It goes without saying — though I’ll say it anyway — that I don’t trust Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:
Iran’s president calls for nuclear cooperation
Ahmadinejad’s words and tone suggested that the possibility of a deal remains.
By Borzou Daragahi, The Los Angeles TimesBEIRUT, Lebanon – Iran’s president called yesterday for international cooperation on nuclear technology in a prime-time television appearance filled with conciliatory language toward the world community, in stark contrast to the dismissive tone of other senior Iranian officials toward a United Nations-backed proposal.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not directly mention a U.S.-endorsed International Atomic Energy Agency plan in which Iran would trade the bulk of its enriched uranium in exchange for fuel to operate a Tehran medical reactor. But he said Iran was confident and powerful enough to begin working with other countries and the United Nations’ international watchdog to expand the country’s nuclear program.
“Today, Iran’s nuclear conditions are stabilized,” he said, “and we’ve entered the phase of nuclear interaction and cooperation, and today an important issue is international nuclear cooperation in construction of nuclear power plants, reactors, and even Iran’s contribution to a world fuel bank.
“We have the necessary technology and material, … but there is always quid pro quo, cooperation, and investment.”
The Obama administration, its European allies, and international arms-control authorities await a definitive response from Iran on whether it would send about 70 percent of its enriched-uranium supply to Russia and France to be further refined and turned into rods for the medical reactor.
The deal would temporarily allay international concerns that Iran could make a sprint toward developing a nuclear weapon, and possibly would set the stage for a broader compromise.
This story could mean many things:
- It could mean that the internal resistance to the already signed agreement has backfired, and the parties in Iran who don’t want to comply have lost favor; or
- It could mean that there is genuine dispute amongst Iran’s leaders as to whether some cooperation — such as the recent agreement — is useful or whether total resistance is better; or
- It could mean that the hard-liners have won in Iran, and Presidnt Ahmadinejad’s statement is just a ploy for time; or
- It could mean that Iran was never serious, but some soothing words might help Iran strategically.
Iran is a touchy, prickly country. The Persians have protested the Neda Agha-Soltan Graduate Scholarship in Philosophy, at Queens College at Oxford. Miss Agha-Soltan was an Iranian woman killed on June 20, 2009, during protests over Iran’s possibly rigged presidential election. The video of her death became an internet sensation, and a symbol of the too-brief, too-unsuccessful Iranian resistance. The Iranian Embassy in London sent a letter to the college provost complaining that the scholarship was an insult to Iran, and stating once again that Great Britain was partially responsible in stirring up the post-election protests.
Now, I don’t know where the decision to protest a small scholarship was taken, but I have a hard time squaring Iran’s touch public posturing and the conciliatory words of President Ahmadinejad. Compromise, something at the heart of diplomacy, doesn’t seem to be a word the Iranians use, or appreciate, much. Just letting things drop isn’t something the Iranians like to do.
Perhaps there is a real diplomatic opportunity here, but I have my doubts. I find it much easier to believe that the Iranians would use soothing words to try to delay attempts by the civilized world to actually do anything about Iran.
JOHN STOCKWELL, FORMER C.I.A. OFFICIAL AND AUTHOR, and author: “It is the function of the CIA to keep the world unstable, and to propagandize, and teach the American people to hate, so we will let the establishment spend any amount of money on arms.”
WILLIAM COLBY, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: The Central Intelligence Agency own everyone of any significance in the major media.”
JAMES MADISON: “The growing wealth acquired by the corporations never fails to be a source of abuses.”
AIDEN WHILEE, GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF JOURNALIST, THE WORLD’S LARGEST ORGANIZATION OF JOURNALISTS, WHEN THE 350 BILLION($)TIME-WARNER AOL MERGER WAS ANNOUNCED. “We are now seeing the dominance of a handful of companies, control information and how that information reaches people. Unless action is taken to ensure journalistic independence we face a dangerous threat to media diversity. Otherwise, we will have corporate gate keepers to the flow of information who will define content to suit their market strategies”.
Face it, the media are the liars, that send people to go and die. How might that be addressed??????????
And of course, if you connect each historical icon’s statement to another’s, it says fascism, louder than anything else. But, look who say these things.
SOVIET CORRESPONDENT BASED FIVE YEARS IN THE UNITED STATES said: “I have the greatest admiration for your propaganda. Propaganda in the West is carried out by experts who have the best training in the world in the field of advertising, and have mastered the techniques with exceptional proficiency… Yours rare subtle and persuasive; ours are crude and obvious… I think that the fundamental difference between our worlds, with respect to propaganda, is quite simple. You tend to believe yours…and we tend to disbelieve ours.”
Hey, check this out, if you haven’t…
http://www.newscorpse.com/
…and yes, I know that the Soviet correspondent spoke of advertising, but I beleive he meant in general, not simply advertising. In any event, that is mostly inconsequential.
Blu, you have anything to say about the topic at hand? Or are you merely continuing with your marxist America-hating agenda?
Hey, blu, check this out.
Obviously we need Space Aliens to solve this problem!
PS What John said. What does any of this have to do with Iran?
I’m wondering what you are trying to say here, Blu. Do you think that the media made up what they reported President Ahmadinejad as having said? Did the media falsify the efforts of some in Iran to resist the previously signed agreement?
Just what lies are you accusing the media of telling here?
Fear mongering.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/215529
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2009/05/14/obama-administration-statements-on-iran-nukes-not-backed-by-intelligence/
http://www.warisaracket.com/
So, you all are ready to start another war, where many more thousands of innocent people die, when solid confirmation of weapons grade nukes have NOT been shown to exist in Iran.
Blu, you do know, don’t you, that the Quran says it’s alright to lie to unbelievers? You also know, don’t you, that many Arab leaders had training by 1930s and 1940s Germany? You also know, don’t you, that of all the middle-eastern countries that declared war on Israel, only Egypt has formally concluded that state of war?
And seriously, blu, why should we ever take the word of a holocaust denier on anything?
Think about it.