2009-09-25

Ramb-O-bama (Iran's *legitimate* U-enrichment)


.. who does this 'guy' ...

  .. think he is, eh? ...

    .. SS-über-cop?

-=*=-

Warning! The following 'snip' contains wilful lies and dis-information!

Obama demands action on Iran's secret nuclear plant
Posted September 26, 2009 00:09:00
  «United States President Barack Obama has accused Iran of building a secret nuclear fuel plant and demanded Tehran immediately halt what he calls a "direct challenge" to the international community.
Mr Obama went public with the charge in a joint appearance with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy at a Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh, sharpening a standoff with Iran over its disputed nuclear program.
"It is time for Iran to act immediately to restore the confidence of the international community by fulfilling its international obligations," Mr Obama said, adding that Tehran had been building the plant in secret for years.
The United Nations nuclear watchdog said earlier on Friday that Iran had just told it of a second uranium enrichment plant under construction, a belated disclosure sure to heighten Western fears of an Iranian bid for nuclear weapons.
The International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran - which insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes to generate electricity - had disclosed the existence of the plant to IAEA director-general Mohamed ElBaradei on Monday.
Mr Obama has accused Iran of "breaking rules that all nations must follow" and called for international inspectors "to immediately investigate this disturbing information."»
 
[AusBC/justin]

-=*=-

1. There is no "challenge." Under the NPT, Iran is perfectly free - and fully entitled - to build whatever it likes, whenever it likes - yes, it is obliged to notify any nuclear work - but only before any radioactive materials are introduced. One assumes that Iran - put (unmercifully, unjustly) under a microscope, complies. Iran has timely declared; there is no "secret."

Let's face it: IF Iran was in non-compliance THEN they'd already be a smoking ruin - just like no-WMD Iraq is - Ooops!

That Ramb-O-bama 'hangs out' with the latest UK poodle and cheese-eating French gypsy only shows a common lack of taste & dignity.

2. Restoring any confidence by Iran is farcical; Iran has, as already pointed out, not put a foot wrong.

3. There is no evidence, nor has there been (specifically told to the world by US-intel itself (at least since 2003); see Iran NIE 2007) - no evidence whatsoever, that Iran is working towards an A-bomb.

4. As for "breaking rules," the US (and Z-rael) do it all the time, most recently the US in Afghanistan & then (their blood-lust un-slaked) Iraq; Z-rael 61+ bloody years long, both mass-murdering for spoil.

(IMHO, the article is mostly filthy, lying and war-mongering propaganda. IF a person tells a lie, THEN they *totally* destroy their own credibility. Same for the traitorous, lie-transmitting messenger. Boo! Hiss!)

Tell it to a judge, Ramb-O-bama.

Getting obnoxious, 'guy-O.'
 

24 comments:

  1. G'day ID, was amused at the juxtapositioin of headlines at antiwar.com - a little below one about the above, there appears:

    "US Mulls Increasing Drone Strikes in Pakistan" 

    Obey the rules?

    ReplyDelete
  2. They've done it again!

    Reports ping around the world that "Netanyahu attacks Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial", "Diplomats walk out on Ahmadinejad", blah, blah, blah.

    We're to believe that Ahmadinejad's adress to the UNGA was all about Holocaust denial.

    BUT anyone interested in the truth can find the full text of Ahmadinejad's most recent UNGA speech ...

    AND everyone who cares to look will see no mention of the Holocaust within it, let alone a denial that the Holocaust happened!

    ReplyDelete
  3. But, Orana, he did point out some glaring examples of hypocrisy. So, best for those responsible to divert attention and keep on song.

    ReplyDelete
  4. G'day, Bob. Yes, that's right. Best for the hypocrites to never utter some of what he actually said, like ...

    "Our nation is prepared to warmly shake all those hands which are honestly extended to us."

    Nor mention Ahmadinejad proclaiming his country’s "commitment to participate in the process of building durable peace and security" around the world.

    But most of all they'd never want word out that he called for ...

