Nukes and Iran

Newsworthy subjects post here

Nukes and Iran

Postby NUKELIES » 04 Nov 2011 22:12

[Keywords: nuke lies Iran nuclear weapon lies Iran war scare global nuke lies Iran]
NOTE -- We explore nuclear weapons, which now seem to have been a hoax since 1945. And nuclear power may well be a fraud, too. Please read the site! Click here for a guided tour of the site - topic description with its link.

Ahmadinejad is a fake just like obama. Any true leader would speak the truth. In English. To the whole world via the internet. He hosted that Holocaust Revisionist conference simply as a front - what do the powers-that-be care if a bunch of Muslims think the holocaust didn't happen? They already do! And the conference linked Holocaust Revisionism with Muslims. So they invited David Duke and used it as a sort of clearing-house to test and tally world response, which was probably mediocre at best.

If Ahmadinejad is legitimate, what was he doing in New York? Any legitimate opponent of the New World Order and globalism would shun the United Nations, and would never set foot in the U.S. or U.K.

Gaddafi was the real thing - compromised? Yes. But sovereign. Compare Ahmadinejad's posturing platitudes with Gaddafi's real rebellion. I really believe Gaddafi is dead. Saddam Hussein? No - I think the hanging video was fake. Maybe his sons are really dead. If they execute Ahmadinejad at some point it will also be fake because he is one of them.

The real thing that we should all be paying attention to is the relationship between the people and their leaders. In Libya, the majority loved Gaddafi. In America, the majority hate obama. They hate the obamanation. They never interview middle America, and all "mainstream" journalists know to filter out anti-obama sentiment. In Iran, the majority know that Ahmadinejad is at least compromised by "Western" interests. Many know that he is more than just compromised - more like an agent of globalism.

Nukes don't exist. If Ahmadinejad were a real opponent of the West, he would put an end to the one excuse the West and Israel claim to have for bombing Iran: the supposed possession by Iran of a nuclear arsenal.

Here is a rather heavy article having to do with Iran supposedly having "enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons." ... -rise.html

UK and U.S. 'draw up joint plan to attack Iran': Evidence of nuclear programme raises tension in Middle East
Whitehall figures say Iran is 'newly aggressive - and we are not sure why'
Iran 'has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons'
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushing for invasion
Tel Aviv test-fires rockets capable of carrying nuclear warheads into Iran
Report reveals China continues to supply Tehran with missiles and other conventional weapons
Obama says nuclear programme remains a threat and calls on Iran to reveal its intentions
Created 11:01 PM on 2nd November 2011

Comments (1006)
Add to My Stories

The UK and U.S. are drawing up plans to attack Iran amid growing tensions in the Middle East, it was claimed last night.
Barack Obama and David Cameron are preparing for war after reports that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hardline regime in Tehran has been linked to three assassination plots on foreign soil, according to senior officials in Whitehall.

Serious threat: David Cameron and Barack Obama are drawing up plans for an invasion of Iran, as the country's nuclear development spirals out of control

Iran has come sharply back into focus following the end of the Libya conflict.
And the unrest has been inflamed by sabre-rattling from top politicians in Israel.
President Obama said Iran's nuclear programme continues to pose a threat and that he and French president Nicolas Sarkozy want the international community to maintain pressure on the country to admit its intentions.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is preparing to reveal intelligence on Iran's alleged nuclear arms experiments.

Aggressive stance: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been linked to assassinations on foreign soil and is pressing closer to building a nuclear bomb
Iran has consistently denied that it is trying to build nuclear weapons and insists the programme is for peaceful purposes.
The U.S., Britain and France want the IAEA to share its intelligence, but Russia and China are pressing for the report to be delayed or scrapped entirely.
Yesterday it was revealed that Tel Aviv had successfully test-fired a rocket capable of carrying a nuclear warhead which could strike Iran.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak are reportedly agitating for a pre-emptive attack against the Islamic state.
The UK would be likely to agree to any U.S. decision to invade, even though the Ministry of Defence are stretched to breaking point by swingeing budget cuts and wars in Afghanistan and Libya.
An MoD spokesman said: ‘The British government believes that a dual track strategy of pressure and engagement is the best approach to address the threat from Iran’s nuclear programme and avoid regional conflict.
‘We want a negotiated solution—but all options should be kept on the table.’
A special unit at the MoD has been instructed to work out the UK's strategy if the Army should invade Iran.
War planners will look at potential deployments of Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles and RAF fighter jets armed with precision-guided Paveway IV and Brimstone bombs and missiles, surveillance planes and air-to-air refuelling.

