Again you put words in other peoples mouths. You choose to say "fearful", I choose to say "cautious". Are there any boogeymen on the Iran Internet since you apparently troll there too. Another misuse of words, "hands full", when referring to a topic that you brought up and thought worthy of discussion. If you were a boxer I guess you would never leave the corner, bell or no bell.
Again you put words in other peoples mouths. You choose to say "fearful", I choose to say "cautious". Are there any boogeymen on the Iran Internet since you apparently troll there too. Another misuse of words, "hands full", when referring to a topic that you brought up and thought worthy of discussion. If you were a boxer I guess you would never leave the corner, bell or no bell.
U.S. Says Iran’s Nuclear Claim Is ‘Hype’
By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan and Viola Gienger - Feb 16, 2012 1:52 PM CT
Enlarge image
Iranian soldiers chant anti-Israeli and anti-U.S. slogans on the first day of celebrations marking the 33th anniversary of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's return from exile in Tehran on Feb. 1, 2012. Photographer: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images
The U.S. played down Iran’s claim of a “major” nuclear breakthrough as an exaggeration to bolster nationalism amid tighter sanctions rather than a step toward developing an atomic weapon.
Iranian state-run Press TV said yesterday 3,000 “new- generation” Iranian-made centrifuges were installed at its main uranium enrichment site at Natanz, and domestically made fuel plates were loaded at a medical research reactor in Tehran. Iran won’t be intimidated by outside pressure and will pursue technological advances, the Iranian Students’ News Agency said.
“Our view on this is that it’s not terribly new and it’s not terribly impressive,” State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters in Washington yesterday. The announcement was “hyped” for a domestic audience, she said.
The opposing assessments came as the European Union received a letter from Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, about resuming negotiations with the U.S., France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the international community wants serious engagement about Iran’s program. Concern the dispute will lead to a military conflict that disrupts oil supplies from the Persian Gulf has contributed to a 3 percent increase in crude prices in February. Iran is OPEC’s second-biggest producer.
Five-Week High
Oil for March delivery rose 48 cents, or 0.5 percent, to $102.28 on the New York Mercantile Exchange at 1:41 p.m. The contract rose yesterday to $101.80, the highest settlement since Jan. 10, after Press TV reported that Iran halted crude oil shipments to Italy, Spain, France, Greece, Portugal and the Netherlands five months before a European Union embargo takes effect July 1.
“This is the kind of news that gets traders juices flowing,” Michael Lynch, president of Strategic Energy & Economic Research in Winchester, Massachusetts, said in a phone interview. “The Iran situation has gone from lukewarm to a simmer.”
The state-run Fars news agency said Iran summoned the ambassadors from the European countries to the foreign ministry to protest against the sanctions, without cutting exports.
Iran is “feeling the pressure” of “unprecedented sanctions” that U.S. and European officials say are impeding the Islamic republic’s acquisition of materials for its nuclear program and hobbling its economy, according to Nuland.
Israeli Position
While Iran insists its nuclear program is for civilian energy and medical research, the U.S. and European governments say they suspect Iran is seeking an atomic weapons capability. Israeli leaders say they haven’t ruled out a military strike to prevent it.
“It’s a lot more likely that we will soon see major change in the situation,” Lynch said. “Whether that’s an attack by Israel or negotiations has yet to be determined.”
Iran hasn’t made a decision to proceed with the development of a nuclear weapon even as it continues to enrich uranium, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told a House panel today, citing U.S. intelligence.
“We will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon,” Panetta said at the hearing of the House defense appropriations panel.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee today that he doubts Iran eventually will make the political decision to move forward with assembling a nuclear device.
“They have put themselves in a position, but there are certain things they have not yet done and have not done for some time,” he said.
New Sanctions
Over the past three months, the U.S. and the EU have imposed numerous new sanctions restricting petroleum and non- energy trade as well as financial transactions in an effort to force Iran to give up any illicit nuclear activities. Sanctions advocates say economic pressure is the best way to avert a military conflict in a region that holds more than half the world’s oil reserves.
Iran pumped 3.55 million barrels of crude a day in January, 11 percent of the total produced by the 12 members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Oil sales earned Iran $73 billion in 2010, accounting for about 50 percent of government revenue and 80 percent of exports, the U.S. Energy Department estimates.
Nuclear Fuel Cycle
Press TV yesterday showed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the research reactor in Tehran, and reported that Iran has taken the final step in completing the nuclear fuel cycle. Only a handful of countries, including France and the U.S., have the technology to build the 19.75 percent enriched fuel plates needed for the reactor, according to Iranian officials.
David Albright, a nuclear physicist and former international weapons inspector in Iraq, said in an interview that the fuel plates aren’t hard to produce and have no military implications.
“They’re so far behind that it sounds like they’re trying to play catch-up, which makes me think it’s more for a domestic audience than an international one,” said Albright, founder of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington.
‘Image of Progress’
Iranian media provided no details about the so-called new generation of centrifuges, the sophisticated equipment used to enrich uranium. Enriched uranium is used to fuel power plants and reactors and, at 90 percent enrichment levels, it may be further processed for use in atomic weapons.
