Tehran Wants Nuke Facility in Iran

[American Patriot]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189347,00.html

Tehran Wants Nuke Facility in Iran
Tuesday, March 28, 2006

MOSCOW — Iran has proposed setting up a nuclear fuel production facility within its borders with international help, the Iranian Embassy said Tuesday, days before the five permanent U.N. Security Council members and Germany meet to discuss Tehran's suspect program.

The new proposal is an alternative to Russia's offer to host Iran's nuclear fuel production as a way to ease concerns that enrichment conducted in Iran could be used to develop weapons. Iran maintains its atomic program is for generating electricity.

Russia said its enrichment offer was contingent on Iran resuming a moratorium on domestic enrichment, but the Iranians rejected that link.

"In terms of satisfying its needs, Tehran cannot remain dependent on international suppliers," the Iranian government said in the statement.

"Iran would welcome the creation of an international nuclear fuel center on its territory with the participation of other countries and in the framework of an international consortium."

Iran also reiterated that Security Council intervention in the dispute would "escalate tensions, entailing negative consequences that would be of benefit to no party."

The statement came as top diplomats from the United States, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia scheduled a Thursday meeting in Berlin.

Talks at the United Nations have stalled, with Russia and China wary of the tough language America, Britain and France are pushing to include in a draft statement on Tehran's nuclear activities. That language includes a demand that Iran stop uranium enrichment, a key process that can produce either fuel for a nuclear reactor or the material for a nuclear warhead.

The Security Council has the power to impose economic and political sanctions.

Russia and China are demanding that any statement reinforce the primacy of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, in confronting Iran.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Tuesday his nation's offer to host Iranian enrichment remains on the table, but "Iran should say unambiguously whether it is planning to accept or reject the offer in order to allay the international community's concerns," the Interfax news agency reported.

Britain, France and Germany broke off more than two years of talks with Iran in January, saying there was no point in continuing to negotiate after Tehran said it would restart enrichment.

[American Patriot]

On a side note, I just clipped an article that was dated 12 March 2006 out of the Denver Post. The title is:

Iran Raises Threat of using Oil as weapon if Sanctions Ok'd.

Basically, it was stated in this article by the Iranian Foreign Minister Mostafa Pourmohammadi that, "If they (the US/UN) politicize our nuclear case, we will use any means. We are rich in energy resources. We have control over the biggest and most sensitive energy route in the world."

Folks, what this man is talking about is "economic war" on a scale that hasn't been seen in a long, long time. He is speaking of the Straits of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf.

Iran is the number two oil exporter in OPEC (Organization of Petrolem Exporting Countries for that do not know what OPEC is).

Iran is still denying that it is trying to produce nuclear weapons, and insists that any reactors will be used for peaceful energy uses like electricity. If that is so, then why use a threat of oil as a weapon? Why not USE the oil as a source of energy? Why suggest that they control the Straits of Hormuz?

Why are we preparing to go after them? Or are we?

I have seen the signs, have you?

[American Patriot]

Shah's Son: Iran 'Threat Is Real'
NewsMax ^ | Tuesday, March 28, 2006 1:40 p.m. EST | With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the Shah of Iran, said he is "totally against” a U.S. military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities – and defended his nation’s right to have nuclear technology.

Appearing with John McLaughlin on his show "One on One,” the 45-year-old heir to the Peacock Throne was asked: "Under what circumstances would you permit direct military action against Iran's nuclear infrastructure?”

He told McLaughlin: "I'm totally against it for many reasons. As a nationalist, as a patriot, I could not even think of a scenario which would involve any kind of military strikes on my country. And if that's my sentiment, I guarantee that's the sentiment of many Iranians.”

Pahlavi also voiced opposition to a military strike at a National Press Club press conference earlier this month, saying an attack would generate nationalist fervor in the country and strengthen the clerical regime. Such a strike would be a "gift” to the Tehran regime, he said.

McLaughlin asked Pahlavi: "If you were monarch today, would you defend your country's right to procure the peaceful uses of nuclear power, for example, in electricity?

Pahlavi answered: "Absolutely ... It's not even a question of having the right. Iran had that right already before the revolution. Three countries - namely, the U.S. Britain and Germany - were competing with each other as to who would sell nuclear technology to Iran. And by now, had it not been for [the Islamic] revolution, Iran would have had over 30 nuclear power plants.”

McLaughlin asked if Pahlavi thought Tehran might use a nuclear weapon if it acquired one. Pahlavi said: "I’m not going to speculate as to whether or not the Islamic regime is going to use it or not use it.” But he added: "I think that the threat is real.”

And when asked if Iran would attempt a nuclear strike against Israel if it had the weapon, he responded: "The potential for this regime to use anything in its power to guarantee its mission of exporting the revolution may not stop at that. It may even include that.”

Pahlavi left Iran in 1978, the year before his father was deposed, and has lived in the U.S. continuously since 1984. The Shad died in 1980.

Pahlavi told McLaughlin that he would like to see Iran as a "secular democracy in which there is separation of church from state, which will be founded on the principles of human rights. And this is the only time that Iran can get back on track of progress, freedom and modernity.”