Standby: A convoy of mine-resistant U.S. tanks, pictured in Iraq, could now be deployed to Iran

Ready for violence: A plume of smoke left by the missile Israel test-fired yesterday (right), thought to be a Jericho missile. Left, another cruise missile. The Israel missile was capable of carrying a nuclear warhead

On the attack: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is lobbying Western forces to take action against Iran
Senior Whitehall figures have expressed alarm that Iran appeared ‘newly aggressive—and we are not quite sure why’.
Western intelligence has also suggested that Iran is hiding the material for a covert nuclear weapons programme in fortified bunkers which cannot be reached by conventional missiles.
Barack Obama is understood to have no wish to attack Iran in the run-up to the White House elections next year. But Washington may be pressured by Israel if Iran’s nuclear programme is not curtailed.
Mr Netanyahu is apparently also lobbying Cabinet members for a military strike, despite the likelihood it would draw a retaliation from Iran.
An Israeli defence official said the rocket launched by the military had merely been a long-planned test for a 'propulsion system'.
Further information about the rocket was censored by the military, but foreign reports said it was a long-range Jericho missile - capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and striking Iran.

Israel speeds up ballistic missile tests as speculation grows of attack on Iran
Israel considers Iran its most dangerous threat. It cites Tehran's nuclear programme, ballistic missile development, repeated references by the Iranian leader to Israel's destruction and the government's support for anti-Israel militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
Mr Ahmadinejad denies his country is trying to produce a bomb, claiming its nuclear programme is only intended to produce energy for the oil-rich country.
But the work could only be for the design and development of a nuclear warhead, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency's report.

Ready to strike: The Natanz nuclear site, 130 miles south of Tehran, where Iran is believed to be enriching uranium

Concerns: The nuclear power plant in Bushehr, southern Iran. The facility began to be fuelled last year
Israel have repeatedly insisted that economic sanctions could persuade Iran to halt its nuclear ambitions.
Diplomats have been lobbying the international community for tougher sanctions - but have now stepped up their interventions.
It comes as Mr Netanyahu defended his decision to expand settlements in east Jerusalem.
He said it was Israel's 'right' and 'duty' to build in all parts of its capital.
Israel captured east Jerusalem in the 1967 war, along with the West Bank. Palestinians claim that section of the city as their future capital.

Inspection: Technicians from the International Atomic Energy Agency check the uranium conversion plant in Isfahan, Iran. Tehran has repeatedly failed to meet its obligations by revealing the construction of nuclear facilities
Work to develop nuclear facilities began in the 1990s, with the Russian Federation providing experts, although the U.S. blocked the trade of equipment or construction of technology for Iran.
International attention was drawn to its developing nuclear potential in 2002 after an Iranian dissident revealed the existence of two sites that were under construction - a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz and a heavy water facility in Arak.

