Iran Breaks Seals on Nuclear Equipment

[Boon 0]

VIENNA, Austria (CNN) -- Iran has broken the seals on equipment at an atomic processing facility amid Western fears Tehran could use its technology to build a nuclear bomb.

 

That the International Atomic Energy Agency seals were in place indicate the equipment at nuclear plants had not been used up to now.

 

Removal of the seals means the plant is now capable of being fully operational, a state-run news agency reported.

 

U.S. and other Western nations fear could the plant lead to development of nuclear weapons. Tehran says it's atomic work is for peaceful purposes only.

 

Mohammad Faidi, deputy director of international affairs of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, said a U.N. representative was present when the seals were removed, the agency reported.

 

A spokesman for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog would have preferred Iran not remove the seals and restart full operation at the plant.

 

But Mark Gwozdecky said the plant at Isfahan, located 410 kilometers (255 miles) south of Tehran, "is fully monitored by the IAEA" and "is not a uranium enrichment plant."

 

"Their uranium enrichment plant in Natanz remains frozen, and they have indicated it will remain that way," he said. "This plant (Isfahan) produces feed material that could one day be used in enrichment."

 

Still, he said, Iran's decision "isn't particularly helpful."

 

"This is a process of confidence building," he said. "Iran built a nuclear program for 18 years and concealed it from the international community.

 

"The international community, through our board of governors, has asked Iran to put on hold activities that are not urgently needed right now and allow this dialogue ... as well as allow the inspectors to finish their job."

 

In Vienna, the IAEA's board of governors postponed a planned meeting to give delegates more time to hammer out a resolution on the issue.

 

The agency was expected to press Iran to reverse its decision to resume its uranium conversion program at Isfahan.

 

CNN's Walter Rodgers said the postponement "indicates a lack of unanimity on how to deal with the Iranians."

 

Iran restarted parts of the uranium conversion process at Isfahan Monday without breaking any U.N. seals at the plant. (Full story)

 

But in order to run the whole plant -- which converts uranium concentrate into a gas that can then be enriched into reactor or bomb fuel -- seals had to be removed.

 

Iran has insisted it has the right to have a nuclear fuel recycling program in its quest for greater reliance on nuclear energy.

 

Western nations, however, fear this same uranium enrichment program could also be used by Iran as a front to develop atomic weapons.

 

The IAEA board met Tuesday to receive a report from its monitors on the restarting of the fuel conversion at Isfahan.

 

The agency indicated its board would ask Iran to rescind its decision on resuming its uranium conversion program. If Iran declines, it could be referred to the U.N. Security Council for sanctions.

 

Iran agreed in November to suspend the production of enriched uranium amid heavy international pressure. (Full story)

 

In a statement read late Tuesday at the IAEA meeting, Iran's leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a fatwa, or religious legal ruling, saying "production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that the Islamic Republic of Iran shall never acquire these weapons."

 

"The leadership of Iran has pledged at the highest level that Iran will remain a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the (Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty) and has placed the entire scope of its nuclear activities under IAEA safeguards and additional protocol, in addition to undertaking voluntary transparency measures with the agency that have even gone beyond the requirements of the agency's safeguard system," Khamenei said in the statement.

 

According to Iran's state news agency, new Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in a phone call that Iran was willing to continue negotiations on its nuclear program.

 

But Ahmadinejad rejected a European Union proposal to settle the dispute as "an affront to the Iranian nation."

[Henry Spencer 0]

About time.

[Vampiro69 0]

Oh Iran, how we missed you in the news.

[SuperJerk 0]

In a related story, 80's band A Flock of Seagulls are planning a comeback.

[Vampiro69 0]

If Iran does get nukes ready, I will run, run so far away, I will have to get away.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

If Iran does get nukes ready, I will run, run so far away, I will have to get away.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yes, dammit!

 

Word play that's both awful and brilliant simultaneously.

[SuperJerk 0]

If Iran does get nukes ready, I will run, run so far away, I will have to get away.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yes, dammit!

 

Word play that's both awful and brilliant simultaneously.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How about some credit for the dude who did the actual set-up for the joke by mentioning A Flock of Seagulls?

[Vampiro69 0]

Thanks for the setup Y2Jerk!

[Stephen Joseph 0]

Well, thats why were really in Iraq anyways

 

What?

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Iraq, Iran...change one letter and it's all the same. Most Americans probably can't tell the difference. We should just invade Iran while we're in the neighborhood anyway...no one will probably notice the difference.

[Vampiro69 0]

most people probably could not find Iran on a Globe. Then a genius would say, who says that it has to be on the outside of the Globe and then they would crack it open and be disapointed they couldn't find it.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

most people probably could not find Iran on a Globe.  Then a genius would say, who says that it has to be on the outside of the Globe and then they would crack it open and be disapointed they couldn't find it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Southwest Asia bordering Iraq on the West, Georgia and Azerbijan on the North West, Afghanistan and Pakistan on the East.

[Vampiro69 0]

I said most people but not all people. There are a few people that can find it.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

I said most people but not all people.  There are a few people that can find it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm kinda proud of that in any event.

[SuperJerk 0]

Bush, Merkel united on Iran's nuclear threat

They ask other nations to join opposition

 

(CNN) -- President Bush and German Chancellor Angela Merkel called on nations around the world Friday to join in opposition to Iran's nuclear activities.

 

"Iran armed with a nuclear weapon poses a grave threat to the security of the world," said Bush at a joint appearance with Merkel at the White House.

 

The EU-3 nations of Britain, France and Germany -- which have negotiated with Iran in hopes of reaching a resolution -- together with the United States must work to persuade other nations to join their stance, said Merkel.

 

"And we will certainly not be intimidated by a country such as Iran," she said.

 

Bush said their meeting was part of a "proactive" diplomatic effort to determine how best to confront Iran over its fledgling nuclear program and "lay the foundation for peace."

 

Sidestepping a question about whether he favored sanctions, Bush said, "I'm not going to prejudge what the U.N. Security Council should do. But I recognize that it's logical that a country which has rejected diplomatic entreaties be sent to the United Nations Security Council."

 

"The current president of Iran has announced that the destruction of Israel is an important part of their agenda, and that's unacceptable," Bush said. "And the development of a nuclear weapon, it seems to me, would make him a step closer to achieving that objective."

 

On Friday the British Foreign Office said all five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, along with Germany, will meet Monday and Tuesday to discuss the nuclear standoff with Iran.

 

Senior officials from the EU-3 nations will attend the meeting along with representatives of the United States, China and Russia, the foreign office said in a written statement. All but Germany have veto power over any resolutions.

 

The meeting will focus on the language of a Security Council resolution that would not draw a Russian or Chinese veto, the statement said.

 

The United States has welcomed the EU-3's call for the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, to refer the issue to the Security Council. (Full story)

 

In response Friday, Tehran threatened to block inspections of its nuclear sites and stop working with the IAEA, if such a scenario occurs, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said.

 

The move reflects a law passed by Iran last year.

Frustration with Iran builds

 

The meeting between Merkel and Bush coincided with Russia's appeals to Iran to resume its moratorium on nuclear activities and cooperation with the IAEA. (Full story)

 

Earlier this week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov informed U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that Russia would abstain, rather than vote against, efforts to move the issue to the Security Council, according to The Washington Post.

 

As well as possible economic sanctions, there have been calls for cultural and sports boycotts, including banning Iran from soccer's 2006 World Cup in Germany.

 

The calls resurfaced Friday as Bayern Munich played a match in Iran against Persepolis Tehran, to criticism in Germany. (Full story)

 

France said Friday that it favored a step-by-step approach over Iran's contested nuclear program and that any sanctions request at this stage would be premature.

 

Britain's Straw on the other hand didn't rule sanctions out when interviewed on BBC radio Friday.

 

Despite the threat of U.N. referral, Iran has vowed to press ahead.

 

"Unfortunately, a group of bullies allows itself to deprive nations of their legal and natural rights," The Associated Press quoted President Ahmadinejad as saying.

 

"I tell those superpowers that, with strength and prudence, Iran will pave the way to achieving peaceful nuclear energy," he said. "The Iranian nation is not frightened by the powers and their noise."

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/13/...lear/index.html

[2GOLD 0]

I said most people but not all people. There are a few people that can find it.

 

There are some people who couldn't find their home state on a map even if the map had words.

[NoCalMike 0]

Wouldn't be suprised if Bush got on TV tomorrow and said, "see I told you Iraq was starting up their nukes program"

[The Czech Republic 0]

In a related story, 80's band A Flock of Seagulls are planning a comeback.

First concert will be in Iran, Iran so far away.

[The Czech Republic 0]

If Iran does get nukes ready, I will run, run so far away, I will have to get away.

Mine was better, asshat.

[2GOLD 0]

Apparently he followed this up with the announcement than Iran will hold a holocaust conference. I bet that's going to be some fair and balanced exchange of ideas.

[Guest InuYasha]

Honestly, Iran deserved the parking lot treatment more than Iraq ever did. Add that to the rather asshat-like comments the "President" of Iran has been saying recently, and that country is just begging for the 9/11 Syndrome.

[SuperJerk 0]

Senators: Military last option on Iran

Lawmakers stress gravity of nuclear standoff, push sanctions

 

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Republican and Democratic U.S. lawmakers said Sunday there must be major immediate diplomatic action on Iran's nuclear activities, and that the option of military action cannot be taken off the table.

 

"This is the most grave situation that we have faced since the end of the Cold War, absent the whole war on terror," Sen. John McCain told CBS' "Face the Nation."

 

"The Iranians showed their face when their president came to the U.N. and advocated the eradication of the state of Israel from the earth," said the Arizona Republican. "We must go to the U.N. now for sanctions."

 

The United States and the so-called EU-3 -- Britain, France and Germany -- want the International Atomic Energy Agency to meet soon and turn the issue over to the U.N. Security Council, which could impose sanctions.

 

Iran on Sunday threatened to manipulate world oil prices if sanctions are imposed.

 

"If the price of oil has to go up, then that's a consequence we would have to suffer," said McCain.

 

McCain, widely seen as a likely 2008 Republican presidential candidate, added that war is not out of the question.

 

"There's only one thing worse than the United States exercising the military option; that is a nuclear-armed Iran," he said. "The military option is the last option but cannot be taken off of the table."

 

He also said the United States must support the pro-democracy movement in Iran.

 

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, told the same program that she agrees with McCain's assessment of the extent of Iran's threat.

 

"Iran has much more opportunity to create devastation in the Middle East than Iraq at this time," she said. "I think it's a very serious threat."

 

"This new president of Iran is very difficult to predict. He clearly holds very radical and fanatic views with -- certainly with respect to Israel," she said. "I don't think it's a stretch to say that, if the Iranians had a nuclear missile, that this president might well use it against Israel."

 

She called the issue "the major test of the international community."

 

Asked whether she could envision a scenario in which the United States would take military action, she said, "I certainly can't say right now. As people have wanted to say, every option should be on the table."

 

She emphasized that the international community must be "unified, forceful and dramatic in its diplomacy."

 

On CNN's "Late Edition," Sen. Evan Bayh referred to the "radical, almost delusional nature of the Iranian regime" and recent comments of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the Holocaust is a "myth."

 

"To deny history like this, this virulent anti-Semitism, their sponsoring of terrorism, their search for a nuclear weapon -- ought to be a wake-up call to every American. Appeasement won't work," said the Indiana Democrat.

 

"We need to use diplomacy, economic sanctions, other means, so we won't have to resort to military action."

 

Bayh, a possible Democratic presidential candidate, said the Bush administration had "ignored" the Iranian issue since it took office, and "It's brought us to the position that we're in today."

 

White House spokesman David Almacy took issue with Bayh, telling CNN that Washington "has been leading the way to confront the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. To suggest otherwise ignores reality."

 

Sen. Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, said the administration has been working with European countries in hopes of convincing Iran "to act reasonably."

 

"It is a serious problem -- probably right now the most serious in the world," Lott said.

 

Representatives of the United States, Britain, France and Germany are scheduled to meet Monday in London with representatives of Russia and China.

 

All but Germany are permanent members of the Security Council and hold veto power.

 

U.S. lawmakers expressed concern that Russia and China -- which have close economic ties with Iran -- may veto any sanctions. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he does not believe Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon.

 

McCain told CBS that if Russia and China "for reasons that would be abominable" opt not to support sanctions, "then we would have to go with the willing" -- meaning an international agreement to impose sanctions even if the move is not supported by the Security Council.

 

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, told "Fox News Sunday" that the United States should work to win over those two nations.

 

"If we're going to put an economic stranglehold on Iran, which we should be doing -- it's preferable to military, any military option, and maybe more effective -- we need the Russians and Chinese.

 

"They need stuff from us. They need trade. They need all kinds of assistance. We ought to play hardball with them," he said. "And if President Bush were to do that, either publicly or privately, I think he'd get broad bipartisan backing."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/15/iran.congress/index.html

 

Is it just me, or do certain senators seem more concerned that the Holocaust was called a myth than with the possibility of being incinerated by a nuclear bomb?

[2GOLD 0]

Didn't we already try the whole sanctions on Iran thing when Jimmy Carter was in office and it didn't really work too well?

I could have sworn we tried that with them. I don't know what is going to work with Iran, I really haven't much of a clue.

[Slayer 0]

How long until the freshness expires

[The Czech Republic 0]

From what I understand, a large contingent of the Iranian population is sick to death of the theocratic regime and is really yearning to westernize; the citizens don't really hate America the way the government does. Too bad we're probably gonna have to kill them

[SuperJerk 0]

Didn't we already try the whole sanctions on Iran thing when Jimmy Carter was in office and it didn't really work too well?

 

I don't recall anything about sanctions...we were too busy planning failed rescue attempts for the hostages.

 

So long as we don't deal with the Iranians the way Eisenhower did. That's what got us into this mess in the first place.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Yes sir, Mr. Jerk wins the prize.

 

The reason that the senators are incensed about it is because their constituents have seen news that centered on the Holocaust stuff more than the nuclear cloud.

[Justice 0]

Didn't we already try the whole sanctions on Iran thing when Jimmy Carter was in office and it didn't really work too well?

 

I don't recall anything about sanctions...we were too busy planning failed rescue attempts for the hostages.

 

So long as we don't deal with the Iranians the way Eisenhower did. That's what got us into this mess in the first place.

 

I'm not to knowledgable on the exact information, but seeing the word Eisenhower and the phrase 'deal with' automatically triggers this response: Don't you mean 'didn't deal with'? Or 'ignored'? Or 'brushed over'? Or 'forgot about'?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Didn't we already try the whole sanctions on Iran thing when Jimmy Carter was in office and it didn't really work too well?

 

I don't recall anything about sanctions...we were too busy planning failed rescue attempts for the hostages.

 

So long as we don't deal with the Iranians the way Eisenhower did. That's what got us into this mess in the first place.

 

I'm not to knowledgable on the exact information, but seeing the word Eisenhower and the phrase 'deal with' automatically triggers this response: Don't you mean 'didn't deal with'? Or 'ignored'? Or 'brushed over'? Or 'forgot about'?

 

There was, in the 50s, a CIA-led coup (under Kermit Roosevelt, I think) that overthrew their democratically elected leader and put in the pro-western Mossadegh (spelling?), who was eventually overthrown in favor of Ayatollah Assaholah in the 70s.

[A Happy Medium 0]

Apparently, either there are not sanctions imposed on Iran, or we have to pay even more to fill up our automobiles.

 

Don't they realize that if they don't sell to us, they don't make any money, and it will just cause our government to get off of it's ass and give us alternatives to petro?

 

I think we should sanction them, take this whole "got you by the balls!" thing, and turn it around on them by grabbing them by the balls, since they'll miss their cash-cow.

 

In the end, I think it's all about money anyways.

 

I may be very wrong about this, but eh.