“This is more symbolism than anything else,” Dennis Ross, who served until recently as President Barack Obama’s chief adviser on Iran, said in an interview. Iran has “claimed for years that they are installing next generation centrifuges, and they continue to have material and technical problems that bedevil their operation.”
There is no evidence that Iran has overcome those failings, Ross said. They are trying “to create the image of progress even when they are not advancing, now because they want to suggest they are not being affected by the pressure and isolation” of sanctions, he said.
Iran’s announcements may have been timed for the day its leaders sent a letter to the EU about resuming talks to signal that the nation is “in a position of strength,” Peter Crail, a research analyst at the Arms Control Association in Washington, said in an interview. These were “posturing, more than real advances,” he said.
Time for Diplomacy
There’s still an opportunity to persuade Iran’s leadership to stop enriching uranium to 19.75 percent and to turn over its stocks of so-called low-enriched uranium, according to Crail. To induce Iran to halt domestic enrichment, the U.S. and Europe have offered to provide nuclear fuel for civilian use.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said the U.S. expects “to learn more” about yesterday’s developments from International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, who are due to return to Iran Feb. 20-21. Officials from the United Nations’ agency last visited the Persian Gulf country for three days ending Jan. 31.
Carney called reports of a nuclear breakthrough and threats to cut off oil exports before an embargo takes effect “provocative acts” that are “designed to distract attention from the demonstrated impact” of sanctions.
Car-Bomb Attacks
Israel’s leaders, who have pressed for “crippling sanctions” on Iran, have suggested time may be running short to stop its rival’s progress toward becoming a nuclear weapons state. The two countries accuse each other of engaging in bombings and assassination attacks. Car-bomb attacks on Feb. 14 targeted Israeli diplomats in India and Georgia, which Israel blamed on Iran.
In Thailand, police arrested Iranians allegedly planning similar attacks. Iran says Israel is behind a series of killings of Iranian nuclear scientists.
Iran declaration that its underground Fordo enrichment facility “is in routine production,” is more significant than its announcements yesterday, according to Olli Heinonen, a Finnish physicist and former top inspector for the IAEA.
“By the end of this year they’ll have 250 to 290 kilograms of 20 percent enriched uranium, and that’s a lot,” Heinonen said in a phone interview from Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he is a senior fellow at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. That amount of 20 percent enriched uranium could be used for two nuclear weapons if Iran further enriched it to 90 percent, he said.
Iran’s known enrichment facilities are under IAEA monitoring and there has been no report of enriched uranium being diverted for weapons use.
To contact the reporters on this story: Indira A.R. Lakshmanan in Washington at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net; Viola Gienger in Washington at vgienger@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: John Walcott at jwalcott9@bloomberg.net
By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan and Viola Gienger - Feb 16, 2012 1:52 PM CT
Enlarge image
Iranian soldiers chant anti-Israeli and anti-U.S. slogans on the first day of celebrations marking the 33th anniversary of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's return from exile in Tehran on Feb. 1, 2012. Photographer: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images
The U.S. played down Iran’s claim of a “major” nuclear breakthrough as an exaggeration to bolster nationalism amid tighter sanctions rather than a step toward developing an atomic weapon.
Iranian state-run Press TV said yesterday 3,000 “new- generation” Iranian-made centrifuges were installed at its main uranium enrichment site at Natanz, and domestically made fuel plates were loaded at a medical research reactor in Tehran. Iran won’t be intimidated by outside pressure and will pursue technological advances, the Iranian Students’ News Agency said.
“Our view on this is that it’s not terribly new and it’s not terribly impressive,” State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters in Washington yesterday. The announcement was “hyped” for a domestic audience, she said.
The opposing assessments came as the European Union received a letter from Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, about resuming negotiations with the U.S., France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the international community wants serious engagement about Iran’s program. Concern the dispute will lead to a military conflict that disrupts oil supplies from the Persian Gulf has contributed to a 3 percent increase in crude prices in February. Iran is OPEC’s second-biggest producer.
Five-Week High
Oil for March delivery rose 48 cents, or 0.5 percent, to $102.28 on the New York Mercantile Exchange at 1:41 p.m. The contract rose yesterday to $101.80, the highest settlement since Jan. 10, after Press TV reported that Iran halted crude oil shipments to Italy, Spain, France, Greece, Portugal and the Netherlands five months before a European Union embargo takes effect July 1.
“This is the kind of news that gets traders juices flowing,” Michael Lynch, president of Strategic Energy & Economic Research in Winchester, Massachusetts, said in a phone interview. “The Iran situation has gone from lukewarm to a simmer.”
The state-run Fars news agency said Iran summoned the ambassadors from the European countries to the foreign ministry to protest against the sanctions, without cutting exports.
Iran is “feeling the pressure” of “unprecedented sanctions” that U.S. and European officials say are impeding the Islamic republic’s acquisition of materials for its nuclear program and hobbling its economy, according to Nuland.
Israeli Position
While Iran insists its nuclear program is for civilian energy and medical research, the U.S. and European governments say they suspect Iran is seeking an atomic weapons capability. Israeli leaders say they haven’t ruled out a military strike to prevent it.
