Ok, so let's look at what all this fuss is about, and I'm going to offer my opinion on this whole affair, which is in direct opposition to another much more popular, learned and informed diarest than myself, and his diary which is currently on the Rec'd. List.
And just because my dear departed father was very high in our intelligence community, who wore two hats, holding and retiring at the rank of Lt. General and also very high in our nation's covert intelligence activities, doesn't necessarily mean that I'm privy to any special qualifications, or that I know what I'm talking about to a dead certainty, does it? But I'm going to take a stab at it, anyway.
More of my counter-proposal, explanation to what I think's really going on here or theory, if you will, under the fold...
The New York Times reported today that "American intelligence agencies reversed their view about the status of Iran’s nuclear weapons program after they obtained notes last summer from the deliberations of Iranian military officials involved in the weapons development program."
These "notes" showed conversations in which "military officials complained bitterly about what they termed a decision by their superiors in late 2003 to shut down a complex engineering effort to design nuclear weapons."
So strictly on the basis of "obtained notes", from whom? Iranian "military officials". Who did what?
They "complained bitterly" about what? A "decision by their superiors".
Which "superiors", Ahmadinejad? Doesn't say.
When? "In late 2003". To do what now? "To shut down a complex engineering effort to design nuclear weapons."
Which "complex engineering effort" and among how many? Surely there's a back-up or redundant plan, right? Doesn't say.
Does it say anywhere that the facilities were actually shut down? NO.
Does it give any details whatsover conclusively proving that Iran no longer has a nuclear weapons program? NO.
It says only that the military officials, who are un-named, had "complained bitterly", not that they had actually shut anything down at all!
So how is Bush lying, again? So Bush is a liar based on notes? Anyone who knows me, knows how much I detest Bush, but am I supposed to accept flimsy evidence--at best? Well, I don't.
Well, let's look at a few facts we DO know about Iran's nuclear program, then I'm going to give my opinion about what I think is really going on here.
First, let's look at what the UN's own nuclear weapons watch dog agency, the IAEA has to say about Iran's program starting with Iran's president's comment.
These are the FACTS we do know for a certainty:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Iran will have "completed its fuel cycle" by February-March of 2007, and brags about bringing thousands of centrifuges online. And then goes on to say the world accepts an nuclear Iran. 29 .
The IAEA report lists several issues with the Iranian program, specificallyo the enrichment facilities at Natanz:
>>>no response to request for more information on its enrichment program
>>>no access to suspicious equipment/military personnel possibly involved in nuclear activities;
denial of a request for a copy of the uranium metal diagrams;
>>>no information on apparent experiments linking nuclear and ballistic missile research. 30
So Iran's own president, freely admits: "Iran will have "completed its fuel cycle" by February-March of 2007, and brags about bringing thousands of centrifuges online"!
So are we to pooh pooh what Ahmadinejad bragged about, or are we to take him at his word? Is he merely a braggart with a death wish, knowing how badly Bush and Cheney are chomping at the bit to annihalate him?
For all of his false macho bravado, it would appear Ahmadinejad does know just a little bit more about his own program than we do, even if he's the world's biggest fool to publicly admit the details of it. Strange, foolish man!
The IAEA further reports: "Iran also stated that once the hall reaches 500 machines, all monitoring will cease". But if it doesn't have a uraniun enrichment program, why would they even mention reaching 500 machines? Very strange. Almost looks like some certain POTUS hasn't been lying afterall, doesn't it? Let's move on:
The IAEA reported that the Iranian Centrifuge facitlity at Natanz has completed the 164 unit cascade, adding to the 10 and 24 unit cascades in the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant that already existed. The 164 unit cascade is at the production EFP and in which the first 18 will be tested shortly.
The current enrichment quality is at 4.2% U-235 proving the design efficiency of the facility. Iran continues to deny remote monitoring of the 3000 machine hall but pledges to allow frequent inspector visits. Iran also stated that once the hall reaches 500 machines, all monitoring will cease. 34, 35
Ok,Let's move on to the IAEA's next reporting period. Read it very carefully folks. It says, and I quote, "Iran has refused to cease their Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant experiments and continued with building the production EFP facility".
