Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 29, 2013

"Nuclear Iran" Scare Buried - To Be Revived When Needed

The "nuclear Iran" scare is being laid to rest for now.

Israel: Iran slowing nuclear program, won’t have bomb before 2015

Intelligence briefings given to McClatchy over the last two months have confirmed that various officials across Israel’s military and political echelons now think it’s unrealistic that Iran could develop a nuclear weapons arsenal before 2015. Others pushed the date back even further, to the winter of 2016.
"We can’t attribute the delays in Iran’s nuclear program to accidents and sabotage alone," he said. "There has not been the run towards a nuclear bomb that some people feared. There is a deliberate slowing on their end."
There is only a "slowing" of Iran's nuclear program if one had assumed that Iran was going for a bomb. It wasn't and isn't.

Moving the date Iran could have a bomb has been done since about 1982. It will continue to be done for years to come.

And while the "nuclear Iran" scare is for now buried it will certainly be revived when there is again need to divert attention from Israel's misdeeds.

Posted by b on January 29, 2013 at 18:47 UTC | Permalink


The story of fordow explosion in the Israeli media is used by the Israeli government to signal there will be no attack on Iran.

Posted by: nikon | Jan 29 2013 19:15 utc | 1

2015 is ripe just for the next US presidential campaign/election. knowing any first term president has to kneel to their demands..

Posted by: Rd. | Jan 29 2013 19:41 utc | 2

The Iran thing is something I dont understand.
Everybody familiar with the nuclear case knows that an agreement can be reached,but it does not. Why?
Because the theocracy is not able to control the ghosts they have unleashed (Sepah/quds)?And also not in control of the revolutionary mood they try to keep the country in since more than 30 years.(I mean loosing face by somekind of backstapping)
On the other side the US which fears any kind of concession because they pushed to long to hard.(lossing the rest of authority they have in the region). or is it impossible for washington to outmaneuver israel. (maybe Israel as the state it is today was such big geostrategic misscalculation)
this questions remains when we ignore China and Russia and conclude it could be some sort of secret agreements reached.

(sorry for my english)

Posted by: some1 | Jan 29 2013 19:54 utc | 3

This would be my question when i would belive the major consens narrative of the western media.

but my real question is what do you belive do the partys involved have in mind regarding the future of iran.

-The US would do good to reach an agreement with the mullahs and nobody believes that this is realistic conciderring Turky and KSA!?

-China would use Iran for there own puposess (buying oil and using the big iranian market for investments and export)

-Russia would like to do the same like china does but they also need iran for geostrategic purposes like oil-price, influence leverege in ME-region and parts of asia and the caspian see.

It seems to me that the Iranian dream of being a global player or a developed country like japan and S.Korea is hard challenged.

Posted by: some1 | Jan 29 2013 20:10 utc | 4

But they are sending jihad monkeys into space! They plan to stop the Moon from orbiting the Earth so that it is permanently stuck at crescent phase and then paint a large glowing star between the horns of the crescent.


Posted by: ralphieboy | Jan 29 2013 20:28 utc | 5

Reuters would have you believe Iran is stalling the process by not accepting Turkey as the host for further negotiations

Jan 28 (Reuters) - World powers have asked Iran to hold a new round of talks over its nuclear work in February, while expressing disappointment over Tehran's reluctance to schedule negotiations.

A spokesman for the EU's foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said on Monday Iran had not agreed to her proposal, issued on behalf the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany, to meet at the end of January.

"Iran did not accept our offer to go to Istanbul on Jan. 28 and 29 and so we have offered new dates in February," Michael Mann told a news briefing in Brussels.

"We have continued to offer dates since December. We are disappointed the Iranians have not yet agreed," he said.

While failing to mention that Iran merely offered to switch Istanbul for Cairo.

TEHRAN – World powers have requested that their negotiations with Iran over the country’s nuclear program be postponed from January to February.

The request was made during a telephone conversation on Friday between Ali Baqeri, the deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, and Helga Schmid, the deputy of European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton who represents the 5+1 group (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany) in nuclear negotiations with Iran.

Schmid said that the group is not ready to hold talks with Iran this month.

However, Baqeri, the deputy of Saeed Jalili who is Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, said that Tehran is ready to hold talks in January and asked the 5+1 group to remain committed to the date agreed upon for talks.

So in actuality it's the other way around, with Western powers stalling the process. We're they to take these negotiations seriously, like their Russian counterpart, they would accept any given location. I'm guessing Egypt hosting the next round of talks isn't exactly be a 'hot idea' with certain, influential and influenced alike, western politicians at the moment.

Perhaps Stockholm would be a more favorable venue?

Either way, the ball is totally on the western side of the courtyard.

Posted by: never mind | Jan 29 2013 20:49 utc | 6

Some more fun developments today:

Israel angered over Argentina-Iran bombing probe

TEHRAN – Israel summoned the Argentine ambassador on Tuesday in protest over an agreement between Iran and Argentina to jointly investigate the bombing 19 years ago of a Jewish center that killed 85 people in Buenos Aires and that was blamed on Tehran, AP reported.

