Article: More Lies about Iran

There's been alot of rubbish written about Iran's "removing the seals" from its uranium enrichment equipment.

The fear-mongering western media have exploited the expression for all its worth. Even those who are normally skeptical of the Bush-propaganda machine are taken aback by this ominous-sounding phrase.

What gibberish!

How else does one make nuclear fuel for electric power plants if the fuel-producing mechanism is under lock and key?

The fear-engendering description provided in the news would have the reader believe that "diabolical" Iranians are ripping off the seals with crowbars so they can quickly assemble their secret nuclear stockpile to bomb Tel Aviv.

This is the worse type of demagoguery.

The fuel that is produced from these uranium enrichment reactors DOES NOT PRODUCE WEAPONS-GRADE MATERIAL. That requires thousands of centrifuges which Iran does not have.

At the same time, the nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, has on-site inspectors and cameras monitoring the entire process.

Everything is under constant observation.

Additionally, as nuclear weapons physicist, Gordon Prather states, "After almost three years of go-anywhere see-anything interview-anyone inspections, IAEA inspectors have yet to find any indication that Iran has""or ever had""a nuclear weapons program".

Get it???

No nukes! Not now"not ever!

The public has been duped again by the intentionally misleading rhetoric and blatant lies of the MSM and the Bush administration to build the case for war with Iran. What could be more clear?

The public does have a choice, however; either they can accept the credible statements from the Nobel Prize-winning Mohammed Elbaradei, chief of the IAEA, or the spurious allegations of the Liar-and-Chief.

Which will it be?

"Removing the Seals?"

So, why were the seals put on the Iranian conversion equipment?

Was Iran being punished for violations to the NPT (Non Proliferation Treaty) for secretly developing nuclear weapons?

No, but this seems to be the conclusion of most people who haven't followed the issue closely.

The seals were put in place because the Iranian negotiators foolishly fell into a trap that was set by the EU-3. (England, France and Germany) Iran agreed to "confidence-building" measures that would placate the United States, which included "additional protocols" that were not demanded under the terms of the treaty or required by the IAEA. As it turns out, the EU used the extra concessions to make it look like Iran was violating the NPT after negotiations had ended.

The EU strategy was a clever ploy that worked like a charm, but that doesn't change the facts:

IRAN HAS NOT VIOLATED ITS TREATY OBLIGATIONS, AND THE AGREEMENT WITH THE EU-3 WAS NEITHER BINDING NOR DESIGNED TO BE PERMANENT.

Iran has never given up its "inalienable right" (language of the NPT) to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

Was Iran foolish to trust the EU-3? (not suspecting that Washington was orchestrating a media-coup behind the scenes)

Yes, they were" but that is not a violation of the treaty; that's simply being deceived by some very brainy neocons.

Iran has completely cooperated with the IAEA to ensure that it stays within the rules and does not develop highly-enriched, weapons grade material.

Presently, Iran poses no threat to either its neighbors or the United States.

The Bush administration does not accept the internationally-recognized treaty rights of Iran because it believes that all law flows from Washington; a fact that is tragically evident in its torturing of prisoners, spying on American citizens, and its vast destruction of Iraq.

As long as the Bush-media, which serves as an annex to the political establish, can continue to hoodwink the American people with its alarmist misinformation; there's little chance that a war with Iran will be avoided.

(For those who really want to understand the truth about Iran's nuclear programs and the many fictions created in the press, there's no better place to start than the articles of nuclear physicist, Dr. Gordon Prather on antiwar.com.)