Security implications: The UN has passed seven resolutions aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear aspirations, but most of them have been repeatedly flouted
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) sought access to these facilities, but it wasn't until 2003 that Iran agreed to cooperate with it and suspend enrichment activities. The investigation revealed Iran had failed to meet several obligations, including divulging the importation of uranium from China.
The following year, work began on the construction of a heavy water reactor, but again Iran announced a suspension of uranium enrichment under the terms of the Paris Agreement.
After Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election as president in August 2005, Iran removed the seals on its enrichment equipment and effectively rejected the Paris Agreement.
President Ahmadinejad announced that Iran had successfully enriched uranium in a televised address in 2006, where he announced the country had joined those with nuclear technology.
Then U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had urged the UN Security Council to consider 'strong steps' to force Tehran to shelve its nuclear ambitions
Subsequently the UN Security Council has passed seven resolutions on Iran insisting it ends its enrichment activities.
These have included freezing the assets of people and organisations linked to its nuclear and missile programmes.
Three nuclear scientists working on the programme have been killed in the last two years and a computer virus also affected enrichment at the Natanz plant in 2010.
February, 2009: IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran was not allowing UN inspectors to determine if it was working developing nuclear weapons.
June, 2009: IAEA reveals it was blocked from inspecting nuclear facilities, but Mr ElBaradei voices opposition to Israel support for military strike, saying it would turn region into 'ball of fire'.
July, 2009: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he had agreed with President Barack Obama to engage with Iran until the end of the year, but the country would be free to take on the 'existential threat' with military force after the deadline passed. Mr Obama also gave Iran until September to adhere to IAEA proposals or 'face consequences'. Iran threatens to strike back at Israel if its nuclear facilities were targeted.
September, 2009: Second enrichment facility is revealed 20 miles north of Qom, Iran.
January, 2010: Masoul Ali Mohammadi - a particle physicist - is killed by a remote-control bomb as he left for work.
August, 2010: Iran acquires nuclear fuel rods from Russia and begins fuelling of Bushehr I reactor - reportedly to generate electricity.
October, 2010: Stuxnet computer worm infects systems at Natanz enrichment plant, causing centrifuges to crash and suspending work.
November, 2010: Second physicist, Majid Shahriar, killed when bomb was stuck to the side of his car by a motorcyclist.
July, 2011: Darioush Rezaie - third physicist involved in Iran's nuclear programme - shot dead.
Yesterday, Mr Netanyahu's office said 2,000 new apartments would be built in Jewish areas of east Jerusalem.
Officials said the move was a response to recent unilateral steps by the Palestinians, particularly its acceptance into the UN cultural agency UNESCO.
He has blamed Israel for disruptions to the nuclear programme, including the mysterious assassinations of a string of Iranian nuclear scientists and a computer virus that wiped out some nuclear centrifuges.
But a report by the UN's nuclear watchdog due to be published next week will provide fresh evidence of Iran's activity, bringing the Middle East a step closer to another devastating conflict.
It is the latest of a series of quarterly bulletins on Iran's arms programme, but will contain an unprecedented level of detail on research and experiments carried out in recent years.
It comes as a draft report revealed China is continuing to provide advanced missiles and other conventional arms to Iran, in violation of UN sanctions against the regime.
The report, from the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, revealed China sold $312million of arms to Iran, second only to Russia.
It also noted that after Russia began cutting back arms transfers to Iran in 2008, China became the largest arms supplier to the Iranian military.
Most of the weapons transfers involved sales of Chinese anti-ship cruise missiles, including C-802 missiles that China promised the U.S. in 1997 would not be exported to Iran.
The report says: 'Because of the relatively short range of these missiles, China's provision of them to Iran does not violate the Iran, North Korea and Syria Non-proliferation Act of 2006, which seeks to prevent the transfer of only those missiles that can carry a 500kg warhead more than 300km.
'It is possible, however, that these transactions violate the Iran Freedom Support Act, or the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability and Divestment Act of 2010, which both use the ambiguous term "advanced conventional weapons."'

Print this article Read later Email to a friend
Share this article:
Digg it

Ads by Google:
Homeland Security Career
100%Online Counterterrorism-focused Bachelor Degree - Homeland Security
NYC Psychiatrist,Mt.Sinai
Professor. Treatments:Hypnotherapy Biofeedback,Meds,Cognitive Therapy
Comments (1006)
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not debate this issue live on our message boards.
The comments below have not been moderated.
NewestOldestBest ratedWorst rated
View all
No more war!! Get a grip you politicians!! Can't you do something positive instead of spending billions on wars and sending the forces off to get killed! Start thinking what you can do to make the world a better place instead of the hellhole it will turn into if this war takes place!
- lin, sa, 04/11/2011 02:20
Click to rate Rating 38 Report abuse
The axis of evil is NATO.
- Free But Angry Thinker, Hounslow, England, 04/11/2011 00:39
Click to rate Rating 31 Report abuse
When King Croesus of Lydia, not content with his fabulous wealth, was scheming to enlarge his kingdom by attacking Persia (the country known today as Iran), he took the precaution of sending envoys to the Delphic Oracle for advice. The answer he received was that if he went ahead with his planned invasion, he would destroy a great kingdom. Encouraged by this prophecy, he went ahead and launched a war on the Persian king Cyrus. He suffered a disastrous defeat and the kingdom that he ended up destroying was his own. Our warmongering politicians would be well advised to heed this lesson from history. That said, it is simply scandalous that a war crime under international law, i.e., an aggressive war in peacetime, can be openly discussed as a rational policy option.
- Pictorex, Chrismas Island, 04/11/2011 00:27
Click to rate Rating 36 Report abuse
iran has never attacked or invaded any country these past few years. but this so called invasion will never happen. if it does, serious international crimes will be committed.
- abdel, london, 04/11/2011 00:07
Click to rate Rating 32 Report abuse
Here comes world war 3.
- booth2710, South Croydon, 03/11/2011 23:40
Click to rate Rating 34 Report abuse
That is absolute nonsense. planning to attack another nation??? The U.S and its allies should have invaded Iraq back in 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait and the world support it. I served in the Navy as a corpman with Marines from 97-01 to earn my U.S citizenship, was recalled after 9/11 from 01-03 and gladly went because of 9.11 for Afghanistan and surely not for the whole Iraq fiasco. I was stop loss twice from 03-04, 04-05. Yeah two extra tours. That was fun. In 06 they had the nerve to send me letter home to rejoin and when I refused I was put on the reserves 4 more years and deployed in 08 to 09. I would be nice to finish college some time this decade. Clearly the Armed Forces are stretch to the limit and war sentimentality here in the US is turning to be like that of Vietnam again. But who cares about 4k dead and 50k wounded, those numbers have already being satisfied. The days of colonialism are over! all that come come from this is WWIII
- Alfredo, Houston, USA, 03/11/2011 23:31
Click to rate Rating 5 Report abuse
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
We are no longer accepting comments on this article.

Read more: ... z1cm0vxWJV
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 302
Joined: 17 Mar 2011 15:53
Location: UK/USA

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby FirstClassSkeptic » 06 Nov 2011 23:08

While I don't believe nukes exist, I do believe that Iran has some pretty effective missiles. I think it's very possible that Iran has the capability to sink all the USA warships in that area. That would be a devastating blow to the USA. It would have a large psychological effect on the people in the USA.

Every empire of the past had that last battle where they lost ignominiously. The whole faith in that nation's system, economy and money are destroyed. It would seem to me that the USA is on the verge of that catastrophic event. However, they have postured with Iran so many times to go to war, and then backed off, that it's become the boy who cried 'Wolf'.
User avatar
Posts: 671
Joined: 20 Mar 2011 21:19

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby rerevisionist » 07 Nov 2011 17:54

It's difficult to even guess the military situation, isn't it. Would one hit by a missile sink a modern battleship? Is there some underwater anti-ship technology? Are missiles immune from electronic interference? Do the people supposedly in control know about nukes? Is there some presently-secret method to bring down planes? Can airborne control systems be 'compromised'?

It's difficult to guess the psychology, too. The casual references to genocide in Vietnam shows how powerful the media stranglehold still is - or appears to be.

The fact they've only postured so far suggests maybe they have worries, though.
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby Heiwa » 09 Nov 2011 07:11

The International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, has November 7, 2011 issued a 12 chapters report about Iran that you cannot read about at .
The report has been given to the five UN veto powers and Iran (and I read about in FAZ of November 8, page 6). According to FAZ and the report Iran today is or has been active in all fields of building nuclear weapons, incl. enrichment of uranium, manufacture of a bomb that can be carried by a missile and development of a mechanism that can trigger the exponential chain reaction of this Iranian nuclear bomb.

Iran evidently informs that their nuclear research program is fully peaceful. No bomb, no triggering mechanism!

IAEA cannot produce any ‘smoking gun’ or clear evidence that Iran is building a nuclear bomb of any kind. In an Annex B of the report, IAEA, says that their findings are based on info from 10 (!) different secret (spy) services and the secretary general of IAEA, Amano, thinks their info is reliable.

It is a pity that IAEA cannot publish its report on its own web site.
Posts: 53
Joined: 22 Oct 2011 10:19

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby rerevisionist » 10 Nov 2011 03:31

Heiwa, if nuclear weapons don't exist, all that material is smoke and mirrors, or moonshine, or - select your own imagery.

I'm talking about 'conventional' weapons. With satellite navigation, fine control of rocketry, ultra-fine explosives, accurate microelectronic timing, could Iran sink US ships? I just don't know.
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby Heiwa » 10 Nov 2011 06:40

rerevisionist wrote:Heiwa, if nuclear weapons don't exist, all that material is smoke and mirrors, or moonshine, or - select your own imagery.

Of course. The info given to IAEA about Iran's nuclear weapons comes from CIA, MI5 and BND, the same spies that told GWB that Iraq had WMDs. I find it embarrassing that IAEA believes proven liars. Why can't IAEA just announce that nuclear weapons like atomic bombs do not work and are nothing to worry about?
Posts: 53
Joined: 22 Oct 2011 10:19

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby FirstClassSkeptic » 10 Nov 2011 10:27

User avatar
Posts: 671
Joined: 20 Mar 2011 21:19

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby rerevisionist » 10 Nov 2011 17:18

FCS, that looks like a good site. I see Fred Reed is (or was) in Mexico, just as Bradley Smith of CODOH is.