The attack was the deadliest on Argentine soil, coming just two years after a bomb flattened the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, killing 29 people.

According to AP, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon claimed the Argentina-Iran agreement, which was struck on Sunday, “is like inviting a murderer to investigate the killings he committed.”

Hypocrisy much, Danny?

Israel investigating Gaza attack that killed 11 Palestinians

Back to the first article:

On Sunday, Argentine President Cristina Fernandez announced via Twitter that her country and Iran agreed to establish an independent international “truth commission” to investigate the bombing.

The commissioners will examine the evidence and recommend how to proceed, “based on the laws and regulations of both countries,” Fernandez said.

Independent, Danny. So please shut the f*** up.

Posted by: never mind | Jan 29 2013 21:09 utc | 7

As a recreational diver I have observed schools of fish swimming in a beautifully coordinated way. they turn and change speed as a group, there is no leader with the others following. they vary the formation with ease and an evasive maneuver of one is immediately acted upon by all the others and they never run into each other.

I thought of this upon reading that attention to Iran may decrease for the time being. Like watching fish, I am constantly amazed at how easy it seems for corporate media to present a united front when manufacturing consent. I find it remarkable that so many "serious" news sources from state run television to mega corporations like News Corp and seemingly different ones like Al Jazeera might have been carry the same stories with the same spin.

Just how do they pull that off? if the people making these decisions of what constitutes news are not extremely gullible, they must be ignorant. if they are not ignorant then what is left? Malicious? rough choice, evil or incompetent.

of course, I could be completely delirious and imagine things that aren't. maybe there is a guide somewhere, something like "The Prince" that explains what words you must use to cause the common folks to act in a certain way, how to get one thing by pretending it is something else.

just wondering

Posted by: dan of steele | Jan 29 2013 21:36 utc | 8

This 1809 complaint by UK Foreign Minister George Canning about Britain’s Spanish allies in the Peninsular Campaign of the Napoleonic War could be applied to the Israeli sense of entitlement to US support:

the Spanish think they are sure of us; and that they have a right to us; and that instead of every assistance that we afford them being another matter of fresh acknowledgement, that every point upon which we hesitate is an injury and a breach of engagement. This tone of theirs is offensive, and becomes irksome to me.

Posted by: Watson | Jan 29 2013 22:52 utc | 9

never mind - 7

The "color revolution" process has already started in Argentina.

Posted by: вот так | Jan 29 2013 23:40 utc | 10

great overview of Parchin etc. here:

Posted by: clint | Jan 30 2013 0:32 utc | 11

@8 "Just how do they pull that off? if the people making these decisions of what constitutes news are not extremely gullible, they must be ignorant. if they are not ignorant then what is left? Malicious? rough choice, evil or incompetent."

All major news outlets are run by only a handful corporations and magnates, who represents the view of corporate World and few powerful countries. The top decides how to spin, and journalists have to follow the guidelines or they are fired. Also designated source like pizza guy from SOHR makes it easier. Templates are provided, mass-media just uses their own words to repeat it.

Goebbels would be proud of his pupils, they by far exceeded the teacher.

Posted by: Harry | Jan 30 2013 1:28 utc | 12

We can't back off our claims against Iran because to do so now - even though we know the truth of the matter - would be a national embarrassment. A bully doesn't apologize and walk away when he's proven to be wrong - he beats you up anyway.

I have to wonder, though, if the drumbeat of war would be so loud if Iran were a Euro-Christian nation that just happened to have interests counter to those of Israel?

Posted by: Cynthia | Jan 30 2013 2:19 utc | 13


True, the bully never backs off, but sometimes it loses to a pugnacious, even though smaller, adversary.
And, Anglo-Americans bullied catholic nations when they find it necessary to do so. South America is a clear example.

Posted by: ATH | Jan 30 2013 2:53 utc | 14

@ never mind [#6},

If I keep inviting you for a few rounds of poker, but every time you appear I tell you your 'dress code' is wrong, how many times will you set foot on my doorstep? No matter what the Iranians do, it'll never be enough. 'We' need that nuclear scare monkey on our collective backs, otherwise we might start thinking for ourselves and arrive at different conclusion, outcomes and theses.

Posted by: Daniel Rich | Jan 30 2013 2:54 utc | 15

Egypt's version of the Iranian revolutionary guard?

Posted by: nikon | Jan 30 2013 4:07 utc | 16

'Israel: Iran slowing nuclear program, won’t have bomb before 2015'

unlike the 'chosen people', iran wont have a bomb ever, unless a US backed regime gets in

Posted by: brian | Jan 30 2013 5:55 utc | 17

Posted by: never mind | Jan 29, 2013 3:49:49 PM | 6

reuters is quiet over Turkey being run by a jihadi-backing megalomaniac

Posted by: brian | Jan 30 2013 5:58 utc | 18

вот так @10
I don't think so in Argentina, there was more in Chavez win in Venezuela then just straight politics. For the first time the Israel-American failed to make any inroads with with their "colour revolution", to make it a humilating failure they failed to get their Jew elected and how much of a setback do you think that was. They may have won in Hondorous but only by using the military.

