Sounds like people in the CIA want to make sure the world knows we’re going to war this time for phony reasons BEFORE we start.
‘No proof’ of Iran nuclear arms
The US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has not found conclusive evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, a US magazine has reported.
Veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, writing in The New Yorker, cites a secret CIA report based on intelligence such as satellite images.
Correspondents say the alleged document appears to challenge Washington’s views regarding Iranian nuclear intentions.
And where have we heard this line before:
The article says the White House was dismissive about the CIA report.
[…]as with Iraq, it suggests political battles to come over how intelligence is used as a basis for American foreign policy.
You heard this line when the CIA said the exact same thing about North Korea.
Conclusive evidence is hard to come by in a closed society.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB87/
And then Bush and Cheney does their research on Google…
Y’know, it would save a lot of time, money, ink and electrons if the GOP would simply merge the War on Terror, the War on Drugs, the War on Godless Liberalism, &c., &c., into a nice, convenient omnibus War On Reality.
#4 – That would require them to acknowledge reality in the first place. Too recursive. Never happen.
So let me get this straight – it’s the opinion of the group here that Iran is NOT trying to develop nukes?
Really?
Iran will never possess nukes, Israel will see to that! They attacked Osirak in 1981 and Saddam’s nuclear program never recovered. The fact that Israel hasn’t attacked yet is the best evidence Iran isn’t close to possessing nukes.
why this obsession with iran, other than bush and fox constantly pushing it?
pakistan has many nukes, and is falling to hard-core islamic fundies as we speak. and they’ve already sold the tech to korea. and bin laden and his people are operating in the northwest as an independent nation, through an informal agreement with the nominal government.
pakistan doesn’t have oil.
I have no real personal opinion on the matter, but I heard the Israeli nuclear pilots were doing exercises.
Well taken, JT.
Building nukes is infinitely more expensive and laborious than simply letting your already-paranoid enemies think you might have ’em.
and catbeller –
You’re right. All this wringing-of-hands over the possibility of nukes falling into the hands of Muslim fundamentalists is ludicrous.
The military runs Pakistan.
The military is rife with Muslim fundies.
Pakistan has nukes.
Therfore, Muslim Fundies already have nukes. Q.E.D.
Israel says Iran has nukes and wants to take them out with tactical nuclear weapons, so the U.S. concurs; what else is new?
You know if this group(USA) would open its doors to information, and spread it freely and openly to be disected and discussed, MAYBE we could get a decent opinion, insted of all this HUSH HUSH, crap that led to the last wars…
This is as bad, as a little boy trying to sneak a cookie, and dogeing and sneaking all over, until the parents find, its to late to stop him..
I aint to worried about nuke weapons,
If we cant stop them BEFORE they get into this country, ITS OUR OWN FAULT, AND OUR GOVERNMENTS. Its not that easy to move nuke material…
I worry about an ICBM, intercontinental balistic missle… WHICH isnt that easy to test in private…
Lets just walk threw, this country with giger counters, and SHOW them whats happening to them… It took the US gov 30 years to Learn how to handle this stuff safely, and they STILL wont acknowledge alot of their Own mistakes.
#6 Of course, Iran is trying to develop nukes. They are afraid we are going to invade them. It is just that they do not have them and are a long way from having them. All this tension over Iran having the bomb is silly. Pakistan has it, and they hate the U.S. and Israel as much as Iran does.
I just saw the Good Shepard this weekend, and it reminded me of how falsely the former USSR was built up as all powerful. It was a sham. We are doing the same thing with Iran right now.
What just gets me is the obsession with “cheap” oil. The U.S. spends hundreds of billions defending the right to buy tens of billions of oil. If you spent the money defending the oil on developing alternate energy means, we could tell the arabs to drink it. The best way to stop terrorism is to quit buying arab oil. If you add in defense costs, the real price of gasoline is around $15 a gallon. If not for oil, would we care if Iran had the bomb?
POINT of fact…
we DONT get that much oil from the middle east…
we get 60% from canada
around 20% from Cali and texas…
Most of the rest from S. America….
US corps want us to BUY the foriegn oil, its CHEAPER, and they can add MORE money into there pockets. The middle east tries to keep their prices around $23-25 per barrel…
so, ask…whats UP with the US charging so much..
ITS MONEY…Its a commodity…(look it up)
A saying in our family — “My mind is made up, don’t confuse me with the facts!”
just like your bed,
either someone ELSE does it,
Or its a mess…
you said the magic words Uncle Dave….the ones that say……bullshit on this premis….they are…SEYMOUR HERSH!!!!!
enuff said.
Found this article while looking for “nuke related” material –
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=655#more-655
the nuke drive for the starship sounds feasible…
17. ECA. You sir, continue to annoy and amuse all at the same time. You are a unique individual.
When government continually dismisses the will of the people there is only one option. I am disheartened that the democrats have taken impeachment off the table. Things may get desperate, people will have to decide how to take this country back.
When government continually dismisses the will of the people there is only one option. I am disheartened that the democrats have taken impeachment off the table. Things may get desperate, people will have to decide how to take our country back.
ECA where do you get the idea that the Middle East charges less than $30 a barrel?
Yes Iran is probably years away from nuclear weapons capability. So do you let them acquire in the meantime? With the current ruler that’s a bad idea, but perhaps he would be replaced with a saner person who isn’t carrying visions of a 12th imam arriving if he starts a war with Israel.
http://www.wtrg.com/prices.htm
http://www.opec.org/home/PowerPoint/Taxation/taxation.htm
You have to think about something.
The CORP doesnt want to pay anything.
the Corp dont want to use its own resources
they BUY, and hold
then sell to those that want it, AT their price, at least 2 times what they paid.
Then consider that the oil corps, OWN each other, they can buy back and forth until the price is right for them.
ADD to that the average Tax, is about $.070-$1 per gallon,
Profit margin for the seller/gas station is about $0.21-0.50
the rest is pure profit. about $1 per gallon in the US.
20, thank you…
At 47, and handicapped, I learned to be obnoxious Along time ago, and question everything, harshly. I learned humans, by watching them most of my life, and its ALL the same.
# 22 Nuclear weapons are already in the hands of a madman. Perhaps if the US President is replaced with a saner person who isnt carrying visions of The Crusades and is itching to start a war with Iran, the world would be a better place.
This is deja view all over again.
This is just like the 2002 story, now long forgotten, that Sen. Bob Graham demanded an intelligence report from the CIA on if they thought Iraq was a threat. After much persistence, he got his report in October 2002. The answer? No imminent threat (unless we attacked first.)
It made the news for about two days, was quickly forgotten, and the Bush administration just kept on making the claim as if the report never happened.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=119
So I recommend keeping a copy of this article about Iran. In a few short days, the war mongers will call you a liar for mentioning it.
ECA, your links don’t show OPEC currently charging less than $30 a barrel, or a significant price difference between OPEC and non-OPEC oil. The charts also don’t show $70 a barrel oil, but I’ll assume that’s due to time and inflation differences.
While you’re doing your strange caps-no caps thing, think about this. The corp that sells oil is losing oil that they can sell in the future. If oil is a limited supply, then this means that they are selling cheaply now what they can sell for more in the future.