... Bear in mind that a great many countries fear attack by the United States, among them such trivial nations as Russia, China, and Iran. None of these has the money to build carrier groups to oppose those of the Navy.

All of these have thought about cheap ways to overcome the US behemoth. Four solutions soon came to hand:

Very fast sea-skimming cruise missiles, such as the Brahmos and Brahmos II (Mach 5+).
Supercavitating torpedoes, reaching speeds of over 200 miles an hour.
Very quiet submarines, diesel-electrics in the case of poor countries.
Anti-ship ballistic missiles, such as the one attributed to the Chinese.

Any military buff knows that the Navy cannot defend itself against these. It says it can. It has to say it can. ...

Another possibility is the U plane Click for link to redesigned submarine, the underwater plane, U-Plane.

Note added later; for some reason Amazon UK removed this, whereas Amazon US allowed it:
I looked through the whole of Fred Reed's website. Fascinating to read someone completely ignorant of all 'conspiracy theory' material. For example, he believes in AIDS. (But also that someone he knew was cured of it). He believes blacks were brought up in the 50s in white-type households, and there was little mutual prejudice where he was brought up. But also that blacks live in a mental world that's ignorant of almost everything. (There's something similar expressed in the idea that LBJ's 'war on poverty' was a deliberate fraud). He seems to think US drug policy is entertainingly silly, because Congress 'doesn't do decisions'; he has no idea it could be deliberate, and even less idea that it is. He doesn't realise immigration is a deliberately damaging policy, nor who imposes it. He doesn't seem to have learned that laws are man-made, and often have functions which are kept secret. He doesn't realise that education might have other purposes than teaching simple reading and writing and a bit of technology so you can get a job and move out of the area. He dismisses evolution because there's no firm explanation for the beginning of life. And because it's hard to imagine the life cycles of insects evolving. He has liked quite a few Jews, so the conspiracy theories there can't be true. He doesn't know enough about science to be aware of scientific frauds. He avoids thinking about NASA, 9/11, nuclear weapons, the underside of the world wars, facts about money and subsidies and warbucks. He seems to have been a simple-minded 'veteran'. I suppose he's the 'universal soldier' type - maybe he manages to be both 5' 2" and 6' 4".
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby rerevisionist » 10 Nov 2011 18:35

@Heiwa --
Unflattering assessment of Hans Blix of IAEA and his activities (or inactivities) over Iraq---
Hans Bix and International Atomic Energy Authority - a story of incompetence.
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby Heiwa » 10 Nov 2011 18:47

The IAEA does not have a mandate to study nuclear weapons and its verification information cannot be shared publicly.
Who says that?
Posts: 53
Joined: 22 Oct 2011 10:19

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby Heiwa » 27 Nov 2011 03:45 ... 1&Itemid=9

‘They Found Nothing. Nothing.’ - The IAEA, Iran And ‘Fantasy Land’

Reason being nuclear weapons doesn’t work!
Posts: 53
Joined: 22 Oct 2011 10:19

Re: Nukes and Iran

Postby rerevisionist » 27 Nov 2011 18:05

An interesting Iranian website in English is
There's a fair amount of material on nuclear issues, peaceful uses (which never seem to be clearly listed), the USA, the Arab League, missiles, Israel and the usual stuff, but no clear picture emerged, to me least. I haven't read their material very closely. However, as might be expected, they have quite a bit on so-called 'Jews' and their corrupting effect.

I can't say for sure whether any of them suspect the nuke weapons idea is a phoney. A typical comment is
... On November 2, Israel test fired a new long-range nuclear capable missile.This three-stage Jericho-3 missile, which is capable of delivering a 750-kilo warhead to a distance, is estimated to have a range of up to 10,000 kilometers. Paradoxically, the new nuke-capable missile, which can target many parts of the globe, is not considered a threat in the eyes of the West. ... (written by MRS/HGH)

3/4 of a tonne is remote from a megaton, or a kiloton. Is the comment about not being considered a threat because it's tacitly known that nukes are a fraud?

Here's a link from the same site reporting a speech by Ahmadinejad - 'Iran needs no bomb to cut off US hands' - it's mainly about the USA supposedly having 5,000 nuclear bombs, though it doesn't say why Ahmadinejad - if he believes this - should be so unworried.
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1056
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 11:40

Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest