Did the CIA give Iran the bomb? Extracts from New York Times reporter James Risen's new book | Environment | The Guardian
Marcy Wheeler « Antiwar Radio with Scott Horton and Charles Goyette
2011年7月14日木曜日
2011年7月12日火曜日
2010年12月1日水曜日
2010年11月1日月曜日
2010年10月6日水曜日
Iranians Want Capacity to Enrich Uranium But Accept NPT Rules Against Developing Nuclear Weapons - World Public Opinion
Iranians Want Capacity to Enrich Uranium But Accept NPT Rules Against Developing Nuclear Weapons - World Public Opinion
"We might tarry for a moment to ask whether there is any solution to the U.S.-Iran confrontation over nuclear weapons. Here is one idea:(1)Iran should have the right to develop nuclear energy, but not weapons, in accord with the NPT. (2)A nuclear weapons-free zone should be established in the region, including Iran, Israel, and U.S. forces deployed there. (3)The United States should accept the NPT. (4)The United States should end threats against Iran and turn to serious diplomacy.
The proposals are not original. These are the preferences of the large majority of Americans, and also Iranians, in polls by World Public Opinion, which found that Americans and Iranians agree on basic issues." (Noam Chomsky, Hopes and Prospects)
"We might tarry for a moment to ask whether there is any solution to the U.S.-Iran confrontation over nuclear weapons. Here is one idea:(1)Iran should have the right to develop nuclear energy, but not weapons, in accord with the NPT. (2)A nuclear weapons-free zone should be established in the region, including Iran, Israel, and U.S. forces deployed there. (3)The United States should accept the NPT. (4)The United States should end threats against Iran and turn to serious diplomacy.
The proposals are not original. These are the preferences of the large majority of Americans, and also Iranians, in polls by World Public Opinion, which found that Americans and Iranians agree on basic issues." (Noam Chomsky, Hopes and Prospects)
2010年8月15日日曜日
Hilary: "it’s not so much the timing as to when if – when or how the Iranians might pursue the nuclear weapons, it’s whether they do so."
Interview With David Sanger and Mark Landler of The New York Times
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Via Telephone
August 6, 2010
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, that would be based on intelligence assessments so I’m not going there.
QUESTION: But it’s also based on your conversations with allies who are --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let me just – let me say that based on my conversations with allies, it’s not so much the timing as to when if – when or how the Iranians might pursue the nuclear weapons, it’s whether they do so. And so whether it would take six months, a year, or five years, it’s that deep concern about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons that is the preoccupation of our friends and partners. And we would be pursuing the path we’re pursuing regardless of any issue of timing because we think it’s got the best potential for changing Iranian behavior.
QUESTION: One of your colleagues made the observation a few weeks ago that if, in fact, the Iranians don’t respond to the sanctions, don’t come back in a serious way in the September, October period, that the time may come for you or the President or others to speak – to use that phrase, “All options on the table,” more vigorously than you have. And I noticed that the President did use it briefly with the columnists the other day. Is there a sort of a conscious decision underway here to reinforce to the Iranians that you’re giving this limited time?
SECRETARY CLINTON: (Inaudible) I think we’ve always said that we were looking at all kinds of approaches to resolving this very threatening situation. So I don’t want to characterize what we’re doing now other than to say we’ve always pursued a two-track approach of pressure and engagement and we continue to do so, and I don’t think the President or any of us want to be issuing public red lines at this point. The President’s been very clear that Iran should understand that he is leaving all options on the table and that they should take him at his word, but I don’t think it benefits our efforts to go much further than that.
for more
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Via Telephone
August 6, 2010
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, that would be based on intelligence assessments so I’m not going there.
QUESTION: But it’s also based on your conversations with allies who are --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let me just – let me say that based on my conversations with allies, it’s not so much the timing as to when if – when or how the Iranians might pursue the nuclear weapons, it’s whether they do so. And so whether it would take six months, a year, or five years, it’s that deep concern about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons that is the preoccupation of our friends and partners. And we would be pursuing the path we’re pursuing regardless of any issue of timing because we think it’s got the best potential for changing Iranian behavior.
QUESTION: One of your colleagues made the observation a few weeks ago that if, in fact, the Iranians don’t respond to the sanctions, don’t come back in a serious way in the September, October period, that the time may come for you or the President or others to speak – to use that phrase, “All options on the table,” more vigorously than you have. And I noticed that the President did use it briefly with the columnists the other day. Is there a sort of a conscious decision underway here to reinforce to the Iranians that you’re giving this limited time?
SECRETARY CLINTON: (Inaudible) I think we’ve always said that we were looking at all kinds of approaches to resolving this very threatening situation. So I don’t want to characterize what we’re doing now other than to say we’ve always pursued a two-track approach of pressure and engagement and we continue to do so, and I don’t think the President or any of us want to be issuing public red lines at this point. The President’s been very clear that Iran should understand that he is leaving all options on the table and that they should take him at his word, but I don’t think it benefits our efforts to go much further than that.
for more
2010年5月29日土曜日
2010年5月20日木曜日
Muhammad Sahimi « Antiwar Radio with Scott Horton and Charles Goyette
Muhammad Sahimi « Antiwar Radio with Scott Horton
Muhammad Sahimi, Professor of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science at the University of Southern California, discusses the Iran/Turkey/Brazil enriched uranium swap agreement, the predictable negative reception from Europe and the US, further demands upon Iran and continuing sanctions meant to queer the deal, Hillary Clinton’s last minute attempt to dissuade Turkey and Brazil from cooperating with Iran and why arguing for Iran’s rights under the NPT is not an endorsement of Ahmadinejad or the ayatollahs.
Muhammad Sahimi, Professor of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science at the University of Southern California, discusses the Iran/Turkey/Brazil enriched uranium swap agreement, the predictable negative reception from Europe and the US, further demands upon Iran and continuing sanctions meant to queer the deal, Hillary Clinton’s last minute attempt to dissuade Turkey and Brazil from cooperating with Iran and why arguing for Iran’s rights under the NPT is not an endorsement of Ahmadinejad or the ayatollahs.
2010年4月29日木曜日
2010年4月18日日曜日
2010年4月3日土曜日
Obama: ALL THE EVIDENCE shows Iran is developing nukes - Haaretz - Israel News
Obama said "all the evidence indicates" that Tehran is trying to get the "capacity to develop nuclear weapons." Advertisement With such a capability, Obama said that Iran could "destabilize" life in the Mideast and trigger an arms race in the region, adding that, for that reason, he felt "the idea here is to keep on turning up the pressure." - Haaretz - Israel News
What evidence? Where?
What He said does not make any sense unless he was actually talking about U.S. & Israel (but in that case they already have nukes!). Or he wants the whole world to know that he is seriously evil. The Godfather of the world!
What evidence? Where?
What He said does not make any sense unless he was actually talking about U.S. & Israel (but in that case they already have nukes!). Or he wants the whole world to know that he is seriously evil. The Godfather of the world!
2010年3月24日水曜日
2010年2月21日日曜日
2010年2月11日木曜日
2010年1月11日月曜日
2010年1月2日土曜日
ANTIWAR.COM: The Iran bomb threat talks are unreliable
Philip Giraldi « Antiwar Radio with Scott Horton and Charles Goyette
Former CIA and DIA officer Philip Giraldi discusses evidence that documents contradicting the 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate on Iran are forgeries, the history of Rupert Murdoch-owned media passing along propaganda from Israeli and British intelligence, how bogus news stories create a deeply ingrained false narrative and distort public perception, the overwhelming Congressional support for warlike sanctions on Iran, the possibility Osama bin Laden is long-dead and how ending military occupations would almost completely eliminate terrorism.
MP3(53:05)
Former CIA and DIA officer Philip Giraldi discusses evidence that documents contradicting the 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate on Iran are forgeries, the history of Rupert Murdoch-owned media passing along propaganda from Israeli and British intelligence, how bogus news stories create a deeply ingrained false narrative and distort public perception, the overwhelming Congressional support for warlike sanctions on Iran, the possibility Osama bin Laden is long-dead and how ending military occupations would almost completely eliminate terrorism.
MP3(53:05)
登録:
投稿 (Atom)