Weaponization vs Enrichment

Share/Save/Bookmark

alimostofi
by alimostofi
07-Dec-2007
 

For that very reason, however, relieved doves who think the spectre of a nuclear Iran or of an American attack has now disappeared had better read the report again. Its final sentence says (“high confidence”) that Iran has the scientific, technical and industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons if it chooses. As to what “eventually” means, the assessment has not changed: it was always late 2009 at the earliest but more probably the middle of the next decade.
.
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?...
.
We know that the so called "spies" of United States, had seen some notes of some whisperings from some Seyyed thugs. That led them to deduce that the weaponization program, which is not that hard, has been halted. The world press, of course, the ones inside United States to begin with, and then the ones outside United States, used this as ammunition to beat neocons like Dick Cheney. What a shame that none of these correspondents actually know much about the nuclear cycle. As you can see from the article above, the crucial part of the nuclear cycle is the enrichment process. That bit has not stopped, and those centrifuges in Natanz have cost Iran so much both financially and internationally. We have let the Seyyeds ruin our reputation as the Birth Land of Human Rights. The fact that the enriched Uranium has no use for any power station in Iran, means that the Seyyeds want to use it for their own global Armaggeddon in respect of their Mahdi. They will press the button. The MAD (Multually Assured Destruction) principle does not apply for the Seyyeds. They see themselves as over and above UN or any international body that exists, has existed, or will exist. So what is the solution? The solution is that the world press should spend more time praising the Iranian diaspora, that has managed to create a new understanding of Iran for the future. We have people of incredibly high intellectual calibre who are keeping the dignity and respect of Iranians. These professionals are the future of Iran. We all want peaceful regime change. The one power we do not have is a world press that understands and appreciates the simplest way to get rid of the Seyyeds without bloodshed. We need the world press to not ask about the nuclear programs, but to ask what the Seyyeds could do in light of a non violent general strike. Once the Seyyeds are faced with questions centred on General Strikes, then they will realise that their bandits, can do nothing against a population of 65 million, if it decided to shut down Iran for even a couple of days. Our problem is not the Seyyeds, but the world press's blackout on forces of peaceful regime change in Iran.

Share/Save/Bookmark

more from alimostofi
 
default

Martike khejalat nemikeshi?

by Anonymous8 (not verified) on

ENRICHMENT is NOT WEAPONIZATION.


default

From Within

by mama (not verified) on

The bottom line is that the Iranian living outside Iran (myself included) worth zero as far as the future of Iran is concerned and they should be. The future of Iran must be decided by the people whom live in Iran ONLY.


alimostofi

Hamid Reza, I have been one

by alimostofi on

Hamid Reza, I have been one of the most vocal of all Iranian dissidents advocating non violent resitance. I advocated it via the blog media. But the main newswires do not say what I say. Show me one article by anyone who says that dialogue and discussion with the Seyyeds in an open debate will surely invalidate their authority. This discussion can be done from anywhere in the world. Any newspaper, any magazine, and TV show, any public speech by a world leader could spark a huge wave of discussions on non violent regime change in Iran. But not one of them do. Only I say it here, in this lonely neck of the woods. It is not rocket science. I sure as hell did not invent it. And you and I know that if all the media talked about the strengths of a non violent General Strike, then the very fear of it would be enough to force massive debates and a regime change. So talk to more people about it, wherever they are. It does not matter whether you are in Iran or not.
.

Ali Mostofi

http://www.alimostofi.com

 


default

Seyyed Ali's New Revolution!

by Seyyedeh (not verified) on

Seyyed Ali joon, why don't you go to Iran and start a brand new revolution with such a courage and talent (falgiri) that you have. Haji and I are behind you! You are my hero and love of my life. Moosh bokhoret!


default

re: From the comments

by Hamid Reza (not verified) on

peaceful? oh yea... well , as long as you are not participating in it, it's peaceful for you.


alimostofi

From the comments, it

by alimostofi on

From the comments, it seems some people do not understand. What I am proposing, is an open debate, or even a question answer session, by the media with one of the Seyyeds in charge. Then ask them what could they do if there was a General Strike. I believe that one can have a peaceful regime change without street riots and marches, where the Seyyed thugs get their guns out on secular youth of Iran. The public forum can in effect be the "battle ground" of minds. And in that interaction, the argument is definitely against the Seyyeds.

Ali Mostofi

http://www.alimostofi.com

 


default

hypocrite

by Javat sibil (not verified) on

> Our problem is not the Seyyeds, but the world
> press's blackout on forces of peaceful regime change
> in Iran.


our problem is actually people like you who are
living abroad and then say "lengesh kon" to people
living inside.
Ageh mardi pasho boro iroon khodet sherkat kon. hypocrite.


default

you again!

by Anonymoushi (not verified) on

you wrote:

>What a shame that none of these correspondents
>actually know much about the nuclear cycle. As you
>can see from the article above, the crucial part of
>the nuclear cycle is the enrichment process

and you know that.... wow... you are such a smart fall-gir.
lol