Article & Journal Resources: Dec 4, 2007

Article & Journal Resources

Reid: Bush war claims are 'all hype'

by Matthew Hay Brown

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, thrown on the defensive by President Bush’s increasingly dire warnings about the consequences of not funding troops in Iraq, said Monday that the commander-in-chief “is not leveling with the American people.”

“Let me just say this: People know how I feel about his credibility, OK? I've been more explicit on previous occasions,” Reid told reporters at the Capitol. “Let me just say that the president is not leveling with the American people.”

Earlier Monday, Bush returned to a theme he has pounded now for several days: That Congress must send him a war funding bill without the strings that Democrats have sought to attach, or the troops overseas will suffer.

"Unless Congress acts, the Defense Department will soon be required to begin giving layoff notices to about 100,000 civilian employees,” Bush said Monday from the Rose Garden, citing Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other senior Pentagon officials.

“Unless Congress acts, the military task force developing ways to better detect, protect our troops from roadside bombs will run out of money by early next year.

“Unless Congress acts, the Army will run out of operations and maintenance money in February. Unless Congress acts, the Marine Corps will run out of similar funds in March.”

Reid reckons that gives Congress plenty of time.

“His secretary of defense told us, without any degree of wavering, he said, ‘The Army has enough money until the first of March; the Marines have enough money until the middle of March.’ That's what he told us.

“Now, since Secretary Gates told us that, the president's spin machine is going. … But the fact is that we have given the president $460 billion. His own secretary of defense said everything's OK under the timeline that I've told you about. This is all hype from the president.”

Reid said the Senate should address war funding before leaving for Christmas. One alternative, he said, was resurrecting the $50 billion bill passed last month by the House but blocked on a procedural vote by Senate Republicans. That bill would give Bush a quarter of the funding he requested, while requiring that he begin a troop pullout with a goal of a complete withdrawal of combat forces by the end of 2008.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called on the Democrats to produce a bill that Bush will sign.

“We know already from the multiple votes that we've had this year what won't get a presidential signature,” he said. “Any kind of surrender date or any kind of congressional micromanagement of the war, even if it were adequate on the funding side, is not going to get a signature. And we do need to get a signature here.”

With reports of a drop in violence in Iraq, McConnell said, now is the wrong time for Congress to claim a role in military strategy.

“I don't think the president is going to sign a bill that, in effect, substitutes Congress judgment for General Petraeus judgment, as to how to manage the war,” he said. “I think the general has demonstrated in the last six months he knows what he's doing. He's getting results and why would we want to do that at this point?”

Reid allowed that the surge in U.S. forces “could be a part of” the reduction in violence. But he said it still hasn’t accomplished its goals.

“2007 is the deadliest year of the war,” he said. “Violence is as it was two years ago, in the fall of 2007. Political reconciliation remains out of reach. Iraq has failed to meet the benchmarks.

Reid said congressional Democrats would make sure the troops got everything they needed.

“We have given the troops more than the president asked for,” he said. “We've given them armor. We've taken care of veterans, following the Walter Reed scandal … We have given them up-armored vehicles that the president didn't ask for.”

All-clear is the best present for Graham

Dec 6 2007 by Louise Dicks, Gwent Gazette

BEAUFORT councillor Graham Hughes has received the early Christmas gift he was hoping for – the all-clear from a brain tumour.

Coun Hughes collapsed while at a funeral earlier this year and was diagnosed with a tumour the size of a cherry.

Now, after several intensive chemotherapy sessions, his consultant says he has made a full recovery.

After not being able to spend as much time with his grandchildren because of the intensive treatment, he’s looking forward to celebrating Christmas with his family and, hopefully, taking a holiday with his wife in the new year.

He has also made a return to full council duties, chairing meetings and caring for the needs of his constituents.

“It’s excellent news, such a big weight off my mind,” said the 68-year-old.

“I’m so pleased and so is my wife, Margaret.

“I have to see my consultant this Wednesday but when I rang the clinic following my last brain scan my consultant said to give me the message that everything looked fine and gave me the all-clear.

“Margaret and I were forced to cancel a cruise because of the illness so hopefully we can get away somewhere in the new year now.”

Coun Hughes, who lives in Chandler’s Road, Ebbw Vale, wanted to thank his Beaufort ward colleague David White for all his support, and the Rev Teify Ebenezer, who has been paying him regular visits and praying for him.

“The support of people has been amazing, you don’t realise how much the support of people around you can keep you going,” he said.

Daniel Craig vows to bare all in next Bond film

Female James Bond [Images] fans are in for a treat as actor Daniel Craig [Images] has sworn to go nude in his next Bond movie.

The Casino Royale star will be reprising his role in the next Bond movie, currently called Bond 22, and has vowed to "go totally nude" in it, saying that it is only fair on the girls.

"I'd go totally nude. I've got nothing to hide, and after all, we ask the girls to reveal almost all, so why not the men?" The Sun quoted him as saying.

The ladies have already been given a preview of what is to come, in Casino Royale, where the blonde 29-year-old emerged from the sea in tight blue swimming trunks.

However he found that the infamous scene has made him nervous, especially with the attention it got.

"Did I know the trunk thing would be such a big deal?" he said

"Yeah. I saw it on a huge billboard in Hollywood and people were screaming. It did make me feel rather nervous," he concluded.

WallSt.net (www.wallst.net) Updates the Investment Community Through All-New Interviews With BRI, MDU and BTUI

NEW YORK, Dec. 4 /PRNewswire/ -- On September 27, Victor King, President and CEO of Birim Goldfields, Inc. (http://www.birim.com) updated the investment community in an all-new interview with www.wallst.net. Interview highlights include detailed discussions on the following topics:

-- the company's current land position in Ghana
-- why Ghana is "a great place to be" for gold exploration
-- reasons the company has been able to "build up a very significant
property portfolio"
-- the company's "very strategic" interest in the Bui Belt in Ghana
-- upcoming development milestones for investors to watch for


To hear the interview in its entirety, and to read an in-depth report on the company, visit http://www.wallst.net/superstocks/superstocks_profile.asp?ticker=tsx:bgi

On November 15, Terry Hildestad, President and CEO of MDU Resources Group, Inc. (http://www.mdu.com) updated the investment community in an all-new interview with www.wallst.net. Interview highlights include detailed discussions on the following topics:

-- the company's various business segments, and market opportunities for
each
-- key drivers behind the company's third-quarter results
-- increased demand for the company's products and services
-- reasons the company's energy segment of business has a "bright future"
-- industry trends bolstering the company's growth prospects
-- upcoming milestones for investors to watch for


To hear the interview in its entirety, visit
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?ticker=MDU&id=4180


On November 21, Paul Van Der Wansem, Chairman and CEO of BTU International, Inc. (http://www.btu.com) updated the investment community in an all-new interview with www.wallst.net. Interview highlights include detailed discussions on the following topics:

-- applications for the company's thermal processing systems
-- why the company's systems have a competitive edge
-- reasons the company's systems are well-suited for "high quality
production" processes
-- key drivers behind the company's third quarter results
-- steps the company has taken to tap the alternative energy market
-- upcoming milestones for investors to watch for


To hear the interview in its entirety, visit
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?ticker=BTUI&id=4208


About WallSt.net:

www.wallst.net is owned and operated by WallStreet Direct, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Financial Media Group, Inc. (http://www.financialmediagroupinc.com). The Web site is a leading provider of timely business news, executive interviews, multimedia content, and research tools. Financial Media Group, Inc. also owns http://www.mywallst.net, a financial social network for investors, and Financial Filings Corp. (http://www.financialfilings.com), a provider of media and compliance solutions to publicly traded companies. In addition to WallSt.net, WallStreet Direct, Inc. owns and operates WallStRadio (http://www.wallstradio.com), a business and finance podcast Web site. We have received nine thousand nine hundred ninety five dollars from Birim Goldfields, Inc. for media and advertising services. For a complete list of our advertisers, and advertising relationships, visit http://www.wallst.net/disclaimer/disclaimer.asp.

(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20050927/LATU121LOGO)

Contact:
WallSt.net
800-4-WALLST

‘I swear like we all do but I never swore at Adam’

Dec 4 2007 by Ben Glaze, South Wales Echo

A CARE home worker sacked after a patient’s death has won a claim for unfair dismissal.

Rachel Close, who was charged with Adam Morris’ manslaughter before the prosecution was dropped, was fired by Rhondda Cynon Taf council for gross misconduct.

She was dismissed in October, 2005 after a disciplinary panel heard she slept on duty and swore in front of patients.

But an employment tribunal issued a damning verdict on the council’s investigation procedures and upheld 39-year-old Mrs Close’s complaint.

Mrs Close was suspended in May, 2003 following 23-year-old Adam’s death.

The cerebral palsy sufferer, from Beddau, near Pontypridd, suffered severe brain damage after being starved of oxygen when his head became trapped in a bed at the Clwyd Wen respite home in Miskin. He died five days later.

An inquest last year heard allegations from colleagues of Mrs Close that she was “aggressive” to Adam and swore about him to her workmates.

Detectives charged her with Adam’s manslaughter but the case was dropped before it came to trial.

However, the council used police witness statements to make a misconduct case against Mrs Close and sacked her from her £17,000-a-year job.

But she appealed and a Cardiff tribunal upheld the complaint. She now faces a payout from the local authority.

The judgement came in August, but the Echo is able to report it only now after RCT council last month pleaded guilty to three Health and Safety charges over Adam’s death.

Mrs Close, of Tonteg, near Pontypridd, said today: “The allegations people were making against me were serious and I agree that if the council is presented with those allegations it has to investigate. But I wasn’t given a fair hearing.”

She told the Echo she had sworn and was sometimes late, but denied she was guilty of misconduct or sleeping on duty.

“I swore – we all swear in all walks of life. But I would never swear at one of my clients,” said Mrs Close, who takes tablets for depression and receives £78.50 a week incapacity benefit.

“I might have been one or two minutes late, but I was never late all the time. It was said I went home early and arrived late – it was all rubbish.

“If they investigated properly they would have found out I was telling the truth.”

In 2005, Mrs Close’s sister Deborah Waters, the Clwyd Wen manager, was cleared by a jury of wilful neglect over Adam’s death.

Four and a half years since the tragedy, Mrs Close is banned from working with vulnerable adults – a move she wants overturned.

The mum of four, who lives with her electrician husband Rob, spent 18 years working as a council-employed carer before 2003.

She pointed out the only party convicted over Adam’s death is RCT council for failings in risk assessment and ensuring safety.

Adam’s parents Paul and Meryl were disappointed Mrs Close’s appeal succeeded and said: “The council has let us down again.”

A local authority spokeswoman said the council was “vigorously appealing” Mrs Close’s victory and a hearing is scheduled for the new year.

She said it would be inappropriate to comment further.

ben.glaze@mediawales.co.uk

All in the family, doesn't country have other leaders: BJP

New Delhi (PTI): Exasperated over naming of popular projects after members of the Nehru-Gandhi family, the BJP on Tuesday asked the ruling party whether the country was devoid of any other great leader.

"All new institutions and programmes are named after Rajiv Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. All limits of sycophancy have been crossed by this government," BJP Deputy leader in the Lok Sabha V K Malhotra said.

The Government brought three bills named after Rajiv, Indira and Nehru on a single day on Monday, Malhotra said and alleged the Government's attitude was that there were no great leaders other than those in the Gandhi-Nehru family.

"This is objectionable," he told reporters.

The government has even forgotten Mahatma Gandhi and Sardar Vallabhai Patel, he said and took a dig at Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, alleging she remembered Gandhi and Patel only when she went to Gujarat for electioneering.

He said the BJP Parliamentary Party, which met on Tuesday, condemned the Government's stand that the minimum support for rice could not be increased and decided to support the agitation by farmers in South India.

"Peasants are on a warpath in southern states. We will support their demand inside and outside Parliament and take part in their agitation," Malhotra added.

During the meeting, Leader of the Opposition L K Advani also asked all party MPs to devote time for campaigning in Gujarat.

All talk, no action on global season


By MARC HINTON - RugbyHeaven

Much ado about nothing. That might be the cynical view to take of the IRB's heavily-trumpeted conference in Woking that attracted a who's who of the game's stakeholders.

While the IRB must be applauded (now there's a statement I never thought I'd make) for the initiative shown in addressing such an urgent issue, and for the commitment of spending so much of their hard-earned World Cup profits on such a comprehensive gathering, it's hard to shake the feeling that for all the talking, we're really none the better off.

Really, what's changed?

There is a commitment to get something up and running in Argentina so as they might one day be in a position to join the Tri-Nations. All very well and good, but given that the Argies have first to establish a fully-fledged professional domestic competition and persuade the 100% of their leading players who currently ply their trade in the north that it's worth turning down all those Euros and sterling to stay local, nothing is going to happen.

We may well see George Bush and Osama Bin Laden sit down for coffee together before that happens.

There's also been a pledge from the leading club competitions in France and England to finish their seasons by May 31 so as players can be available for the June tours to the southern hemisphere. Big deal. That's still not going to fully address the key issue of under-strength touring outfits effectively cheapening test match rugby.

Players are still going to be injured and tired at the end of their impossibly long seasons, and this premium test window is still going to be viewed as an opportunity by the sides in the north to rest key players rather than run them into the ground.

There's also the so-called agreement on a 10-week "off-season" for players. Yippee. We've actually had that in New Zealand since the new Collective Bargaining Agreement was introduced.

Otherwise? Sweet flippin' all, despite the acolytes returning with swashbuckling declarations of "robust" debate, "significant" progress and "recognition" of the game's key issues. It's amazing what a business class flight, a nice set of digs and a few free beers can achieve in terms of unbridled enthusiasm.

Essentially international rugby post the Great IRB Forum of '07 is exactly the same as international rugby prior to it. Thanks for nothing, guys.

There will still be a month of rather meaningless internationals in June between sub-par northern outfits and sub-interested southern ones, and another three or four weeks of vice-versa in November.

There's a vague intent that something should really be instituted to give all these matches some validity, but nothing more than that. And the forecast for change is not exactly brimming with prospect.

Still, we shouldn't really be surprised.

Once again it's a case of northern might winning the day. They're quite happy up in their part of the world, thank-you very much. The Six Nations is going gangbusters, their club competitions are growing into a major concern and they positively coin it anyway in November when we bring our attractive sides north, so why change?

As for June? It's an obligation for them, nothing more. A quid-pro-quo to enable them to fill their stadiums, and coffers, in November.

It was the south that wanted to push all inter-hemisphere rugby into a September-November time-frame, but it was a fanciful hope, with so much compromise required by the north that it was never going to happen.

Chopping and changing between competitions is an ingrained part of northern hemisphere rugby. In fact they thrive on it. Six Nations one weekend, Heineken Cup the next, Guinness Premiership the one after. And if we're lucky the Anglo-Welsh Cup the one after that.

Streamlining the season into a sensible flow from one competition to another was something that appealed greatly to southern hemisphere unions, but sadly not to the north. Nor to the "economic" people who, if you read the reports submitted to the forum, cautioned greatly against tinkering with established playing patterns.

All in all it's a bit disappointing for someone hoping that test rugby might have gotten the shakeup it appears to be desperately in need of.

But don't take my word for it. This is the view of Tony Dempsey who's head of the Australian players' association.

"We were hoping for something far more substantial," Dempsey told The Australian newspaper. He called the forum a "talkfest" from which Australian rugby "do not derive any comfort".

But he wasn't finished there, describing the decision to leave test rugby as the piecemeal status quo it is as "like saying there is no need to worry about global warming".

He added: "This was a rare opportunity to do something substantial and meaningful that would bring some clarity to the convoluted global season. Instead we have just got more of the same."

He's right. But it's hard to see what can be done, despite the good intentions of the IRB. They can't force change; only encourage it.

Right now the north holds all the cards. And that's a worrying thing for test match rugby.

Putin's Reaganesque Victory

By TONY KARON/NEW YORK


There was little surprise in the results of Russia's parliamentary election Sunday, with Vladimir Putin's party appearing to have won two-thirds of the vote. Given the extensive use of state resources to tilt the political playing field entirely in the favor of the ruling party, the outcome was all but predetermined. But the more telling fact may be that Putin's managed election victory has caused so little public discontent outside of small liberal enclaves of the middle class and die-hard supporters of the Communist Party. That lack of an outcry is just further proof that, despite what opposition figures liken to the authoritarian traditions of the communist era, Putin remains the overwhelmingly popular leader in Russia today.
Related Articles

There was nothing subtle about official attempts to shape the election result. Opposition parties and leaders were harassed, the electronic media relentlessly flattered Putin's achievements, and state employees were pressured to turn out and vote for his United Russia party. In Chechnya, the breakaway province bombed and bludgeoned into quiescence by Putin since taking office in 2000, some 99.4% of the vote went to his party.

But while the margin of its victory might have been a lot narrower, few doubt that United Russia would easily have won even if the election had been free and fair. And it's not simply because of the party's policies — indeed, the centerpiece of the party's election platform, as much of its campaign media made clear, was Putin himself.

If he were a U.S. President, Putin would be a lame duck at this stage. His second term of office expires four months from now, and the constitution prohibits him from seeking a third consecutive term. Still, nobody doubts that Russia's immediate political future will be decided primarily by the former KGB man now in the Kremlin. Some supporters have urged him to find a legal loophole to allow himself another term; others hope that, as the leading candidate of United Russia in Sunday's poll, he simply moves into the legislature in the job of Prime Minister, and inverts the constitutional relationship between the two positions by installing a supplicant in the presidency. Whatever mechanism he chooses to continue his political role, a majority of voters appear ready to give their president a blank check.

The explanation for Putin's popularity may be found in certain similarities to the man often credited with helping to bring down the Soviet Union. It's not that the former KGB man has any policy preferences or even a political style in common with Ronald Reagan, the great icon of contemporary American conservatism. But in the sense that he has made Russians feel good once again about their country, his appeal is Reaganesque.

Reagan's own popularity — even among many Democrats — owed less to his specific policies (tax cuts, arms buildup) than to his overall success in restoring Americans' national pride and optimism. If the Carter era had been associated with domestic economic woes and a string of geopolitical defeats that culminated in the Iran hostage crisis, Reagan managed, almost as soon as he took office, to convince the public that a new "morning in America" had broken, by getting tough with U.S. adversaries on the global stage.

Putin's success, similarly, is based on reversing the national sense of gloom and doom that accompanied the presidency of Boris Yeltsin. While lionized in the West for his anti-communist stance, Yeltsin is remembered at home for ushering in an era of economic and social catastrophe, rampant kleptocracy and a series of geopolitical humiliations at the hands of the West. Rising oil prices have allowed Putin to oversee a dramatic turnabout in Russia's economic position, fueling an increasingly assertive, and domestically popular, economic and political nationalism. Whether challenging the U.S. and its allies on Kosovo, opting out of previous arms agreements with Washington to protest U.S. missile defense plans, or using energy exports as a pressure-point against former Soviet territories inclining towards NATO, Putin has had few reservations about standing up to the West. And if the creeping authoritarianism of the Putin era is presented as the price of their renewed national pride and economic prospects, many Russians appear willing to accept the deal.

Still, having secured his political blank check, it remains unclear how President Putin will proceed — although he may provide some hint of an answer sooner than next Spring. On December 17, All Russia is due to hold its party congress, where it is expected to name its presidential candidate for the March 2008 election. But whoever the party puts forward in the presidential race, the likelihood remains that his or her election effort will be run, like the party's parliamentary campaign, "For Putin!"

US: Iran Still Able to Develop Nukes

By PAMELA HESS – 1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Iran halted its nuclear weapons development program in the fall of 2003 under international pressure but is continuing to enrich uranium, which means it may still be able to develop a weapon between 2010 and 2015, according to a new U.S. intelligence assessment released Monday.

That finding, part of a new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, is a sharp turnaround from two years ago when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program. It suggests that Iran's decisions are rational and pragmatic, and that Tehran is more susceptible to diplomatic and financial pressure than previously thought, the document concluded.

"Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," says the unclassified summary of the secret report.

The findings come at a time of escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, which President Bush has labeled part of an "axis of evil," along with Iraq and North Korea. At an Oct. 17 news conference, Bush said, "If you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

Rand Beers, who resigned from Bush's National Security Council just before the Iraq war, said the report should derail any appetite for war on the administration's part, and should reinvigorate regional diplomacy. "The new NIE throws cold water on the efforts of those urging military confrontation with Iran," he said.

Senior intelligence officials said Monday they failed to detect Iran's fall 2003 halt in nuclear weapons development in time to reflect it in the 2005 estimate.

One of the officials said Iran is the most challenging country to spy on — harder even than North Korea, a notoriously closed society. "We put a lot more collection assets against this," the official said, "but gaps remain." The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

Some of the changes in the new report reflect the use of "open source" intelligence — public information from sources such as the news media and international organizations. An official said, for example, that photos taken at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility during U.N. inspections in 2002 were particularly useful in assessing the capabilities of the civilian uranium enrichment program.

U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, said the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains "a serious problem." The estimate suggests Bush "has the right strategy: intensified international pressure along with a willingness to negotiate a solution that serves Iranian interests, while ensuring the world will never have to face a nuclear armed Iran," Hadley said. He was less interested in what the 2005 assessment missed than what it got right: that Iran had a covert nuclear program.

Bush was briefed on the 100-page document on Nov. 28. National Intelligence Estimates represent the most authoritative written judgments of all 16 U.S. spy agencies. Congress and other executive agencies were briefed Monday, and foreign governments will be briefed beginning Tuesday, the officials said.

Despite the suspension of its weapons program, it may be difficult to ultimately dissuade Tehran from developing a nuclear bomb because Iran believes such a weapon would give it international prestige and leverage to achieve its national security and foreign policy goals, the assessment concluded.

"The bottom line is this: For that strategy to succeed, the international community has to turn up the pressure on Iran with diplomatic isolation, United Nations sanctions, and with other financial pressure and Iran has to decide it wants to negotiate a solution," Hadley said.

The intelligence officials said they do not know all the reasons why Iran halted its weapons program, or what might trigger its resumption. They said they are confident that diplomatic and political pressure played a key role, but said the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Libya's termination of its nuclear program and the implosion of the illegal nuclear smuggling network run by Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan might also have influenced Tehran.

To develop a nuclear weapon, Iran needs to design and engineer a warhead, obtain enough fissile material, and build a delivery vehicle such as a missile. The intelligence agencies now believe Iran halted warhead engineering four years ago and as of mid-2007 had not restarted it.

But Iran is still enriching uranium for its civilian nuclear reactors that produce electricity. That leaves open the possibility that fissile material could be diverted to covert nuclear sites to produce highly enriched uranium for a warhead. Engineers have known the design for a nuclear weapon for 60 years. The countdown to a nuclear weapon is determined more by the availability of fissile material than anything else, the officials said.

Even if the country went all out with present enrichment capability, it is unlikely to have enough until late 2009 or 2010 at the earliest, the officials said. The State Department's Intelligence and Research office believes the earliest likely time it would have enough highly enriched uranium would be 2013. But all agencies concede Iran may not have sufficient enriched uranium until after 2015.

Iran would not be able to technically produce and reprocess enough plutonium for a weapon before about 2015, the report says. But ultimately it has the technical and industrial capacity to build a bomb, "if it decides to do so," the intelligence agencies found. They said Iran's immediate intentions are a mystery.

"We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options, or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart its program," the report says.

This national intelligence estimate was originally due in the spring of 2007 but was delayed because the agencies wanted more confidence their findings were accurate, given the inaccuracy of the 2002 intelligence estimate of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.

"There was a very rigorous scrub using all the tradecraft available, using the lessons of 2002," said one senior intelligence official. He said foreign intelligence information was particularly closely scrutinized.

The CIA, which did most of the analysis, considered at least six alternate scenarios that could explain the new findings, including whether Iran was intentionally trying to deceive them into believing weapons work had stopped.

Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell decided last month that key judgments of NIEs should not be declassified and released. The intelligence officials said an exception was made in this case because the last assessment of Iran's nuclear program in 2005 has influenced public debate about U.S. policy toward Iran, and must be updated to reflect the latest findings.

Also Monday, a top U.S. diplomat said China may be open to discussing fresh U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran. China and Russia, both veto-wielding members of the Security Council, have been reluctant to support new sanctions.

Iran Halted Bomb Drive in 2003, U.S. Spy Agencies Say (Update2)

By Jeff Bliss and Ken Fireman

Dec. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Iran suspended its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and probably can't produce enough uranium for a bomb until 2010 at the earliest, according to a new report from the U.S. intelligence community.

The Iranians halted the program ``primarily in response to international pressure,'' and this decision ``suggests Iran may be more vulnerable to influence on the issue than we judged previously,'' the intelligence agencies said.

If Iran were to restart its program, it would not have enough material for a bomb until between 2010 and 2015, according to the National Intelligence Estimate, which is the consensus view of the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.

``Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005,'' according to the report's key judgments, which the Office of the Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell released to the media today.

The agencies said they lack ``sufficient intelligence to judge confidently'' how long Iran will suspend its nuclear weapons program, but Iran's decisions appear to be ``guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs.''

As of the middle of this year, Iran hadn't restarted the program, according to the agencies.

Still, the agencies said it would be ``difficult'' to prevent Iran from eventually developing nuclear weapons because the country's leaders believe this goal is important to their national security.

Reversal of Judgment

The report represents a reversal of the intelligence community's judgment in 2005, when it concluded ``with high confidence that Iran is determined to develop nuclear weapons despite its international obligations and international pressure.''

President George W. Bush was kept abreast of the changing analysis of the spy agencies, which have been sifting new information for three months, senior intelligence officials told reporters in Washington today. He received the key judgments on Nov. 28, a day after senior leaders at the agencies approved them.

`World War III'

The Bush administration for months has condemned what it has insisted was an Iranian drive to build a nuclear weapon.

Bush on Oct. 17 warned that even allowing Iran to acquire the knowledge necessary for a nuclear weapon risked ``World War III.'' Vice President Dick Cheney said on Oct. 21 that if Iran ``stays on its present course, the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences.''

White House National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley denied Bush was exaggerating the threat on Oct. 17.

``He was describing the threat as the intelligence community itself had been describing the threat both publicly and in their briefings to him,'' Hadley told reporters at a briefing.

The president ``was trying to give a wake-up call to the international community that we need to step up diplomacy, step up the pressure,'' he said, adding that message wouldn't change.

When first briefed on the new information, the president ``was not told to stop talking about Iran's nuclear weapons program,'' Hadley said. He said he didn't know whether Bush was given an early indication of the changing analysis before or after his ``World War III'' comment.

Premise `Evaporated'

Joseph Cirincione, an arms control expert with the Center for American Progress in Washington, said the new report would undermine the position of those advocating military action to halt Iran's nuclear program and may also damage the Bush administration's drive for tougher United Nations sanctions.

``The White House effort for years has been premised on the notion that there was a secret nuclear program,'' Cirincione said. ``The NIE report says there wasn't. The belief that we could expose this program and win international support for either crushing sanctions or military strikes has now evaporated.''

The new information stems from a recent added emphasis on Iran and includes data from publicly available sources, the senior intelligence officials said. For instance, the Iranians allowed the media to tour and take pictures of the Natanz nuclear facility, adding to the agencies' knowledge of the operations there, the officials said.

In addition to international pressure, the decision by Libya to abandon its atomic-weapon plans and the collapse of the A.Q. Khan network, which was selling Pakistan's nuclear technology abroad, may have played a role in Iran's decision to halt its program, the officials said.

Russian Reaction

The Russian ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin, whose government has opposed stiffer sanctions, quickly trumpeted the new report as a vindication.

``We have always been saying there is no proof they are pursuing nuclear weapons,'' Churkin told reporters. He said he didn't know what impact the report would have on the U.S. bid for new sanctions.

Hadley said the new intelligence estimate ``offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically.''

The report ``suggests that the president has the right strategy -- intensified international pressure along with a willingness to negotiate a solution,'' he said in an e-mailed statement.

The report noted Iran was continuing its effort to produce enriched uranium, a conclusion shared by the UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. In a Nov. 15 report, the IAEA said its ability to gain knowledge about Iran's nuclear activities was diminishing because of reduced Iranian cooperation.

To contact the reporter on this story: Jeff Bliss in Washington at jbliss@bloomberg.net ; Robin Stringer in London at rstringer@bloomberg.net .

US spies give shock verdict on Iran threat

Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Monday December 3, 2007
Guardian Unlimited


A suspected Iranian nuclear research facility
A satellite image of a suspected nuclear research facility at the Parchin military site near Tehran. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images


US intelligence agencies undercut the White House today by disclosing for the first time that Iran has not been pursuing a nuclear weapons development programme for the last four years.

The disclosure makes it harder for President George Bush and the vice-president, Dick Cheney, to make a case for a military strike against Iran next year.

It also makes it more difficult to persuade countries such as Russia and China to join the US, Britain and France in imposing a new round of sanctions on Tehran.

Hadley: U.S. Policy Toward Iran Nuclear Weapons Must Continue

WASHINGTON — The intelligence community has high confidence that Iran had a covert nuclear weapons program that it never acknowledged and continues to deny, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said Monday, but the program is currently halted although perhaps not indefinitely.

The assessment, outlined in the latest National Intelligence Estimate, states that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons development program in the fall of 2003 under international pressure, but is continuing to enrich uranium and could be capable of developing a weapon as early as late 2009.

The findings are a change from two years ago, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Iran was determined to develop a nuclear capability and was continuing its weapons development program.

Click here to read the unclassified NIE (pdf).

Hadley said the change in assessment does not suggest a failure on the part of the U.S. intelligence community, but a success in finding the true status of the program.

Hadley said no secret has been more closely kept than Iran's nuclear weapons pursuits.

"They are very good at his business of keeping secrets," he told reporters in an afternoon press conference at the White House.

Prior to Hadley's on-the-record, for-attribution briefing, four of the nation's top intelligence officials said they believe it remains Iran's "latent goal" to develop a nuclear weapon, but that "gaps remain" in their ability to collect and analyze information on what they called "probably the hardest intelligence target there is."

The intelligence community considers the Iranian regime a "rational actor" and a "unitary actor," meaning internal differences of opinion amongst various factions inside the regime are not contributing to a schism in the regime's actions or calculus.

Hadley said the latest NIE, briefed to President Bush last week and given to the congressional intelligence committees on Monday morning, suggests the U.S. has taken the right approach to dealing with the Islamic republic. He described the strategy as one of "intensified international pressure along with the willingness to negotiate a solution that serves Iranian interests while insuring the world it will never have to face a nuclear-armed Iran."

"On balance, the estimate is good news," Hadley said. "On one hand it confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons. On the other hand, it tells us that we have made some progress in trying to insure that that does not happen. But it also tells us that the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains a very serious problem."

The unclassified portion of the NIE being made public is nine pages in length, five of which explain methodology. The key judgments conclude with "high confidence" that:

— Until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons;

— In fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program;

— The halt lasted at least several years;

— Iran has the scientific, technical and industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to reverse course;

— The halt, and Tehran's announcement that it has suspended its declared uranium enrichment program and signed additional safeguards relating to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are "primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure resulting from exposure of Iran's previously undeclared nuclear work"; and

— Iran will not be technically capable of producing and reprocessing enough plutonium for a weapon before about 2015.

The judgments find with "moderate-to-high confidence" that:

— Iran does not currently have a nuclear weapon;

— Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons; and

— Iran has not obtained enough weapons-usable fissile material to develop a nuclear weapons, though the NIE assesses with low confidence the importation at all of some material. The report does not rule out that Iran "has acquired from abroad — or will acquire in the future — a nuclear weapon or enough fissile material for a weapon."

The judgments also find with "moderate confidence" that:

— Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but the NIE notes that its intentions to develop weapons is unknown;

— The earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely;

— More likely is that it would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon sometime between 2010 and 2015;

— Iran probably would use covert facilities rather than its declared nuclear sites in its effort to produce highly enriched uranium for a weapon.

The report concludes that Iran resumed its declared centrifuge enrichment activities in January 2006 despite the continued halt in the nuclear weapons program, and made significant progress in 2007 installing centrifuges at Natanz, its chief nuclear plant.

In those efforts, Iranian agencies are still working on creating the technology that could be used for producing nuclear weapons, if it turned toward that activity.

"Since fall 2003, Iran has been conducting research and development projects with commercial and conventional military applications — some of which would also be of limited use for nuclear weapons," the report states.

What Does the Report Mean for the U.S.?

The report is the outcome of a request made earlier this year by Congress calling for a new intelligence estimate on Iran. Hadley said production of the report was delayed in part to process new intelligence that was received in the last few months and conclusions about it were reached last Tuesday.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Monday he asked for the new NIE because he was concerned that Bush was beating the drum for war with Iran.

"Early reports of the NIE judges that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program four years ago ... We should be having a surge of diplomacy with Iran. And based upon this, I think it would be a pretty good idea," Reid said.

"I strongly urge President Bush to pursue a clear-eyed, serious diplomatic effort, with both carrots and sticks, to prevent Iran from restarting its nuclear weapons program. We must not lose sight of this threat," said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas.

Stopping Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon must be one of the highest priorities of the United States and the international community. Iran is the world's preeminent state sponsor of terrorism, and there are indications that the Al Quds force of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps has assisted insurgents in lethal activity against U.S. forces in Iraq," Reyes said.

2008 presidential candidates were also quick to draw conclusions about U.S. policy based on the report.

"The new National Intelligence Estimate shows that George Bush and Dick Cheney's rush to war with Iran is, in fact, a rush to war," said Democratic candidate John Edwards. "The new NIE finds that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that Iran can be dissuaded from pursuing a nuclear weapon through diplomacy. This is exactly the reason that we must avoid radical steps like the Kyl-Lieberman bill declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, which needlessly took us closer to war. And its why I have proposed that we pursue a comprehensive diplomatic approach instead."

"For years now, the Islamic Republic of Iran has defied and played games with every international effort aimed at persuading the country to halt enriching uranium. Sanctions and other pressures must be continued and stepped up until Iran complies by halting enrichment activities in a verifiable way," said Republican candidate Rudy Giuliani.

Despite the new conclusions, the report makes clear that intelligence gaps mean a judgment can't be made on whether Tehran is willing to continue the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely or has set specific deadlines or criteria to prompt the continuation of the program.

It also concludes that Iran's decision to halt the program is likely based on a cost-benefit approach, influenced by international pressure, "rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs."

"In our judgment, only an Iranian political decision to abandon a nuclear weapons objective would plausibly keep Iran from eventually producing nuclear weapons — and such a decision is inherently reversible," the report states.

"If we are to avoid the grim choice of accepting an Iran on the path to nuclear weapons or considering the use of force, we need to intensify our pressure on Iran while making clear that if they do suspend enrichment, there is an opportunity for better relations with the international community," Hadley said.

In the earlier briefing, the intelligence officials took pains to explain why the last NIE, dated May 2005, failed to detect the central new conclusion of the present one: namely that Iran halted its covert nuclear weapons program in late 2003 (actual programs for weaponization were what was halted; other activities that could contribute to a nuclear weapon, such as uranium enrichment and research into delivery systems, remain ongoing).

"We had a paucity of data," one official stated, adding such shortcomings are "just part of the business." The officials said the Iranians "deliberately, carefully, and ... effectively" kept their nuclear weapon program hidden, and, too, the secret halt to it.

The officials said they are more inclined now than they were in 2005 to believe the Iranians are rational actors, because the regime's susceptibility to international pressure — a key factor in the halting of the nuclear weapons program — suggests the Iranians' "cost-benefit" model is surprisingly similar to the kind the U.S. would employ.

Asked if the intelligence community's state of knowledge about current Iranian nuclear activities is "diminishing," as the International Atomic Energy Agency recently said of itself, the officials suggested the opposite: that drawing on all available sources, including signals intelligence, open-source, the IAEA and other resources, the American intelligence community has new information and better insight into old information than it did in 2005.

However, the officials agreed the IAEA's knowledge about current Iranian activity is diminishing. One official stated flatly that the Iranians have concealed nuclear activities from the IAEA. One source of information available to analysts this time around were the TV images of the exterior and interior of Iran's pilot fuel enrichment facility at Natanz, which gave intelligence professionals "data" that "helped us understand what they have."

The officials said counterintelligence analysts were asked at one point to assess whether the halt in Iran's weaponization program was initiated as a "strategic deception," namely, a ruse. "We gamed more than half a dozen such scenarios," one official stated. But the analysts reached the conclusion such a scenario was "plausible but not likely."

Although the officials as a rule, respecting the norms of their craft, declined to offer policy prescriptions based on their findings, the most senior official present did cite the finding that the Iranians are susceptible to international pressure and say that such pressure should "continue" as a way to "allow IAEA to have significant visibility into the program."