    "a referendum and free elections in Palestine in order to prepare a conducive environment for all Palestinians, including Muslims, Christians and Jews, to live together in peace and harmony."

    Mmmm, he talks about a future where all Palestinians, including Muslims, Christians and Jews, live together in peace and harmony. Sounds like a place where the dividing lines, the walls and other means for enforcing occupation and oppression are wiped off the map!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Not forgetting the 2003 approach. Oh wait, they are forgetting the 2003 approach so they can accuse Iran of not cooperating.

    Speaking of living together, some don't like the idea.

    ReplyDelete
  6. illegitimate tail vs. rabid dog, bis

    .. the battle for hearts'n minds ...

      .. nooo, not the hapless victims' ...

        .. ours, we the dumbed-down sheople's

    -=*=-

    What we have is the endless repetition of "the big lie;" US&Co keep on repeating it - until any feeble resistance crumbles, either giving up in disgust or simple boredom. But who really cares? We the sheople, the supposedly sovereign power-wielding voters, have neither chance nor choice, no matter who we vote for, all we ever get is 'the war party' paradigm. No more, no less; we, justice via truth seekers with eyes to see, can plainly recognise the lies, but our corrupt & venal MSM incl. the traitorous AusBC act like they're all deaf, dumb & blind. Boo! Hiss!

    Here, some items from the antiwar front page (g'day Bob):

      «Obama: Iran Is On Notice, Won't Rule Out Attack
    As Required, Iran Informs IAEA About New Enrichment Site
    New Nuke Charges Raise Stakes in Upcoming Iran Talks
    Sources: US Was Aware of 'New' Iranian Nuke Site for Years
    Despite Iran Already Promising This, West 'Demands' Access to Plant
    Gen. McChrystal: Afghan Situation Getting Worse
    US 'Troop Targets' May Force Conscription on Afghanistan
    Taliban 'Opens Northern Front Against German Troops' in Afghanistan
    Obama: 'I Know Americans Are Tired of War'
    Poll: Half of Americans Oppose US Surge in Afghanistan
    5 US Troops Killed as Debate Grows Over Afghan War
    A Week of Dimming Mideast Peace Prospects»
     

    [split]
     

    ReplyDelete
  7. illegitimate tail vs. rabid dog, bis [continued]

    Here, a 'snip' from the AusBC:

    Nuclear plant was no secret, Iran says
    By John Shovelan in Washington and wires
    Posted September 26, 2009 07:34:00
      «US officials say Mr Obama went public with the explosive new allegation after the Iranians discovered Western intelligence had breached their security.
    He said the existence of the second enrichment plant deepens a growing concern that Iran is refusing to live up to its international responsibilities
    He said the plant must now be opened to inspectors.
    "We expect the IAEA to immediately investigate this disturbing information and to report to the IAEA board of governors," Mr Obama said, calling the new plant a "direct challenge" to international non-proliferation rules.»
     
    [AusBC/justin]

    Note: As usual, one should read the lot. Any excerpt can only be indicative, but: one should examine the conflicting bits. Only parts can be true; Q: Which parts? A: 'The West' has form on lying; remember B, B & H's lies on Iraq? Bald faced, outright lies - which they knew as they spouted them that they were lies. Then, based on those lies, they went on to demolish Iraq and murder, kill or otherwise cause the deaths of perhaps well over a million hapless Iraqis.

    Note also, that the IAEA, under incredible and continuous pressure from the US, nevertheless reports that they can find no breach of the NPT by Iran.

    -=*=-

    There is a point here, hidden behind all the scurrilousness, and that is that US-thug-Obama is back on the Z-song sheet; "All options!"

    Once again, we see the US caving in to Z-raeli pressure, as if in extracting payment for Obama's 'tough talk' on illegal Israeli settlements, the illegitimate Z-tail once again wags the rabid US-dog.
     

    ReplyDelete
  8. "... nothing is more vital than aggressive media scrutiny and skepticism towards war-fueling accusations against our Enemy Du Jour, the latest Hitlers."

    Thus writes Glenn Greenwald. Unfortunately, as before, the scrutiny and skepticism are lacking other than in rare cases.

    ReplyDelete
  9. More of those juxtapositions:

    Obama: Iran must show its 'peaceful intentions' 

    A little further down:

    US threatens airstrikes in Pakistan 

    They must have a whole other understanding of the English language ... mmmm "War is peace" ...

    Time for more common sense, this from Scott Ritter.

    No apologies to those who are stirring up the hysteria in pursuit of their agenda(s).

    ReplyDelete
  10. how dare they? (US & 'Western' hypocrisy vs. Iran)

    .. "technically and legally wrong" = lies ...

      .. "opposed to further sanctions on Iran unless" = intervention ...

        .. if you're not agin' 'em, looks like you're condoning heinous crimes

    -=*=-

    The US rabid dog with its Z-rael illegitimate tail, each regime long-time lying mass-murderers for spoil, keep yelling "All options!" at Iran. The newest UK poodle and the French gypsy stood shoulder to shoulder as the so-called 'leader' of the free world screeched "crippling sanctions!" and "You must comply!" at Iran, a country that has not attacked anyone, has no A-bombs and even if they had one it could only ever be for honourable self-defence. The IAEA has been sooled onto Iran, with possibly the most intrusive inspection regime on the planet. (No such inspection has ever been carried out on Z-rael. Why not?)

    -=*=-

    All of these aggressing countries have nukes - sacks full. Z-rael is totally rogue in the NPT-sense, as well as totally immoral in illegally occupying most of Palestine - murdering for land and water.

    -=*=-

    The UK & the US CIA sponsored & ran a coup against the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953, after Iran nationalised its oil resources. Before that, the UK had its Jackboot on Iran's neck, and now Z-rael demands 'regime change,' and the US has been itching to attack Iran since the Iranians took their country back by deposing the US-sponsored & supported tyrant, Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlevi. The US wishes to plant its Jackboot on Iran's neck, as it already (illegally, immorally, *brutally*; assisted by the UK) has in Iraq; mass-murder for oil.

    -=*=-

    These US, Z-rael, UK depredations, these utterly vile crimes are perpetrated in the cold, hard light of day; hardly anyone (excepting the likes of we, the justice via truth seekers) ever says "Boo!"

    Why that? Where are the (mature, Enlightened) adults?
     

    ReplyDelete
  11. two comments

    .. from Bob's c-f ...

      .. deserve a repeat ...

        .. G'day Bob; nice day - over here.

    -=*=-

    No Epitaph...
    written by Grandma Jefferson, September 27, 2009
      «... Not yet. Not before millions more die, not before we at last provoke that necessary war against the Islamofascist evildoers of Iran, not before we expand our holy efforts in Afghanistan and of course not until we launch a real blitzkrieg upon those Satanic terrorists embedded in Pakistan. Keep the Homeland safe!

    As the decrepit national infrastructure continues to crumble, as tens of thousands die for lack of a civilized national health care plan, we will valiantly continue to funnel the people's treasure where it will do the most good, into the pockets of the war profiteers and banking Mafiosi.

    No epitaphs, just a flickering, buzzing neon sign anchored above the Statue Of Liberty's torch that proclaims, "Hello Suckers! Abandon All Hope Ye Who Are Trapped Here".» 

    ...
    written by el grillo, September 27, 2009
      «We throw good money at these gooks, and they still don't like us to invade their country and kill their people! Really! What does an empire have to do to get a little love around here?

    "What does an empire have to do?" Answer: Repent, and go away, and bring your leaders to trial, and hold them accountable for their war crimes and torturing..

