IAEA findings on Iran dismissed (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7068478.stm)
France and the US have dismissed a finding by the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog Mohammed ElBaradei that there is no evidence of Iran building a bomb.
If this sounds familiar, it should. The US said the exact same thing when weapons inspectors insisted that Iraq did not have any nuclear weapons.
Panel: US Ignored Work of UN Arms Inspectors (http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2005/0403ignored.htm)
By the time President Bush ordered U.S. troops to disarm Saddam Hussein of the deadly weapons he was allegedly trying to build, every piece of fresh evidence had been tested -- and disproved -- by U.N. inspectors, according to a report commissioned by the president and released Thursday.
Unfortunately for this puppet US Administration, the average US citizen does possess a much longer attention span than the propaganda merchants of CNN and Fox News thinks .

Americans understand fully that America was lied into attacking Afghanistan and Iraq, and will not, thank you, take very kindly into being lied to about Iran's nuclear intention as a pretext for a military strike..

Why the hell would France do that?

bush and co dont give a damn about what the IAEA find or dont find they will do what they want to do regardless

Well, think about it. How could El Baradi make such statements without full and unlimited access for inspections in Iran? On what evidence is he basing his claims?

I don't blame the US and France at all for not believing him ....El Baradi hasn't inspected Iran's facilities fully, and has no evidence. El Baradi should say, "Well, we haven't fully inspected everything, therefore, I don't know."

Baron Max

the IAEA is like the UN - all show and no substance. who the hell cares what they have to say?

Unfortunately for this puppet US Administration, the average US citizen does possess a much longer attention span than the propaganda merchants of CNN and Fox News thinks .

Americans understand fully that America was lied into attacking Afghanistan and Iraq, and will not, thank you, take very kindly into being lied to about Iran's nuclear intention as a pretext for a military strike..
I have to disagree about Afghanistan. That was a retaliation (i.e. going after the Taliban who was harboring Bin Laden) for 9/11. Everyone was all for that back then and I'm still for it now.
In fact, I wish we would withdraw more troops from Iraq and bring them over to Afghanistan and finish that up.
The Bush administration used the momentum of the Afghanistan invasion and the war on terror to start the Iraq invasion.

the IAEA is like the UN - all show and no substance. who the hell cares what they have to say?


Remember the Oil for Food program, it seems that in the U.N. bribes can get you a clean bill of health for anything. The only thing the U.N. is good for is condemning Israel and not doing a dam thing about the Islamic Crusade against the west, hell they can't even get a resolution passed that defines terrorism.

IAEA findings on Iran dismissed
Well of course, they don't want to let a few niggly little facts get in the way of their bloodlust.

Remember the Oil for Food program, it seems that in the U.N. bribes can get you a clean bill of health for anything. The only thing the U.N. is good for is condemning Israel and not doing a dam thing about the Islamic Crusade against the west, hell they can't even get a resolution passed that defines terrorism.

What about the western Crusade against the islamic world ? Numerous interventions since the colonial era. I also seem to remember several prominent members resigning because they couldn't stop the sanctions which killed over 1.5 million children. Of course they would get oil for food, it was a compromise ,which is pretty much what the UN is about.

Well, think about it. How could El Baradi make such statements without full and unlimited access for inspections in Iran? On what evidence is he basing his claims?

I don't blame the US and France at all for not believing him ....El Baradi hasn't inspected Iran's facilities fully, and has no evidence. El Baradi should say, "Well, we haven't fully inspected everything, therefore, I don't know."

Baron Max

We should base our justification for going to war with another nation on some evidence. Do we have any?

Baradi's findings are the most complete we have so far, isn't that true?

If this sounds familiar, it should. The US said the exact same thing when weapons inspectors insisted that Iraq did not have any nuclear weapons.

Unfortunately for this puppet US Administration, the average US citizen does possess a much longer attention span than the propaganda merchants of CNN and Fox News thinks ...
"puppet administration" of who Foley?

YOUR [own] BBC Article/Link continues ...
With the anti-Iraq-war French ("puppet"????) govt's take on this affair:

"...French scepticism

The French defence minister said: "Our information, which is Backed up by Other countries, is contrary [to Mr ElBaradei's comments]."


"If... ElBaradei is right then there is No reason that Iran stops ElBaradei and the IAEA.. from carrying out inspections," Mr Morin told reporters on a visit to Abu Dhabi.

"If [the nuclear programme] is only civil what would be the reason to stop international inspections?"

The IAEA has SOME access to Iranian nuclear facilities but Tehran's refusal to allow intrusive inspections means the UN cannot verify the absence of undeclared nuclear material..."

Baradi's findings are the most complete we have so far, isn't that true?

But he didn't inspect everything ...so how could it be complete? And if it's not complete, then what's El Baradi missing? ...all the nuke factories, perhaps?

Baron Max

Perhaps. Are you willing to start a war on a guess?

Perhaps. Are you willing to start a war on a guess?

I think most wars of the past have been started that way, haven't they? Why change now? :D

The problem, Spider, is not that Iran does or does not have nukes ....it's El Baradi making that stupid, idiotic statement based on never having inspected anything in Iran! How could you accept anything he could say ...since he didn't inspect anything?

El Baradi, by making that statement, has probably caused more trouble than anything else. How can anyone trust the man after that?

Baron Max

He didn't inspect anything? ...or he didn't inspect everything? There's a difference.

Did anyone inspect more? Could they?

I think most wars of the past have been started that way, haven't they? Why change now? :D

The problem, Spider, is not that Iran does or does not have nukes ....it's El Baradi making that stupid, idiotic statement based on never having inspected anything in Iran! How could you accept anything he could say ...since he didn't inspect anything?

El Baradi, by making that statement, has probably caused more trouble than anything else. How can anyone trust the man after that?

Baron Max

Hey Maximus,

I guess dick chennney has inspected the lot of them though and being the nuclear scientist that he is knows fully well that they(the iranians) have a weapons program.. just like he knew Saddam had a WMD program too!!!

~~~~~~~~~
cheers
zak