The NIE does not address what conditions would need to obtain in order for the Iranian leadership to take the decision to restart the weaponization program. At one point one official stated: "I don't expect them to admit (to having maintained or halted a longstanding covert nuclear weapons program). I assume they'll just say we're wrong."

Asked if the war in Iraq was among the factors that likely contributed to the halt of the weaponization program in late 2003, the officials suggested it was part of an "atmosphere" that also included at that time the "implosion" of the A.Q. Khan network; the decision by Libya to abandon its weapons of mass destruction programs and cooperate with American authorities probing its origins; and the threat of U.N. sanctions.

The impact of international pressure is beyond dispute, the officials said, a "cause-and-effect" relationship backed up by an "evidentiary trail."

The officials also went to great lengths to emphasize how differences of opinion amongst the intelligence agencies were spotlighted and not brushed over in the final product. They said they were "exceptionally careful" in preparing this report because of the "lessons learned" from the mistakes made regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.

FOX News' James Rosen and Sharon Kehnemui Liss contributed to this report.

U.S. report: Iran stopped nuclear weapons work in 2003

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran halted work toward a nuclear weapon under international scrutiny in 2003 and is unlikely to be able to produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb until 2010 to 2015, a U.S. intelligence report says.

art.natanz.satellite.dglobe.jpg

A file satellite image shows Iranian nuclear facilities.

A declassified summary of the latest National Intelligence Estimate found with "high confidence" that the Islamic republic stopped an effort to develop nuclear weapons in the fall of 2003.

The estimate is less severe than a 2005 report that judged the Iranian leadership was "determined to develop nuclear weapons despite its international obligations and international pressure."

But the latest report says Iran -- which declared its ability to produced enriched uranium for a civilian energy program in 2006 -- could reverse that decision and eventually produce a nuclear weapon if it wanted to do so.

Enriched uranium at low concentrations can be used to fuel nuclear power plants, but much higher concentrations are needed to yield a nuclear explosion.

"We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely," the report says. A more likely time frame for that production is between 2010 and 2015, it concludes. Video Watch what new report says about Iran's nuclear ambitions »

Iran has insisted its nuclear program is strictly aimed at producing electricity, and the country has refused the U.N. Security Council's demand to halt its enrichment program.

Monday's report represents the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies. It suggests that a combination of "threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige and goals for regional influence in other ways," could persuade the Iranian leadership to continue its suspension of nuclear weapons research.

Available intelligence suggests the Iranian leadership is guided "by a cost-benefit approach," not a headlong rush to develop a bomb, the report concludes.

U.S. National Security adviser Stephen Hadley expressed hope after Monday's announcement, but he said Iran remains a serious threat.

"We have good reason to continue to be concerned about Iran developing a nuclear weapon even after this most recent National Intelligence Estimate," he told reporters at the White House. "In the words of the NIE, quote, Iranian entities are continuing to develop a range of technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons if a decision is made to do so."

He said technology being developed for Iran's civilian nuclear power program could be used to enrich uranium for use in weapons, and that Iran is continuing to develop ballistic missiles.

Hadley said the intelligence community came to the new conclusions on Tuesday, based on information gathered over the past few months, and President Bush was briefed about them on Wednesday.

He said U.S. policy toward Iran has not changed because of the new report.

"If we want to avoid a situation where we either have to accept Iran ... with a path to a nuclear weapon, or the possibility of having to use force to stop it, with all the connotations of World War III -- then we need to step up the diplomacy, step up the pressure, to get Iran to stop their so-called civilian uranium enrichment program," he said. "That's our policy going forward -- no change."

Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, who chairs the senate intelligence committee, welcomed the news.

"The key judgments show that the Intelligence Community has learned its lessons from the Iraq debacle," the West Virginia Democrat said in a statement. "It has issued judgments that break sharply with its own previous assessments, and they reflect a real difference from the views espoused by top Administration [sic] officials.

"This demonstrates a new willingness to question assumptions internally, and a level of independence from political leadership that was lacking in the recent past."

Sen. Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the fact that Iran was several years away from nuclear weapons capability meant "the international community has a significant window of opportunity in which to act to avoid the stark choice between going to war or accepting a nuclear Iran."

"But the Bush Administration has long lacked a comprehensive strategy to take advantage of this window," the Delaware Democrat and Democratic presidential hopeful said in a statement. "Instead of continuing its obsession with regime change and irresponsible talk of 'World War III,' we need a policy that focuses on conduct change."

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, has reported that Iran is cooperating with inspectors by providing access to declared nuclear material, documents and facilities. However, the agency also said Iran is withholding information in other areas, and as a result, the IAEA's knowledge about the status of the program is "diminishing."

Iran says its uranium enrichment work is allowed under the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty. The U.N. Security Council has passed two rounds of sanctions against Tehran, but Washington missed its goal of reaching consensus on tighter restrictions by the end of November, the State Department said last week.

advertisement

The report comes amid widespread accusations that the Bush administration is attempting to maneuver the United States into a conflict with Iran, which it accuses of meddling in the war in Iraq. In October, the United States designated elements of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps as supporters of terrorism.

NIEs examine current capabilities and vulnerabilities and, perhaps more importantly, consider future developments. Policymakers usually request the estimates, but the intelligence community also can initiate them. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend