surrael: 'New York Times': 'Iran has enough info for atom bomb' (my italix ... are they building an INFOBOMB?!!!?! OMGWTFBBQ!!!!!) surrael: now entire countries can be guilty of knowcrime surrael: any country with any standard of nuclear knowledge, including 'merely medicinal', should have the knowledge needed to construct a nuclear weapon ... the world would be a much more scary place if not so surrael: what is scary is that this kind of scaremongering is exactly the type of hyperbole that preceded the invasion of Iraq surrael: the NYTimes article that started the current media frenzy surrael: google gives me 2000 hits right now on the story surrael: here surrael: "International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) stresses in its introduction that its conclusions are tentative" ... surrael: global map of nuclear power reactor locations surrael: the emphasis on 'other' states who have embyonic reactor programs is a purposeful distraction which presupposes that it is 'OK' that certain states with large programs carry on maintaining their stockpiles of WMDs surrael: meanwhile, governments and other arms dealers from all across the planet surrael: can't wait to rape and pillagelittle ol' Australia's uranium deposits surrael: while big ol' USA decries Iran's 'almost knowing how to put one together', Australia's government is falselypromoting NUKES as a way to fix the CO2 problem ... hahaha .. nice one Peter, you fucking troll surrael: there's no such thing as a peaceful nuclear program and the IAEA is the principal troll used to delude the public into granting nuclear weapons to governments surrael: if even knowledge is dangerous, why is it we have so much of it? surrael: oh and here's a link if anyone wanted more detail on how to knock their's together ... surrael: did i mention stringent safeguards, carefully managed ... in other words 'SAFE' .. our safe nuclear industry awaits your call! get one now, come on down! free set of steak knives, hallelujah, bejesus, bless me LORD! surrael: summary: "the 1980s made illegal waste disposal a lucrative business for crime groups" surrael: anti nuclear movement? get one up ya! surrael: Weapons of Mass Destruction: WMD programs & possession surrael: how hard it is to build a nuclear weapon surrael: and that link mentions a report from Sept that IAEA strenuously qualified .. is that the same report NYT is now 'sexing up'? surrael: fwiw Komheini rejects nuclear weapons on behalf of his followers ... surrael: even the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists agrees there is no such thing as a proliferation-proof nuclear fuel cycle surrael: "in the long run, proliferation can be stopped only if motivation to nuclear proliferation can be curtailed through an increasing emphasis on diplomatic solutions to resolve conflict and a de-emphasis on violence" surrael: the myth of the peaceful atom surrael: a long article from a few years back about much the same position as today, ie why all the fuss about iran in particular, and outlining iran's actual obligations (have they changed?) surrael: nuclear power => weapons connections surrael: routes to undeclared nuclear weapons surrael: investigation into the link between weapons programs and power programs surrael: nuclear winter vs CO2 global warming surrael: an analysis of why some ? but only some ? political leaders decide to endow their states with nuclear weapons. It finds that decisions to go or not to go nuclear result not from the international structure, but rather from individual hearts surrael: note how we hear continually from other global 'leaders' and critics about how iran must prove its 'power program' is not a weapons program .. never once have i heard one of these people put forward the idea that iran could develop, say, solar power, instead surrael: because those speakers are just as hooked on the nuclear cycle as they allege that iran is ... they have no interest in reality surrael: just as iran does not need a nuclear program at all, neither does USA etc surrael: just as iran cannot seperate power from weapons, neither can USA etc surrael: history of weaponisation of nuclear material surrael: a book on the same topic may be of interest for the diehard critic surrael: 2007: Intel Report: Iran Halted Nuke Arms Program in 2003 surrael: note the NYT correspondent had not even actually read the report themself, but had actually discussed it over lunch with someone who had ... now half the world is quoting the NYT article surrael: if they really wanted nuclear weapons, they could just buy some .. what iran is after, if anything, is prestige with its people, cf space race surrael: why stop at peaceful nuclear power, we could all have peaceful nuclear explosions! ... O_o surrael: IAEA's contribution to covert nuclear programs surrael: scott ritter has already been interviewed for an opinion on politically motivated bs about the level of risk that iran might pose ... so how many days until US declares a full-scale invasion? anyone have a 2003 calendar handy? surrael: IA EA UA WHAT? UAE wants NUKES now too surrael: i screem u screem ... surrael: we all screem for ... ??? surrael: a good referenced, but shortish, article on nuclear proliferation surrael: note re iiss link above "IISS's previous 'strategic dossier' on Iraq in 2002, which became Paul Wolfowitz's bible in the Washington neo-conservatives' crusade to rationalize their planned invasion..." surrael: the UK's Gordon Brown idiot is also fanning nuclear proliferation ... all in the name of MONEY surrael: "Only last Wednesday, the prime minister warned us about rogue states obtaining nuclear weapons and terrorist groups unleashing 'dirty bombs'. Promoting nuclear power as a global solution to climate change is rather a schizophrenic thing to be doing days later." surrael: iran's latest disclosures re its nuclear project surrael: (also from NYT .. well who knows maybe they're onto something ... crazy fucked up world) surrael: india 1974 -- how 'peaceful' can be taken to mean different things:"Although Canada's supply agreement required the reactor to be committed to peaceful uses, India has interpreted the 'peaceful uses' clause to mean that it can use the plutonium from Cirus in 'peaceful nuclear explosives.'" surrael: ok, so far i haven't found what i'm after, it's very simple, a chart showing how many of the planet's nuclear weapon states got there by diverting 'peaceful use' reactor material ... it's a lot surrael: anyway, the claims of peaceful nuclear power are all fiction ... IAEA is grossly underfunded for the task of ensuring compliance supposing it was even a possible job to do, or that they were motivated really to do it, and when they do try to act independently, they are threatened with even less funding or el surrael: welcome to the world, my beautiful child :] surrael:
