's not forget, only Israel is threatening to attack Iran at present. Neocon Dick Cheney says America will support Israel. Well he would. Any suggestion that this diplomatic belligerence isn't for the sake of Isarel is completely unsustainable. British foreign minister Peter Hain said what happens in Israel affects everyone in Europe. How can that be ? If they start world war it certainly will.

by **Dreams End** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:06 am

I'll be the first to admit perplexity here. Naturally, I do "sustain" the position that this belligerence is not solely for the sake of Israel. First off, it does nothing to enhance the security of Israel. Iranian missiles can hit Israel...but not the U.S. However, that aside, assuming the Israeli establishment is sold on the idea of attacking Iran...can we not see just the slightest glimmer of other reasons the U.S. might play this game? After all, is it a coincidence that Israel is an ally of the US AND Israel is located in the oil rich middle east? Is it possible that the drive to procure, protect and expand control over natural resources might still be in play, since, you know....it's basically been the reasoning behind ALL other U.S. entries into foreign wars? Okay, even though that radical position will bring attacks, a few other unrelated thoughts. First off, I'm pretty sure, unless Iran is completely some sort of huge intel-controlled "fake" enemy (given the "suicidal" comments of late, I can't rule that out), I can't imagine the US would go to war with them. Reason? They'll likely fight back. The Iraq army fled/dissolved into the civilian population and the US STILL hasn't "subdued" that country. Of course, since I don't think the US motivation in Iraq was to "bring democracy" (finally, I'm saying something NOT controversial around here) but to bring chaos with little concern for order/security/democracy in Iraq (i.e. they didn't f*&^k it up...it went according to plan) then maybe the Iran part simply furthers that agenda. So, I'm hoping (probably with futility) that this is all just to keep us on the edge..nervous...worried. However, to argue against myself, I see my local paper and hear on NPR the EXACT same rationale and even exact same wording that led up to the Iraq war. I mean, change ONE LETTER and the commentaries could be the same. This does not make me feel good. An interesting indicator about whether our country is completely "hijacked" by some unAmerican force as opposed to simply operating in a typically American way (do we forget, already, how much worse Vietnam was, both for the victims in Vietnam and Cambodia and to US soldiers?) will be the reaction of the Democrats. While I have no illusions about the "opposition" nature of the Democrats, I am wondering if this extreme (even by US standards) militarism in the face of zero evidence that it will "succeed" or have much support at home, is a policy that goes further than the true elites really desire. Recent CIA "leaks"..the whole "intelligence professionals for social responsiblity" phenomenon, the "leak" of the Abu Ghraib photos, Cheney creating his own "intelligence agency" really makes me wonder if there is a true split in the PTB...with the CIA representing one faction. (Unlike others around here, however, though I can consider the CIA in opposition to Bush...I cannot consider them as good guys.) Not long ago, Wayne Madsen was arguing for a military coup. In the pages of Counterpunch. Alongside "former" CIA analysts diatribes against Bush. So maybe there really is a power struggle going on. Or maybe they are simply ready to cut Bush loose. Let him get impeached. Let the "neo-cons" get rounded up, and let a "savior" of the people come forward. A few months ago, I would have said it was Wes Clark. I don't know who it might be now. I think Kerry is safely out...but the fact that Al Gore and Hillary are suddenly criticizing the war...well, maybe they are to be the new face of the military/industrial/intelligence complex. So, you can all "vote"...though I'm sure I know how the vote will go. Still, I'd ask everyone to keep the other alternatives in mind. I think they represent greater sophistication on the part of our elites than this hamhanded saber rattling. Here's the possibilities as I see them. 1. This is all for Israel and somehow Israel has gained control over the U.S. and controls our foreign policy to the extent that they can command the US military to begin a war that is unlikely to lead anywhere remotely resembling "success". 2. Ditto the above...only this is a bluff, misdirection or psyops to get us all freaked out. 3. The U.S. has reasons for messing with the Middle East, as they've been doing for decades, that transcend Israel...though Israel is important to their agenda in the Middle East. (I even hate the term "Middle East." As Tim Wise says, "Middle of WHAT? East of WHAT?) By allowing this to look as if it is "on behalf of Israel" two things are accomplished. a. A handy scapegoat keeps people from looking at the true source of power in this country. b. The strong support of Israel among Jews and also radical Christians is being used to insure support of the war. I think Pat Robertson is total intel. He even went to Yale for Lord/Lady's sake. 4. There is an actual split in the deep political structure and certain elements actually oppose the current administration's warmongering. Hey, there's a first time for everything. I feel, however, that the signs of this struggle were around way back in the '04 elections. And if it were real...I feel like the Dems would have offered some real opposition. 5. There is no real split in the elite power-structure and Bush and the "neo-cons", knowingly or unknowingly, are serving an agenda and will be cut loose to suffer impeachment, arrest, and electoral defeat. This is why I think we are seeing the revelation of Israeli spying and the Abramoff case. If Israel IS spying on the US (not sure why if they, as alleged by some, actually RUN the place) this is surely under the same Gentleman's agreement we've always had with allies. A nod and a wink and a "don't go too far" are usually all that's required. But look at the groundwork that has been laid. Handy subjects for our anger "neo-cons". Israel. A handy "backstory" that the US has been hijacked and thus, ridding us of Bush and the neo-cons will somehow change anything. (How do you explain Clinton, then. or even LBJ?) And the CIA is even doing this openly, with, as I mentioned, "former" agents having been opining for some years now about the "threat of the neo-cons." Okay, length of my explanation shows where my opinion lies. Jeff's recent post on the neo-cons is pretty similar I think. I add to that the Madsen calls for military coup (keep in mind...this was in Counterpunch and he urged the "left" to support this option. He ACTUALLY said a "Seven Days in May" scenario doesn't HAVE to be bad. Go rent that movie and see what kind of mindf*&^k YOU think is being pulled here. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=dreamsend@rigorousintuition>Dreams End</A> at: 1/23/06 1:26 pm

by **Dreams End** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:09 am

I meant to write "I sustain the position that this belligerence is NOT soley for Israel." Edit not functioning for me right now, for some reason. Some of you really enjoyed that little typo, I'm sure.

by **Byrne** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:36 am

Starman, for your info, Iran IS a signatory to the IAEA Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Some further comments.......... There are games of brinkmanship aplay. The Washington Post reported on August 2, 2005; Page A01 -, “Iran Is Judged 10 Years From Nuclear Bomb U.S. Intelligence Review Contrasts With Administration Statements by Dafina Linzer] that the most recent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of Iran’s nuclear program revealed that, “Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years.” Now the threat is 'months away'!! There are currently IAEA inspectors <a href="http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-236/0601226388184655.htm" target="top">in Iran</a>, inspecting that the Iranian position is in line with the Safeguards Agreement of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). As a signatory to the NPT, Iran has the right to pursue a nuclear option for enegy uses. But Iran has been subject to additional restrictions/sanctions by the more powerful members of the IAEA countries and has undertaken voluntary measures ( See <a href="http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2005/ebsp2005n002.html" target="top">Implementation of Safeguards in the Islamic Republic of Iran - Last November, the Secretariat provided to the Board a comprehensive report on the Agency´s verification of Iran’s compliance with its NPT safeguards obligations and its voluntary suspension of enrichment and reprocessing related activities. (Feb 2005).</a> There is no argument that Iran is being somewhat 'shady' in its dealings with explaning the extent of it's (possible) nuclear weapon capabilities. Does it have such a capability or not. When you think about it, if it told the IAEA where every weapon research facility was, then the list is there for targets for Israel/the US to strike at. It's like procuring a secret defense weapon & then telling your enemies which warehouse you keep it in!! Strategically it does not make sense. the point is, Is Iran a threat to any other country. It seems to me that the US/Israel is the bigger threat, but by their converse posturing, all the blame is laid at Iran's door. The same went for Iraq - how much of a threat was that country? It could be argued that Iran is surreptitiously developing a nuclear weapon capability to prevent the sort of threats from the US/Israel that we are seeing now. This argument is made in the piece below.<blockquote>Quote:<hr>From <a href="http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=496587" target="top">mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=496587</a> Nuclear Politics Iran may, indeed, be attempting to acquire nuclear weapons. However, it also has a "legitimate" interest in developing nuclear power, since its own oil reserves are already post-peak and it aims to continue in its role as an energy exporter. Iran is a signatory in good standing to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has openly informed the International Atomic Energy Agency of its intentions as requried by the Treaty. However, Iran's presumed attempt to acquire nuclear weapons is only the politically acceptable excuse for America's threats. The real danger is that Iran will lay down the foundation for a post-hegemonic international energy industry in which America is merely one of many players. If Iran is, in fact, developing nuclear weapons, it is doing so to acquire a deterrent against exactly this kind of American encroachment. Indeed, recent world events have only enforced the notion that a nation's successful efforts to acquire nuclear weapons confer respect and status, not the opprobrium it deserves. India, a growing economic power that possesses a nuclear arsenal and refuses to sign either the NPT or the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), has just been rewarded for its efforts by US President Bush, who has agreed to "work to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India." This is a straightforward violation of the NPT, which forbids signatories from exchanging nuclear materials or support with non-signatories. If Iran really is trying to acquire nuclear weapons, is it any wonder why? Look at the advantages that having nuclear arsenals have given to US allies India, Pakistan, and Israel, all of which have benefitted immensely from a playing field tilted in their favour by their ability to project devastating power. As official hysteria about Iran's intentions escalates in volume and intensity, remember the real force undermining the moral authority of the NPT: the big nuclear 'have' countries that still refuse either to apply the ban consistently or to take any meaningful steps of their own toward "general and complete disarmament" - ostensibly the NPT's ultimate goal. Ironically, America originally invaded Iraq - a poor, defenseless country - partly to send a message to other oil producing countries not to rock the petrodollar system, but the real message for small countries is that they need to present a credible deterrent threat or risk being ignored and/or invaded.<hr></blockquote> The Iranian Oil Bourse is still being ignored by the MSM. Why doesn't Iran allow full & unfettered access to the IAEA (which I thought it was doing?!) and provide full & clear transparency as to it's complete nuclear (military & energy) capabilities. For all we know, it may be doing, but that isn't being reported. Then it could proceed with it's bourse & expose the US/Israeli warmongering. The next IAEA meeting/stage is on Feb 2nd 2006 in Vienna. Info is at <a href="http://www.iaea.or.at/" target="top">.www.iaea.or.at/</a> The Iranian position is reported at <a href="http://www.irna.ir/en/news/menu-236/" target="top">www.irna.ir/en/news/menu-236/</a>

by **Dreams End** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:45 am

Ironically, or maybe just as a mindf*&^k, I think 10 years away was what the real analysts said about Iraq's nuclear weapons capability. They don't even change their story...because they know ultimately the story doesn't matter that much. Kinda like the big budget special effects films that won't hire decent writers.

by **dbeach** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:42 pm

Iran leader is part of the grand game sadam jr..Empire asset..stooge Iran is not getting NUKED. China and Russia have sweetheart deals with their lil pal Iran and its not time yet... MAYBE in the future these so called world leaders will start WW III but not this yr. Fear tactics to scare the sleepers into more repukes in CONgress and another repuke for 2008. dums and repukes got plenty more lootin of the US middle class to do before the signs line up for the big fireworks.. something like the US and Israel against the Arabs and then Russsia and/or China nuking the US.. Cold war is very much alive except the US traitors are more obvious.. thats my 2 grains worth.

by **emad** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:48 pm

SHRILL DOOMSAYER in LONON: "And even the like precurse of fierce events As harbingers preceding still the fates And prologue to the omen coming on..." In Shakespeare, mighty events are heralded by portents, such as the presence of strangem out-of-place animals. Indeed, the death of Cromwell in 1658 was preceded by the arrival of a large whale in the River Thames. What does yesterday's visitor portend? Diarist John Evelyn recorded: "After a long conflict it was killed with the harping irons.....after a horrid groan it ran quite on shore, and died." ----------------------------------------------------------- UK bookmakers Ladbrokes this morning updated their DOOMSDAY odds for 2006: Death of QEII and enthronement of new monarch (NOT Chalres) ......cut from 25/1 odds to 16/1 Blair quits as PM.....cut from 11/8 to 5/4

Another shrill doomsayer has his say....

Another shrill doomsayer has his say....

Oy

Re: Oy

False Flags R Us

Looks like it's gonna happen

Iranian leader

Re: Iranian leader

Re: Iranian leader

Israel

Iran

correction

Re Iran & the NPT

Re: Re Iran & the NPT

Re: Re Iran & the NPT

Thames whale: previous sighting preceded Cromwell's death

Who is online