As Required, Iran Informs IAEA About New Enrichment Site
Western Furore Over 'Secret' Facility Despite No Apparent Illegality
Western leaders reacted with a combination of indignation and outrage today when the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) revealed that Iran had informed them it was in the process of constructing a second uranium enrichment facility.
Several officials used the revelation as a call to action against the Iranian government, just days before six-party talks with the nation about its civilian nuclear program. But despite a flurry of claims that the West had uncovered the “secret” facility it seems unclear that Iran actually did anything wrong.
The IAEA only actually requires that it be informed six months before an enrichment facility comes online, and the new site is at least that far from completion. Nuclear material has not been added, and the IAEA says that the data they’ve been given suggests that as with the existing Nanatz facility, the new site is only designed to enrich uranium to 5%, useful for energy production at the nation’s Bushehr power plant but not for military purposes.
Western leaders are now demanding that UN inspectors be given access to the new site. Such a demand would be seemingly reasonable, if Iran hadn’t already promised to do so days ago to the IAEA and publicly said hours before the “demands” that they have every intention of doing so.
If anything the revelation coming from Iran is inopportune for the US in pressing sanctions on the nation, as they had reportedly known about the construction for “a few years” and were planning to use the revelation to spur their call for “crippling” sactions when they discovered that Iran had already told the IAEA, as required.





oldish_crank
September 26th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Iran has done just about everything the IAEA and the NPT require. Bad Iran! So international legal and treaty participation is meaningless. Then there's nuclear Israel sitting on the global table and mum's the word. Obama spews up bravado and veiled threat. More of that "change" we've come to know and loath.
As Required, Iran Informs IAEA About New Enrichment Site « In These New Times
September 26th, 2009 at 2:50 am
[...] Antiwar.com [...]
Hacklheber
September 26th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Iran, you dumbasses! The tough guy is NOT you! Montrez patte blanche!
Oh well, all the oily outrage distillate (Gordon Brown and the Gnome of Paris come to mind) seem to boil down to whether Iran correctly and lawfully informed the IAEA about their new facility at least six months before go-live or whether they broke some sort of (gentleman's?) agreement to inform the IAEA at construction time (as the Grauniard puts it at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/25/iran-... "western officials point out that at the time this enrichment plant appears to have been started, in 2006, Iran had an agreed obligation to notify the IAEA as soon as construction began on any new nuclear facility")
Now, if western intelligence knew about this or had suspicions about this all along and kept it as a trump card (why do you need a trump card in the first place?), then they can conclusively tell us whether the feared "parallel nuclear industry" actually exists or not by just coming out with all their "suspicions" … actually we already know through that National Intel Estimate, right? It must have factored in this facility. So nothing new at all.
I someone has the time, a large A1-sized chart with the path to deployable U-based nukes and the current state of IAEA-verifications and of that path would be helpful. I always need to explain to colleagues why Iran is NOT likely to go full ICBM next weekend. Gives me high blood pressure. Come to think of it, our challenged politicians might have some use of such a chart, too.
What happend to North Korea's U-based nukes anyway? Have they fallen off the front pages?
Hacklheber
September 26th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Iran, you dumbasses! The tough guy is NOT you! Montrez patte blanche!
Oh well, all the oily outrage distillate (Gordon Brown and the Gnome of Paris come to mind) seem to boil down to whether Iran correctly and lawfully informed the IAEA about their new facility at least six months before go-live or whether they broke some sort of (gentleman's?) agreement to inform the IAEA at construction time (as the Grauniard puts it at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/25/iran-... "western officials point out that at the time this enrichment plant appears to have been started, in 2006, Iran had an agreed obligation to notify the IAEA as soon as construction began on any new nuclear facility")
Now, if western intelligence knew about this or had suspicions about this all along and kept it as a trump card (why do you need a trump card in the first place?), then they can conclusively tell us whether the feared "parallel nuclear industry" actually exists or not by just coming out with all their "suspicions" … actually we already know through that National Intel Estimate, right? It must have factored in this facility. So nothing new at all.
I someone has the time, a large A1-sized chart with the path to deployable U-based nukes and the current state of IAEA-verifications and of that path would be helpful. I always need to explain to colleagues why Iran is NOT likely to go full ICBM next weekend. Gives me high blood pressure. Come to think of it, our challenged politicians might have some use of such a chart, too.
What happend to North Korea's U-based nukes anyway? Have they fallen off the front pages?
Hacklheber
September 26th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Iran, you dumbasses! The tough guy is NOT you! Montrez patte blanche!
Oh well, all the oily outrage distillate (Gordon Brown and the Gnome of Paris come to mind) seem to boil down to whether Iran correctly and lawfully informed the IAEA about their new facility at least six months before go-live or whether they broke some sort of (gentleman's?) agreement to inform the IAEA at construction time (as the Grauniard puts it at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/25/iran-... "western officials point out that at the time this enrichment plant appears to have been started, in 2006, Iran had an agreed obligation to notify the IAEA as soon as construction began on any new nuclear facility")
Now, if western intelligence knew about this or had suspicions about this all along and kept it as a trump card (why do you need a trump card in the first place?), then they can conclusively tell us whether the feared "parallel nuclear industry" actually exists or not by just coming out with all their "suspicions" … actually we already know through that National Intel Estimate, right? It must have factored in this facility. So nothing new at all.
I someone has the time, a large A1-sized chart with the path to deployable U-based nukes and the current state of IAEA-verifications and of that path would be helpful. I always need to explain to colleagues why Iran is NOT likely to go full ICBM next weekend. Gives me high blood pressure. Come to think of it, our challenged politicians might have some use of such a chart, too.
What happend to North Korea's U-based nukes anyway? Have they fallen off the front pages?
Hacklheber
September 26th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Iran, you dumbasses! The tough guy is NOT you! Montrez patte blanche!
Oh well, all the oily outrage distillate (Gordon Brown and the Gnome of Paris come to mind) seem to boil down to whether Iran correctly and lawfully informed the IAEA about their new facility at least six months before go-live or whether they broke some sort of (gentleman's?) agreement to inform the IAEA at construction time (as the Grauniard puts it at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/25/iran-... "western officials point out that at the time this enrichment plant appears to have been started, in 2006, Iran had an agreed obligation to notify the IAEA as soon as construction began on any new nuclear facility")
Now, if western intelligence knew about this or had suspicions about this all along and kept it as a trump card (why do you need a trump card in the first place?), then they can conclusively tell us whether the feared "parallel nuclear industry" actually exists or not by just coming out with all their "suspicions" … actually we already know through that National Intel Estimate, right? It must have factored in this facility. So nothing new at all.
I someone has the time, a large A1-sized chart with the path to deployable U-based nukes and the current state of IAEA-verifications and of that path would be helpful. I always need to explain to colleagues why Iran is NOT likely to go full ICBM next weekend. Gives me high blood pressure. Come to think of it, our challenged politicians might have some use of such a chart, too.
What happend to North Korea's U-based nukes anyway? Have they fallen off the front pages?
The Truth Or The Fight » Blog Archive » Building a Pretext for Mass Murder: Iran’s “Secret” Enrichment Facility
September 26th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
[...] The IAEA only requires that it be informed six months before an enrichment facility comes online. Iran’s new plant is at least six months away from enrichment capability. “Nuclear material has not been added, and the IAEA says that the data they’ve been given suggests that as with the existing Nanatz facility, the new site is only designed to enrich uranium to 5%, useful for energy production at the nation’s Bushehr power plant but not for military purposes,” writes Jason Ditz. [...]
Building a Pretext for Mass Murder: Iran’s “Secret” Enrichment Facility | Gulag Blog
September 26th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
[...] The IAEA only requires that it be informed six months before an enrichment facility comes online. Iran’s new plant is at least six months away from enrichment capability. “Nuclear material has not been added, and the IAEA says that the data they’ve been given suggests that as with the existing Nanatz facility, the new site is only designed to enrich uranium to 5%, useful for energy production at the nation’s Bushehr power plant but not for military purposes,” writes Jason Ditz. [...]
Iran Reported ‘New Enriching Facility’ to IAEA before Propaganda began | Satelec 2003
September 30th, 2009 at 1:44 am
[...] Wednesday, September 30th, 2009, by jedwan America… the U$-Gov is lying about ‘new site’, Iran had already reported and is entitled under "normal" IAEA NNP-rules, U$ cannot deny Iran making low-level fuel for Power Plants permited by IAEA: http://news.antiwar.com/2009/09/25/as-required-iran-informs-iaea-about-new-enrichment-site/ [...]
Iran and Israel: The Nuclear Question « The Invisible Opportunity: Hidden Truths Revealed
September 30th, 2009 at 4:20 am
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
Iran vs Israel: What The Media Wants You To Forget ! « Socio-Economics History Blog
October 1st, 2009 at 4:24 am
[...] to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused. 4. Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has signed. 5. Iran allows IAEA inspections of all its facilities. 6. Contrary to [...]
Iran vs Israel: What The Media Wants You To Forget « The Invisible Opportunity: Hidden Truths Revealed
October 1st, 2009 at 6:41 am
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
Beware of propaganda! « xanabras
October 1st, 2009 at 1:09 pm
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
Iran vs Israel: What The Media Wants You To Forget « Pak Alert Press
October 2nd, 2009 at 1:13 am
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
The Survivalist Forum » Blog Archive » Iran vs Israel: What The Media Wants You To Forget
October 2nd, 2009 at 4:43 am
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
Iran vs Israel: What The Media Wants You To Forget | Cogent Nirvana
October 2nd, 2009 at 9:01 am
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
Iran vs Israel: What the media wants you to forget « Under The Radar Media
October 2nd, 2009 at 4:39 pm
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
Iran vs Israel: What The Media Wants You To Forget | The Total Collapse
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:22 pm
[...] 4. Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod facility…. [...]
Our Intelligence, and Theirs : 33448
October 4th, 2009 at 2:11 am
[...] call 911 – because those shifty-eyed spooks who gave us the NIE [.pdf] knew, knew about this “ secret facility” and still they insisted the Iranians had given up their nuclear weapons program in 2003. Has [...]
hanzelhoff.com » Blog Archive » Israel names Russians helping Iran build nuclear bomb
October 4th, 2009 at 3:12 am
[...] to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused. 4. Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has signed. 5. Iran allows IAEA inspections of all its facilities. 6. Contrary to [...]
Zionist-controlled US Media Jacking-up America « INCOG MAN: Sick of all the BS…
October 4th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
[...] Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod faci… which Iran has [...]
US-Gov Charges Against Iran Proven Deliberately False | Satelec 2003
October 8th, 2009 at 10:55 am
[...] Thursday, October 8th, 2009, by jedwan U$-Corp-Gov silent after Pres-Obama picks up Geo Bush/US-Congress Funded-Program to ‘Overthrow Iran Gov", Obama charge (implying) Nuclear Bomb Site turns out reported to IAEA who are scheduled to inspect unfinished construction site. http://news.antiwar.com/2009/09/25/as-required-iran-informs-iaea-about-new-enrichment-site/ [...]
The sham of Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize win « Eschaton//Aesthetic
October 9th, 2009 at 8:26 am
[...] Falsely drummed up Iranian nuclear issue. Hypocritically makes no response to Israeli nukes. [...]