    Message to the USA, its leaders, and its people:

    "It is unthinkable in the 20th century to fail to distinguish between what constitutes an abominable atrocity that must be prosecuted and what constitutes that 'past' which 'ought not to be stirred up'.
    We have to condemn publicly the very idea that some people have the right to repress others. In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousandfold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations. It is for this reason, and not because of the 'weakness of indoctrinational work', that they are growing up 'indifferent'. Young people are acquiring the conviction that foul deeds are never punished on earth, that they always bring prosperity.
    It is going to be uncomfortable, horrible, to live in such a country!"
    --- Alexandre Isayevich Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago.» 

    -=*=-

    My comments:

    A proper democracy is one where the voters are fully and honestly informed. Lying propaganda is *totally* undemocratic - so why do the US, UK, Aus & Z-rael propagandise their voters?

    A country of laws is one where the laws themselves are just, the laws are applied impartially to all & sundry; no criminal goes unpursued, and no such country goes rogue and attacks. The US, UK, Aus & Z-rael do *not* pursue all internal criminals (think: B, B & H), and partake in Nuremberg-class illegal invasions, morphing into brutal occupations.

    Why that? Where are the world's policemen? Prosecutors?
     

    ReplyDelete
  12. I thought they might strike a chord.

    Two more pieces - Paul Craig Roberts and Justin Raimondo.

    ReplyDelete
  13. ho hum (Iran, enr-U; "All options!")

    .. ever more of the same ...

      .. but the Russkies and the Chinks ...

        .. don't seem to be objecting enough - if at all

    -=*=-

    G'day Bob,

     .. a nice 'crop' of citations; too bad they're full of verifiable facts and solid reasoning. Sadly, tragically, the evil empire (US + side-kick Z-rael) doesn't 'do' facts; they create their own (criminal!) reality.

    Even sadder for some, like the Russkies and Chinks, say; once the evil empire completes their jackboot on the neck choke-hold of the oil-lands of the planet, it (the evil empire) will move against them (the Russkies and the Chinks).

    It's as obvious and predictable as night follows day.

    How can they be so foolishly blind?

    Poor Russkies, poor Chinks ...

      .. poor us.
     

    ReplyDelete
  14. Chris Floyd follows other analyses posted above and recalls Arthur Silber.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Framing the debate ... but the goodies fight back. Glenn Greenwald was on MSNBC. Arianna trotted out the memes .. Glenn trotted out reality. Keep an eye out for the "they tested missiles" bit.

    Scott Ritter also appeared. More reality. "Fact based, not faith based."

    More from GG - "A glossary of terms in foreign affairs". An example - relevant to GG interview above:

    The act of dangerous, threatening Hitlers -- NYT, today:

    Iran was reported Monday to have test-fired long-range missiles capable of striking Israel and American bases in the Persian Gulf in what seemed a show of force.

    The acts of a peace-loving democracy - Telegraph, January 18, 2008:

    Israel has carried out the successful test launch of a long-range, ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, in what was intended as a clear show of strength to Iran.
     

    Sense of irony required.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Haw, haw haw!

    Another 'What the cat dragged in:'

    "Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize"

    Is this the final exit for "All options!!?" - Must be!

    Q: Could such a grand man of peace (with Nobel Prize) attack Iran - not so hidden agenda: murder for oil?

    A: No never; no more!

    Haw again, haw haw!
     

    ReplyDelete
  17. G'day ID, Obama responding to the award of the Nobel Prize:

    These challenges can't be met by any one leader or any one nation. And that's why my administration has worked to establish a new era of engagement in which all nations must take responsibility for the world we seek. We cannot tolerate a world in which nuclear weapons spread to more nations and in which the terror of a nuclear holocaust endangers more people. And that's why we've begun to take concrete steps to pursue a world without nuclear weapons, because all nations have the right to pursue peaceful nuclear power, but all nations have the responsibility to demonstrate their peaceful intentions. 

    Perhaps one of those concrete steps is the new bunker buster. Can't be the "don't mention Israel's nuclear arsenal" stance.

    Some reactions:

    Justin Raimondo.

    Glenn Greenwald.