“It’s a lot more likely that we will soon see major change in the situation,” Lynch said. “Whether that’s an attack by Israel or negotiations has yet to be determined.”
Iran hasn’t made a decision to proceed with the development of a nuclear weapon even as it continues to enrich uranium, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told a House panel today, citing U.S. intelligence.
“We will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon,” Panetta said at the hearing of the House defense appropriations panel.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee today that he doubts Iran eventually will make the political decision to move forward with assembling a nuclear device.
“They have put themselves in a position, but there are certain things they have not yet done and have not done for some time,” he said.
New Sanctions
Over the past three months, the U.S. and the EU have imposed numerous new sanctions restricting petroleum and non- energy trade as well as financial transactions in an effort to force Iran to give up any illicit nuclear activities. Sanctions advocates say economic pressure is the best way to avert a military conflict in a region that holds more than half the world’s oil reserves.
Iran pumped 3.55 million barrels of crude a day in January, 11 percent of the total produced by the 12 members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Oil sales earned Iran $73 billion in 2010, accounting for about 50 percent of government revenue and 80 percent of exports, the U.S. Energy Department estimates.
Nuclear Fuel Cycle
Press TV yesterday showed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the research reactor in Tehran, and reported that Iran has taken the final step in completing the nuclear fuel cycle. Only a handful of countries, including France and the U.S., have the technology to build the 19.75 percent enriched fuel plates needed for the reactor, according to Iranian officials.
David Albright, a nuclear physicist and former international weapons inspector in Iraq, said in an interview that the fuel plates aren’t hard to produce and have no military implications.
“They’re so far behind that it sounds like they’re trying to play catch-up, which makes me think it’s more for a domestic audience than an international one,” said Albright, founder of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington.
‘Image of Progress’
Iranian media provided no details about the so-called new generation of centrifuges, the sophisticated equipment used to enrich uranium. Enriched uranium is used to fuel power plants and reactors and, at 90 percent enrichment levels, it may be further processed for use in atomic weapons.
“This is more symbolism than anything else,” Dennis Ross, who served until recently as President Barack Obama’s chief adviser on Iran, said in an interview. Iran has “claimed for years that they are installing next generation centrifuges, and they continue to have material and technical problems that bedevil their operation.”
There is no evidence that Iran has overcome those failings, Ross said. They are trying “to create the image of progress even when they are not advancing, now because they want to suggest they are not being affected by the pressure and isolation” of sanctions, he said.
Iran’s announcements may have been timed for the day its leaders sent a letter to the EU about resuming talks to signal that the nation is “in a position of strength,” Peter Crail, a research analyst at the Arms Control Association in Washington, said in an interview. These were “posturing, more than real advances,” he said.
Time for Diplomacy
There’s still an opportunity to persuade Iran’s leadership to stop enriching uranium to 19.75 percent and to turn over its stocks of so-called low-enriched uranium, according to Crail. To induce Iran to halt domestic enrichment, the U.S. and Europe have offered to provide nuclear fuel for civilian use.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said the U.S. expects “to learn more” about yesterday’s developments from International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, who are due to return to Iran Feb. 20-21. Officials from the United Nations’ agency last visited the Persian Gulf country for three days ending Jan. 31.
Carney called reports of a nuclear breakthrough and threats to cut off oil exports before an embargo takes effect “provocative acts” that are “designed to distract attention from the demonstrated impact” of sanctions.
Car-Bomb Attacks
Israel’s leaders, who have pressed for “crippling sanctions” on Iran, have suggested time may be running short to stop its rival’s progress toward becoming a nuclear weapons state. The two countries accuse each other of engaging in bombings and assassination attacks. Car-bomb attacks on Feb. 14 targeted Israeli diplomats in India and Georgia, which Israel blamed on Iran.
In Thailand, police arrested Iranians allegedly planning similar attacks. Iran says Israel is behind a series of killings of Iranian nuclear scientists.
Iran declaration that its underground Fordo enrichment facility “is in routine production,” is more significant than its announcements yesterday, according to Olli Heinonen, a Finnish physicist and former top inspector for the IAEA.
“By the end of this year they’ll have 250 to 290 kilograms of 20 percent enriched uranium, and that’s a lot,” Heinonen said in a phone interview from Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he is a senior fellow at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. That amount of 20 percent enriched uranium could be used for two nuclear weapons if Iran further enriched it to 90 percent, he said.
Iran’s known enrichment facilities are under IAEA monitoring and there has been no report of enriched uranium being diverted for weapons use.
To contact the reporters on this story: Indira A.R. Lakshmanan in Washington at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net; Viola Gienger in Washington at vgienger@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: John Walcott at jwalcott9@bloomberg.net
Related Articles
Intel Official: Iranian Missiles Could Hit Nearby U.S. Targets, Europe
February 16, 2012 RSS Feed Print Iran has the ability to fire missiles at U.S. targets in the Middle East and "temporarily" close a key sea transit route, a senior intelligence official said Thursday.