Doesn't sound like they stopped it at all, and especially not at any time remotely close 2003 as reported by the NY Times, does it? Moving right along, we see:
Iran has refused to cease their Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant experiments and continued with building the production EFP facility. The U.N., on March 23, 2007, approved new, tougher sanctions against Iran, despite Iran's warning that such sanctions would be illegal and therefore they would be forced themselves to go "illegal", which implies they will begin to defy the terms of the NPT and cease cooperation with the IAEA. 35, 36, 37, 38
So if they don't have a program, why did they warn the IAEA and world community they "they would be forced themselves to go "illegal", which implies they will begin to defy the terms of the NPT and cease cooperation with the IAEA"?
If they didn't still have a program, why would they put themselves in grave danger by making such a foolish statement, and thereby moving themselves closer to the WWIII Bush already warned them about a few weeks ago? Enter the next IAEA reporting period:
The IAEA reports that Iran's publicly visible (as inspected by the IAEA) uranium enrichment capacity has doubled since their last look in March, now operating some 164 separation centrifuges in the gallery they hope to have 3000 such devices in operation. 39
So the UN's IAEA totally contradicts our own U.S. intelligence report, and according to them, the Iranians not only still have a nuclear weapons program, but their "uranium enrichment capacity has doubled since their last look in March"! So who or whom are we to believe, and who is lying, if anyone, and why?
Let's examine some more evidence, some aerial space photography and see if we can make any sense out of any of this:
From OGLE EARTH:
There are two sites covered. Isfahan is where uranium is first processed and where a storage facility is being built underneath a mountain.
Once the uranium is processed into UF6, it is ready to be enriched at Natanz, 130km to the north. Here, two "cascade halls" have been progressively buried under successive layers of concrete and earth. These facilities are where the thousands of centrifuges are expected to be located that will increase the concentration of the uranium-235 isotope, which is the component needed for both nuclear energy and nuclear bombs. (A concentration of 3.5% is sufficient for nuclear energy. 80% is required for a nuclear bomb.)
Do these photos conclusively prove--or disprove that Iran's building a bomb? Of course not, but why all the new facilities? Why the continuing progression of war rhetoric on both sides? It is all just fantasy?
It is a fact that Bush/Cheney have threatened to attack Iran on several occasions, which is treasonous and impeachable not only if they knew Iran was an imminent threat and failed to protect us, it's also treasonous and an impeachable offense to attack them on flimsey evidence, too!
But no one has proven that they are an imminent threat, or that Bush lied on the basis of someone else's at best shabby "notes".
They could, however, possibly be playing at their continuing game of deception and subterfuge in executing the Bush Doctrine of Pre-Emption, like the one they played in attacking Iraq.
This is how I think Mister Bush is playing-out his hand:
Everyone knows that Bush wants to strike Iran a severe blow and overthrow the Ahmadinejad regime. The question is how to get them to lower their guard, seeing how they have a very formidable army, that would be at least an equal match to ours, in its current stretched to the limit state, as everyone agrees.
Here's my best guess. None of these people just got dropped off the back of a turnip truck, and Bush may just barely have a degree in History from Yale, but he's been at his job of POTUS for awhile now, and probably knows the ropes better than the rest of us. In short, only a fool would underestimate his ambitions, his will, and his ability to carry-out the neo-con agenda.
Now, during WWII prior to the liberation of Europe and the Normandy invasion, a lot of "double agent" stuff was going on, like deliberately feeding the Nazis false intellignce, in order to keep Ike's Operation Overlord from turning into the greatest defeat in history, instead of it's greatest triumph.
Well, Hitler bought the big diversion, or LIE, that the main attack was coming at Calais, France, instead of at Normandy!
And so, I'm basing my opinion, that Bush could also be feeding the whole world false intelligence so he can get the Iranians to lower their guard just long enough for Bush to surprise attack them, and just in time for the U.S. elections.
If he could pull it off, it is possible that we may be stuck with Mister Bush for "the duration of the national emergency", as clearly provided for in current law.
Not saying he would do it, or that he even wants the job as dictator for life, but that possibility isn't just a theory anymore, it's a real stark mathematical probability or possiblity that we need to consider, and NOT dismiss completely out of hand.
My personal opinion is that Bush will attack Iran before he is due to leave office, no matter what anybody's intelligence reveals. This is why it is paramount that he be immediately IMPEACHED!
DISCLAIMER: This is in no way a CT diary, just one man's opinion based on the facts presented herein.