Posted by: hans | Jan 30 2013 6:54 utc | 19

@3: From Mohamed ElBaradei's "The Age of Deception", pp. 312 f.:

"The Iranian fuel proposal did not die when I left office, continuing instead to take its twists and turns. On February 9, 2010, the Iranians declared they would begin enriching LEU up to 20 percent to provide the fuel for their research reactor. Two days later, Ahmadinejad rather inexplicably declared that Iran had become “a nuclear state.” By midmonth, IAEA inspectors verified that Iran was enriching uranium to 19.8 percent in Natanz.

But a more positive development was evolving behind the scenes. After several months’ delay, Tehran was warming to the suggestion of a fuel swap that would feature interim storage of Iran’s LEU in Turkey. In April, Obama wrote directly to Brazilian president Lula da Silva -- in a letter that was later leaked to the press -- urging that any fuel swap include the measure of storing the fuel “in escrow” in Turkey. I remained in occasional contact with the foreign ministers of Brazil and Turkey, fully supporting this new arrangement.

On May 17, 2010, in a joint declaration, Iran, Brazil, and Turkey announced they had reached an agreement on a fuel swap. Iran would send twelve hundred kilograms of LEU to Turkey, in a single shipment, to be held in escrow while Iran’s research reactor fuel was being fabricated. It was a leap forward—particularly because it signaled the willingness of new players, Turkey and Brazil, to take an active role in resolving the diplomatic impasse.

But the very next day, in a masterstroke of diplomatic futility, the P-5 + 1 announced that they had reached agreement on a fourth Security Council resolution to escalate sanctions on Iran for not bringing its enrichment program to a halt. Hillary Clinton called the fuel swap deal with Turkey and Brazil a “transparent ploy” on Iran’s part to avoid new sanctions.

I was dumbstruck and, to say the least, grievously disappointed. Once again, as I noted in an interview with Jornal do Brasil, the West had refused to take yes for an answer. Brazil and Turkey were outraged. Ahmadinejad urged the United States to accept the fuel swap as a move toward openness and dialogue. At the Security Council, Brazil voted against the sanctions—to no avail. The Western powers once more had touched a solution with their fingertips, only to brush it away."

Posted by: k_w | Jan 30 2013 7:28 utc | 20

Brian @18: Yes, but he's moving very gingerly these days, I think our democratically elected megalomaniac may even be democratically removed. The amount of his prestige invested in removing Assad will hopefully be his downfall.

Posted by: kodlu | Jan 30 2013 12:07 utc | 21

Israels fighter jets hit targets Syria/Leb boarder; a recent news report - If they were missiles as the target? No secondary explosions were reported or footage seen, and the Israelis would be eager to show that and make that viral - Where's the footage? All the while Mali is getting huge funding....

Posted by: Kev | Jan 30 2013 15:23 utc | 22

hans - 19

My comment hinting that Israel is going to try and "color revolution" Argentina because they are working with Iran to reinvestigate that past terrorist attack was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. The Argentine "color revolution" was started by Israel-America last year, when the Argentine government began some new policies that were limiting NWO control of the country. See:

Color Revolutions: Argentina Next?
Suspicion grows as Western criticism of Argentina's nationalization and rebuffing of "rules of global finance" sharpens in tandem with street protests.

The Argentine-Iran cooperation may in fact be a response by the Argentine government to this "color revolution".

I don't have an opinion on whether such a "color revolution" can succeed in Argentina, other than I hope it fails. I really don't know much about the political situation there.

Posted by: вот так | Jan 30 2013 20:06 utc | 23

FBI arrests Malcolm X’s grandson before he departs for Iran

"In US, FBI has arrested Malcolm Shabazz, Malcolm X’s grandson, a Muslim and civil activist, and has moved him into an unknown location.

Malcolm Shabbaz was preparing to travel to Tehran to attend ‘Zionist Holywoodism’ conference.

Tasnim News reported that FBI had arrested and moved him to an unknown place. FBI has not provided the reason for his arrest.

The arrest was coincided with Lifetime TV airing of ‘Betty & Coretta,’ a dramatization of lives of two women after deaths of their husbands. Betty was Malcolm X’s wife, and Coretta was Martin Luther King’s spouse."

Posted by: вот так | Feb 4 2013 12:26 utc | 24

Rand Paul on Iran Sanctions

Paul is towing the fascist/zionist line on Iran. My guess is he would be as pliable as Obama is to those guys and would be doing the same war crimes.

Posted by: вот так | Feb 8 2013 8:13 utc | 25

The comments to this entry are closed.