Tehran has a missile arsenal capable of reaching "targets throughout the region and into Eastern Europe," Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, Defense Intelligence Agency director, told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
"Iran has … threatened to launch missiles against the United States and our allies in the region in response to an attack" on its nuclear facilities or other targets, he said.
What's more, Iran "could also employ its terrorist surrogates worldwide," Burgess said. He also noted that "Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz," the key sea lane used to move oil and other goods to destinations around the globe. The U.S. intelligence community believes Iran "is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict or launch a preemptive attack," Burgess told the panel.
[See pictures of Iranian military war games.]
The blunt assessment of Iranian intentions and offensive capabilities comes amid increasing tensions between Tehran, Israel and the United States over Iran's nuclear weapons program.
Alireza Nader, an analyst at the RAND Corporation, said the DIA chief's assessment of Iran's naval and missile capabilities sounds accurate.
"Iran does have missiles capable of hitting U.S. facilities in the Persian Gulf, and notably, in Afghanistan," Nader said. "And it is known to be in development of long-range missiles that could reach Eastern Europe. It has a pretty robust missile program."
Under a scenario where Iranian leaders ordered a missile strike, U.S. officials and analysts question whether any would hit their intended targets.
"Iran's missiles are strategic weapons, not tactical weapons," said Nader. That's because they lack the kinds of precision guidance systems fitted on U.S. ballistic missiles.
[Budget Scorecard: Lockheed Up, General Dynamics Down.]
"Still, if Tehran fired several hundred missiles, it likely would get at least a few past" missile defense systems in the region operated by the U.S. military and its allies, Nader said.
The RAND analyst said the Iranian Navy could employ a number of tools to temporarily shut down the Strait of Hormuz, and frustrate the U.S. Navy. That list includes "hundreds of small boats equipped with relatively sophisticated anti-ship weaponry" and mines on the sea floor, Nader said.
Should tensions over Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions escalate into a military conflict, Nader said, "Iran is looking for an asymmetric war, mostly at sea." That means the conflict would feature those small boats and mines instead of war ships firing on one another.
- U.S. Official: 'No Out of the Ordinary' Military Moves on Syria, Iran
- Budget Scorecard: Lockheed Up, General Dynamics Down
- McCain Blasts Obama Over Defense Cuts
Intel Official: Iranian Missiles Could Hit Nearby U.S. Targets, Europe
February 16, 2012 RSS Feed Print Iran has the ability to fire missiles at U.S. targets in the Middle East and "temporarily" close a key sea transit route, a senior intelligence official said Thursday.
Tehran has a missile arsenal capable of reaching "targets throughout the region and into Eastern Europe," Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, Defense Intelligence Agency director, told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
"Iran has … threatened to launch missiles against the United States and our allies in the region in response to an attack" on its nuclear facilities or other targets, he said.
What's more, Iran "could also employ its terrorist surrogates worldwide," Burgess said. He also noted that "Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz," the key sea lane used to move oil and other goods to destinations around the globe. The U.S. intelligence community believes Iran "is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict or launch a preemptive attack," Burgess told the panel.
[See pictures of Iranian military war games.]
The blunt assessment of Iranian intentions and offensive capabilities comes amid increasing tensions between Tehran, Israel and the United States over Iran's nuclear weapons program.
Alireza Nader, an analyst at the RAND Corporation, said the DIA chief's assessment of Iran's naval and missile capabilities sounds accurate.
"Iran does have missiles capable of hitting U.S. facilities in the Persian Gulf, and notably, in Afghanistan," Nader said. "And it is known to be in development of long-range missiles that could reach Eastern Europe. It has a pretty robust missile program."
Under a scenario where Iranian leaders ordered a missile strike, U.S. officials and analysts question whether any would hit their intended targets.
"Iran's missiles are strategic weapons, not tactical weapons," said Nader. That's because they lack the kinds of precision guidance systems fitted on U.S. ballistic missiles.
[Budget Scorecard: Lockheed Up, General Dynamics Down.]
"Still, if Tehran fired several hundred missiles, it likely would get at least a few past" missile defense systems in the region operated by the U.S. military and its allies, Nader said.
The RAND analyst said the Iranian Navy could employ a number of tools to temporarily shut down the Strait of Hormuz, and frustrate the U.S. Navy. That list includes "hundreds of small boats equipped with relatively sophisticated anti-ship weaponry" and mines on the sea floor, Nader said.
Should tensions over Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions escalate into a military conflict, Nader said, "Iran is looking for an asymmetric war, mostly at sea." That means the conflict would feature those small boats and mines instead of war ships firing on one another.
If one has made a personal commitment to a life of non-violence towards his fellow man, then that's exactly what I'm saying.
If however, one has not made such a commitment, then fuck it - pretty much any excuse will serve to justify waging violence against our fellow brothers & sisters anywhere, anytime you want it
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
15-Feb-12: Is New York threatened by an Iranian attack? You might be surprised to know how real this is.
The Piaget Building on Fifth Avenue: Seized by US authorities
in 2009 because it was secretly controlled by Iran's government.
Iran's covert actions have already had deadly consequences
in major American cities. In the Wall Street Journal yesterday, the director of intelligence analysis for New York City's police department wrote a thoughtful and revealing analysis of a major terrorist threat Here are some of his main points - but the whole article is worth the three minutes of reading (and the hours of pondering that may come afterwards) that it will take.
Site of another focus of Iran's interest in big city
real estate: the AMIA Jewish community building
in Buenos Aires, destroyed in a terrorist attack in 1994.
Iran is believed to be behind the massacre in
which 85 innocents, mostly Argentinian Jews, were killed. Let's review for a moment what is known about the Alavi Foundation affair. It's instructive.
The legal attack via the NY courts was described as "one of the biggest counter-terrorism seizures in American history" but it's a certainty that most of our readers have never heard of it. The more-or-less unknown foundation's assets include bank accounts, Islamic schools and mosques in New York City, Maryland, California and Houston; more than a hundred acres of prime land in Virginia; and a 36-story glass office tower, called the Piaget Building (no connection to the jewelry firm of the same name) at 760 Fifth Avenue in New York.
The case presented by the prosecution was that the so-called not-for-profit Alavi Foundation managed the Piaget tower on behalf of Iran's government, working through a front company, Assa Corp. In this way, it illegally funnelled millions in rental income to Iran's state-owned Bank Melli which the US Treasury says provides support for Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Under US law, doing any business with Bank Melli is illegal.
It may be hard to comprehend that terrorist activity can be taking not only right under American noses but literally just down the block from some of New York's and America's most powerful and sensitive New York-based institutions.
Is there a real and present danger? It will always be hard to know until it's already happened, as it did yesterday in Bangkok and New Delhi. By then of course it's too late, at least for the immediate victims.
15-Feb-12: Is New York threatened by an Iranian attack? You might be surprised to know how real this is.
The Piaget Building on Fifth Avenue: Seized by US authorities in 2009 because it was secretly controlled by Iran's government.
Iran's covert actions have already had deadly consequences
in major American cities. In the Wall Street Journal yesterday, the director of intelligence analysis for New York City's police department wrote a thoughtful and revealing analysis of a major terrorist threat Here are some of his main points - but the whole article is worth the three minutes of reading (and the hours of pondering that may come afterwards) that it will take.
- Less than two weeks ago, on February 3, 2012, the religious leader who rules Iran, "Supreme Leader Ayatollah" Ali Khamenei, said in a widely publicized speech that Iran has "its own tools" to respond to Western sanctions and threats of military action directed against Iran.
- Confirming this, James Clapper, the United States Director of National Intelligence, testified during January to the US Senate that the Iranians are "willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime."
- To illustrate: in October 2011, an American "of Iranian descent" (as the news media delicately put it) hired a killer from one of the Mexican drug cartels to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States. This attempted murder was directed by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and involved blowing up a Washington DC restaurant. It's notable (though barely commented upon in the news reports) that hundreds of restaurant patrons would likely have been killed too had the plot not been thwarted.
- Background: for decades, Iran's government has established a documented record of exploiting its official presence in foreign places to carry out coordinated terrorist attacks and killings, sometimes with the assistance of Lebanese Hezbollah agents in their control.
- The bombings of Jewish community buildings in Buenos Aires in 1992 (29 killed) and again in 1994 (85 killed) provided some lessons for the NYPD. The Iranian agents responsible for those terrorist outrages had been sent to Argentina years before the attacks. They became integrated into local society. They took on Argentine nationality. The chief imam of the At-Tauhid mosque in Buenos Aires was the head of the gang and its main co-ordinator. [There is an open Interpol warrant for his arrest.] He had been in Argentina since 1983, including a stint as the cultural attache to the Iranian Embassy in Argentina. So he had diplomatic immunity.
- The Hezbollah agents brought in for the attack on innocent Argentine civilians received support from the local Lebanese-Shiite community in Buenos Aries, as well as from the 'diplomats' of the Iranian Embassy.
- Iran's Hezbollah clients later tried to duplicate the Argentine results in a series of failed attempts in Azerbaijan, Egypt and Turkey. Iranian agents in New York have already shown similar intentions. For instance, two guards at Iran's mission to the United Nations in NYC were sent home by the State Department in 2004 after conducting surveillance of city subways and landmarks. And in 2008, two Staten Island men pleaded guilty to providing material support to Hezbollah.
- In nearby Philadelphia, 26 people were indicted in federal court in 2009 for conspiring to provide material support to the terrorist group.
- Lebanese-linked businesses in the greater NYC area are implicated in a massive money-laundering scheme benefiting Hezbollah. This came to light in December 2011 in a case filed by the Drug Enforcement Administration and the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
- 18 other Hezbollah-related cases have been brought in federal courts across the United States since 2000.
- As the NY police see it, the city's large Jewish population makes it "increasingly attractive target". Iran's U.N. mission in the city allows officials from Iran's Ministry of Intelligence to live and operate in New York with official diplomatic cover.
- Iran's Alavi Foundation, described as a not-for-profit devoted to charity works and promoting Islamic culture, is "a front for the government of Iran" according to Preet Bharara, the high profile US Attorney for the Southern District of New York. His office in conjunction with the NYPD Intelligence Division seized Alavi's assets, including the largest Shiite mosque in the city and the location most closely affiliated with Iran's U.N. mission.
Site of another focus of Iran's interest in big city real estate: the AMIA Jewish community building
in Buenos Aires, destroyed in a terrorist attack in 1994.
Iran is believed to be behind the massacre in
which 85 innocents, mostly Argentinian Jews, were killed. Let's review for a moment what is known about the Alavi Foundation affair. It's instructive.
The legal attack via the NY courts was described as "one of the biggest counter-terrorism seizures in American history" but it's a certainty that most of our readers have never heard of it. The more-or-less unknown foundation's assets include bank accounts, Islamic schools and mosques in New York City, Maryland, California and Houston; more than a hundred acres of prime land in Virginia; and a 36-story glass office tower, called the Piaget Building (no connection to the jewelry firm of the same name) at 760 Fifth Avenue in New York.
The case presented by the prosecution was that the so-called not-for-profit Alavi Foundation managed the Piaget tower on behalf of Iran's government, working through a front company, Assa Corp. In this way, it illegally funnelled millions in rental income to Iran's state-owned Bank Melli which the US Treasury says provides support for Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Under US law, doing any business with Bank Melli is illegal.
It may be hard to comprehend that terrorist activity can be taking not only right under American noses but literally just down the block from some of New York's and America's most powerful and sensitive New York-based institutions.
Is there a real and present danger? It will always be hard to know until it's already happened, as it did yesterday in Bangkok and New Delhi. By then of course it's too late, at least for the immediate victims.
To assume (and you do that constantly) that anyone who is not a pacifist is simply looking for an excuse to kill someone then you are very simply, simple minded. "Fellow brothers & sisters anywhere, anytime you want it." Not even a statement worth considering. What a commitment, how easy is that, just say it you are content to let other people defend your country and to stand up when it is called for. Do you even appreciate the military? There are other commitments more noble than yours and that would be to defend our way of life and to help spread democracy beyond the limits of the state of Florida (your backyard). Your commitment seems to be at exagerating the obvious and to deluding the facts and circumstances that cause military conflicts. I don't defend the politics but I do defend those military personnel who are commited to keeping the US safe and free. But then again like you say fuck it, they are all a bunch of blood mongering puppets waiting for someone to pull their strings. You sound like a guy who has an excuse not to do anything and no excuse for doing nothing.
Iran a threat to U.S. on many fronts
By Suzanne Kelly
Iran poses a laundry list of threats to U.S. national security, according to top officials in the intelligence community.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that Iran poses a threat on a number of fronts, including its ability to develop a nuclear weapon, and the fact that any nuclear attack would likely be delivered by a ballistic missile.
"Iran already has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East, and it is expanding the scale, reach, and sophistication of its ballistic missile force, many of which are inherently capable of carrying a nuclear payload," Clapper said during his opening remarks to the committee.
The question for the intelligence community remains whether Iran, in particular Supreme Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei, either already has decided or will decide to pull the trigger when it comes to taking the country's nuclear knowledge and applying it to the actual development of a nuclear weapon.
"Iran's technical advancement, particularly in uranium enrichment, strengthens our assessment that Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to eventually produce nuclear weapons, making the central issue its political will to do so," Clapper said.
There are a number of indicators that the intelligence community is looking for that Clapper refused to detail during the public hearing that would indicate that the decision has already been made, and Clapper added that there is no indication yet that the decision has been made.
But Iran is not giving up the potential either. Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said Iran is also "not close to agreeing" to abandon its nuclear program.
Under questioning by Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-New Hampshire, Clapper and Burgess verified that Iran remains a significant threat on a number of fronts, including its continued support of organizations such as Hezbollah, which is deemed a terrorist organization by the United States, as well as its indirect support of Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Burgess added that Iranian weapons have been found in Afghanistan, and that Tehran is attempting a "dual-track strategy" in Afghanistan and Iraq - working against U.S. and coalition desires while making efforts to "put forward the government" in both countries.
"They are walking both sides of the fence" said Burgess, who confirmed that it is the intelligence communities' belief that Iran is supporting the killing of U.S. soldiers.
"Iran is a big problem," Clapper added. He said recent bombing attempts in Thailand, India and Georgia targeting Israeli interests may not have been a technical success, but they still had a psychological impact.
Iran also poses a threat to U.S. interests and can close the Strait of Hormuz, the entryway to the Persian Gulf, at least temporarily, Burgess said. While Iran has substantial reach with its ballistic missiles, it would likely only use them if provoked, according to the U.S. intelligence assessment.
"Iran is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict," Burgess said.
Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, who co-chairs the committee, listed his own ideas about the Iranian threat during his remarks to open the hearing, noting that Iran's believed involvement in a recent plot to assassinate a Saudi ambassador on U.S. soil has changed the nature of the threat.
"The rulers in Iran clearly pose a more direct threat to us than many would have assumed just a year ago," McCain said. "And that is on top of the hostile actions in which Iran has been engaging for years, including killing Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, supporting terrorist groups across the Middle East, destabilizing Arab countries, propping up and rearming the Assad regime in Syria, and continuing their undeterred pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.
The threat posed by the Iranian regime could soon bring the Middle East to the brink of war, if it has not already."
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/16/iran-a-threat-to-u-s-on-many-fronts/
By Suzanne Kelly
Iran poses a laundry list of threats to U.S. national security, according to top officials in the intelligence community.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that Iran poses a threat on a number of fronts, including its ability to develop a nuclear weapon, and the fact that any nuclear attack would likely be delivered by a ballistic missile.
"Iran already has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East, and it is expanding the scale, reach, and sophistication of its ballistic missile force, many of which are inherently capable of carrying a nuclear payload," Clapper said during his opening remarks to the committee.
The question for the intelligence community remains whether Iran, in particular Supreme Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei, either already has decided or will decide to pull the trigger when it comes to taking the country's nuclear knowledge and applying it to the actual development of a nuclear weapon.
"Iran's technical advancement, particularly in uranium enrichment, strengthens our assessment that Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to eventually produce nuclear weapons, making the central issue its political will to do so," Clapper said.
There are a number of indicators that the intelligence community is looking for that Clapper refused to detail during the public hearing that would indicate that the decision has already been made, and Clapper added that there is no indication yet that the decision has been made.
But Iran is not giving up the potential either. Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said Iran is also "not close to agreeing" to abandon its nuclear program.
Under questioning by Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-New Hampshire, Clapper and Burgess verified that Iran remains a significant threat on a number of fronts, including its continued support of organizations such as Hezbollah, which is deemed a terrorist organization by the United States, as well as its indirect support of Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
Burgess added that Iranian weapons have been found in Afghanistan, and that Tehran is attempting a "dual-track strategy" in Afghanistan and Iraq - working against U.S. and coalition desires while making efforts to "put forward the government" in both countries.
"They are walking both sides of the fence" said Burgess, who confirmed that it is the intelligence communities' belief that Iran is supporting the killing of U.S. soldiers.
"Iran is a big problem," Clapper added. He said recent bombing attempts in Thailand, India and Georgia targeting Israeli interests may not have been a technical success, but they still had a psychological impact.
Iran also poses a threat to U.S. interests and can close the Strait of Hormuz, the entryway to the Persian Gulf, at least temporarily, Burgess said. While Iran has substantial reach with its ballistic missiles, it would likely only use them if provoked, according to the U.S. intelligence assessment.
"Iran is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict," Burgess said.
Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, who co-chairs the committee, listed his own ideas about the Iranian threat during his remarks to open the hearing, noting that Iran's believed involvement in a recent plot to assassinate a Saudi ambassador on U.S. soil has changed the nature of the threat.
"The rulers in Iran clearly pose a more direct threat to us than many would have assumed just a year ago," McCain said. "And that is on top of the hostile actions in which Iran has been engaging for years, including killing Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, supporting terrorist groups across the Middle East, destabilizing Arab countries, propping up and rearming the Assad regime in Syria, and continuing their undeterred pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability.
The threat posed by the Iranian regime could soon bring the Middle East to the brink of war, if it has not already."
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/16/iran-a-threat-to-u-s-on-many-fronts/
Argentinian Jews? Didnt know there was such a thing?
McShame doesnt lend credibility to a story or a point. Hes an albatross. McCain is soo hard up for war anything he says regarding threats and the like should not be some type of surprise. Hes a one trick pony.
Also, "willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime." Somehow that is a surprise to the police chief? I kind of see it tit for tat. If someone was going to attack me i would hope i would have the nerve, to attack them back. Wouldnt want to come across as weak, right?
I see it this way. Iran and the US are big nations, they have multiple interests shared and not soo much. Both have them have been engaged in proxy wars vs each other and both have mutual enemys. I see a big drum beat coming here in the next year about Iran and to me, much of its overblown.
McShame doesnt lend credibility to a story or a point. Hes an albatross. McCain is soo hard up for war anything he says regarding threats and the like should not be some type of surprise. Hes a one trick pony.
Also, "willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime." Somehow that is a surprise to the police chief? I kind of see it tit for tat. If someone was going to attack me i would hope i would have the nerve, to attack them back. Wouldnt want to come across as weak, right?
I see it this way. Iran and the US are big nations, they have multiple interests shared and not soo much. Both have them have been engaged in proxy wars vs each other and both have mutual enemys. I see a big drum beat coming here in the next year about Iran and to me, much of its overblown.
I'll let Benny Morris lay it out for you best as he can Fletch. Words might as well be mine.
[FYI: Iran drove a truck bomb through a synagogue in Argentina in 1994. 85 dead and over 300 wounded. Also, Hizb'allah hit the Israeli embassy in Argentina in 1992. Link to above:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6085768.stm ]
==========================
On Iran, a Stark Choice - Benny Morris
Israel's leaders, reflecting Israeli public opinion, take very seriously Iran's oft-repeated threat to create a second Holocaust, to wipe the Jewish state - "the Zionist entity" or "Zionist regime," as the Iranians call it - off the map.
They take equally seriously Iran's nuclear program, which the international community, after years of denial or at least skepticism, now accepts is geared to the production of nuclear weaponry.
Israelis, at least those who don't bury their heads in the sand, believe that if the Iranians get nuclear weapons they will, in the end, use them - or at a minimum, cannot be relied on not to use them - and that Israel's very existence is at stake.
The choice is clear and stark. Either Iran, led by fanatical, brutal and millenarian leaders, will get the bomb, or it will be prevented from doing so by military assault on its nuclear installations, by America or Israel.
If the Americans, who have the capability to do a thorough job, don't do it - and they don't seem to have the stomach for it after Iraq and Afghanistan - then the Israelis, with their more limited capabilities, will have to.
How Washington, which has repeatedly and more or less publicly vetoed the idea, would react to an Israeli strike deeply worries policymakers in Jerusalem. But it worries them far less than a nuclear-weaponized Iran.
An Israeli or American attack on Iran would likely rile much of the Muslim world, causing wide-ranging political fallout. But the consequences of nuclear bombs hitting Tel Aviv and Haifa - effectively destroying Israel, a very small country - are even more dire. (Los Angeles Times)
[FYI: Iran drove a truck bomb through a synagogue in Argentina in 1994. 85 dead and over 300 wounded. Also, Hizb'allah hit the Israeli embassy in Argentina in 1992. Link to above:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6085768.stm ]
==========================
On Iran, a Stark Choice - Benny Morris
Israel's leaders, reflecting Israeli public opinion, take very seriously Iran's oft-repeated threat to create a second Holocaust, to wipe the Jewish state - "the Zionist entity" or "Zionist regime," as the Iranians call it - off the map.
They take equally seriously Iran's nuclear program, which the international community, after years of denial or at least skepticism, now accepts is geared to the production of nuclear weaponry.
Israelis, at least those who don't bury their heads in the sand, believe that if the Iranians get nuclear weapons they will, in the end, use them - or at a minimum, cannot be relied on not to use them - and that Israel's very existence is at stake.
The choice is clear and stark. Either Iran, led by fanatical, brutal and millenarian leaders, will get the bomb, or it will be prevented from doing so by military assault on its nuclear installations, by America or Israel.
If the Americans, who have the capability to do a thorough job, don't do it - and they don't seem to have the stomach for it after Iraq and Afghanistan - then the Israelis, with their more limited capabilities, will have to.
How Washington, which has repeatedly and more or less publicly vetoed the idea, would react to an Israeli strike deeply worries policymakers in Jerusalem. But it worries them far less than a nuclear-weaponized Iran.
An Israeli or American attack on Iran would likely rile much of the Muslim world, causing wide-ranging political fallout. But the consequences of nuclear bombs hitting Tel Aviv and Haifa - effectively destroying Israel, a very small country - are even more dire. (Los Angeles Times)
You asked if there was ever an excuse for war (and violence against our fellow man).
My response was as succinct as I could manage.
Perhaps this might help: If you are personally unsure whether you yourself have made such a commitment, then you probably have not made it. And therefore it's possible that others might be able to persuade you with one or more reasons why such violence is acceptable
However, once you do choose to make that commitment, you will understand that there is in fact no acceptable excuse for personally commiting violence against your (our) fellow brothers & sisters here on Planet Earth
Gun barrel force spreading of democracy, isnt that kinda like an oxymoron? How do you spread peace and liberty to another nation through force? How do they keep it, if they never fought for it? Its like welfare, it doesnt work. See Iraq. Besides, spreading democracy is kinda funny too, what are we exactly spreading? Our form of corporatism and leftist politically correctness fail mode? This reminds me of the west, when we decided to be nice and dole out blankets to the natives here. Sure, it sounds good and they keep you warm but to bad the unintended side effects were death vai Small pox. Thats exactly what they would be importing anyway if we spread our dysfunctional democracy.
If the world is reading my blog (and the 7 visits a day suggest they are(nt)) they would simply say "no mas, no mas" when asked if they would like a dish of our "democracy" served on a brigade of M1Abrams.
Fletcher you're in the 'Daily Alert.org' wheelhouse today [see below]. The short answer is you cut out the cancer in their midst. And then you pray that after 20 years of volcanic activity reason/freedom takes over:
The Causes of Stability and Unrest in the Middle East - Anthony H. Cordesman, and Nicholas S. Yarosh
The "Arab spring" is likely to involve a decade or more of political, economic, and social unrest. The causes of unrest involve structural problems in governance, demographics, and economics. None can be solved in a few months or years.
Most Middle East and North African states have no real political parties or pluralistic structures, and only the monarchies have a history of political legitimacy.
There is no clear basis for representative government, no experience with political compromise, and no pattern of effective governance to build upon.
Ethnic and religious issues often cut deep and have been repressed for decades.
Justice systems are weak and/or corrupt, religious extremism challenges necessary social and economic change, and the security forces are often an equal or more serious problem.
The U.S. and the West may still think in terms of rapid, stable democratic change, but none of the proper conditions exist in many states.
The reality is that far too many revolutions eat their young and the hopes of those who cause them. Sudden successes are unlikely and even the best regimes will take years to meet popular hopes and expectations. (Center for Strategic & International Studies)