    Chris Floyd - who links to Arthur Silber. Making it easier ... and tying the end of the Silber to the opening quote of this post:

    UPDATE: See also, which concludes with this: "No, really: Barack Obama just used his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech to reiterate his threats against Iran."

    Depraved. Obscene. Absurd. Maintain the lies, and this is not only the present, but the bloody, sickening future.
     

    ReplyDelete
  18. As always, it can go two ways; (1) for the better (not too likely), or (2) for the worse (worst); the latter as we've been getting too much of lately (any 'worse, worst' at all is obviously far too much.)

    Just been discussing this; g'day Bob. IF the US goes on the attack THEN the world will no longer be able ignore them (Nobel Peace Prize person attacks?) - and for one thing, the Nobel committee will, (*must*) withdraw/cancel if the US or even its illegitimate side-kick does attack. Seems to me, that all Iran has to do is more of the same; i.e. continue allowing the inspectors to inspect. No-one (especially not Nobel Peace Prize winners) can attack without real proof. Yet to read your citations (sooo much text, sooo little time); we'll see what that text and tomorrow brings... More later, as/when possible.
     

    ReplyDelete
  19. 'Killing for peace' doesn't work, and US&Z's murdering for spoil has been 'sprung.' The only way now, for the US&/Zs to aggress, is to fly in the face of all reason, truth and justice. Once more to the breach: where are the Enlightened adults?
     

    ReplyDelete
  20. Preliminary summation on Raimondo, Greenwald & Floyd - leaving Silber until later: all more or less jumping the gun &/ looking to the past. What we're looking for is a 'game-changer' (Ameri-speak; spit!) - and this prize is *some action, any action* which is (bravely/stupidly, following taste) - jumping out of the 'more of the same' mould. The US economy is rat-s**t, their trading partners are looking for a way out - and it looks (looked?) like Ramb-O-Bama was going to blithely continue Bush's murdering-for-spoil; Iran next. Something, anything, is better than nothing, and this prize *could be* where the Enlightened adults finally say "ENOUGH!!"
     

    ReplyDelete
  21. There's the spin ... and there's other versions:

    Gareth Porte;

    Gordon Prather.

    Glenn Greenwald on all those unreasoning religious extremists.

    Hegemons rise and fall - from Tomdispatch Michael T. Klare on the future for the US.

    It's a matter of priorities and self-inflicted wounds - GG again.

    An emotional Chris Floyd.

    ReplyDelete
  22. cognitive dissonance ...

     .. working my way slowly ...

       .. through your list of citations ...

         .. G'day Bob

    -=*=-

    Consider near the end of this one:

    October 26, 2009 11:35 am
    Tomgram: Michael Klare, The Great Superpower Meltdown
      «The question remains: How much longer will Washington feel that Americans can afford to subsidize a global role that includes garrisoning much of the planet and fighting distant wars in the name of global security, when the American economy is losing so much ground to its competitors?» 
    [tomd/klare]

    I see at least two bones to pick:

    1. The use of garrison[1].

    2. The use of '... in the name of global security.'

    Consider the cases of Germany & Japan; the ostensible justification asserted for *occupying* those two *may* originally have been 'to defend' them - against the Russkies, after WW2. But since the A-bombing war crimes are considered by some (many!) as the opening shots of the 'cold war' AND that 'war' was largely both conjured & instigated by the US, then any 'garrisoning' by the US is far more correctly seen as occupying, see the "Economic Hit Man."

    IMHO Germany was occupied a) to keep a lid on them and b) as a forward post to confront the Russkies & similarly Japan as "Airstrip Two."

    Then, apart from any yanking around by the Zs, the US does *absolutely nothing* they don't see an obscene profit in. (Iraq: oil, Afghanistan: pipeline(s).)

    What I'm trying to say, is that that 'snip' from Klare does not fit the observed facts. Any ideas why not?

    -=*end*=-

    Ref(s):

    [1] garrison —n. troops stationed in a town etc. to defend it. [POD]
     

    ReplyDelete