UN: Iran violated nuclear program sanctions in past 3 months

[News_Editor]

UN: Iran violated nuclear program sanctions in past 3 months

2012-03-23 08:50:32 GMT+7 (ICT)

NEW YORK (BNO NEWS) -- The United Nations (UN) on Thursday alerted of recent sanctions violations relating to the arms embargo imposed on Iran over its nuclear program.

Ambassador Néstor Osorio of Colombia, the current head of the Security Council committee monitoring the arms embargo, said during the past three months, reports showed violation of the resolution prohibiting Iran from carrying out activities related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, in the wake of Iran’s launch of a Navid satellite into space using its own space launch vehicle.

Specifically, in Osorio's quarterly report, which covers the period between December 21, 2011 and March 20, four Member States noted the violations and submitted them on February 28.

In addition, a Member State had also provided information on the results of inspections carried out on material confiscated in February last year from a truck on Iran's border with Syria; while another Member State had brought to the committee's attention a public statement by the Secretary-General of Hizbollah, dated February 7, in which he acknowledged that his group had received "materialistic support in all possible and available forms from Iran."

Furthermore, the report also mentioned a Member State which had informed the committee about the transfer to Iran of items "intended for nuclear power plants with light-water reactor."

International concern has surrounded Iran's nuclear program, which its officials have stated is for peaceful purposes, although some other countries have contend that it is driven by military ambitions.

In 2003, it was discovered that the country had concealed its nuclear activities for 18 years in breach of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In December 2006, the Security Council committee established that under resolution 1737 trade with Iran in all items, materials, equipment, goods and technology which could contribute to the country's enrichment-related, reprocessing or heavy water-related activities, or to the development of nuclear-weapon delivery systems was banned.

The following year, the resolution was further tightened with sanctions imposing a ban on arms sales and expanding the freeze on assets.

The Council imposed increased sanctions against Iran in resolution 1803 in 2008, which included the inspection of cargo suspected of carrying prohibited goods, the tighter monitoring of financial institutions and the extension of travel bans and asset freezes, over its nuclear program.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-03-23

[Ulysses G.]

Oh gosh. This simply can't be true. The Iranian government has pledged that they have no interest in producing ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Must be another one of them there "false flags" that we have heard so much about.

[trainman34014]

Reagan always had the best answer....'Nuke 'Em '. And why not; before they do it to you....by way of taking Israel off the map first and starting a conflict that will destroy large parts of the planet. You think these people are not mad enough to pull the trigger? I wouldn't trust them any further than I could see them....and from here they are out of sight !

[Exsexyman]

Oh gosh. This simply can't be true. The Iranian government has pledged that they have no interest in producing ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Must be another one of them there "false flags" that we have heard so much about.

Always two sides to a story. This from todays Guardian newspaper.

• The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the nuclear watchdog at the heart of the growing Iranian crisis, has been accused by several former senior officials of pro-western bias, over-reliance on unverified intelligence and of sidelining sceptics. Robert Kelley, a former US weapons scientists who ran the IAEA action team on Iraq at the time of the US-led invasion, said there were worrying parallels between the west's mistakes over Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction then and the IAEA's assessment of Iran now.

[Ulysses G.]

A "pro-Western bias". Can't have that.

[chuckd]

Oh gosh. This simply can't be true. The Iranian government has pledged that they have no interest in producing ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Must be another one of them there "false flags" that we have heard so much about.

Always two sides to a story. This from todays Guardian newspaper.

• The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the nuclear watchdog at the heart of the growing Iranian crisis, has been accused by several former senior officials of pro-western bias, over-reliance on unverified intelligence and of sidelining sceptics. Robert Kelley, a former US weapons scientists who ran the IAEA action team on Iraq at the time of the US-led invasion, said there were worrying parallels between the west's mistakes over Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction then and the IAEA's assessment of Iran now.

Wonder where Mohamed El Baradai is when an Islamic country needs him.

Oh, I remember. He's in Egypt aligning himself with the Muslim Brotherhood.

[Steely Dan]

Here is commentary arguing Israel are more likely to attack than not before November as an Obama regime pre-election is less likely to throw Israel under a bus.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/03/20/consensus-israel-will-strike-iran/

[Exsexyman]

A "pro-Western bias". Can't have that.

Surely the point is that in matters as serious as this there should not be ANY bias, either pro Western or pro Iran. It should be about facts, evidence, boring stuff like that. But don't worry, i have no doubt that you will get the war that you are clearly craving for. In the minds of the gung ho warmongers in the US and Israel, imaginary facts and evidence, or probably more to the point, manufactured facts and evidence, are just as valid as the real thing. When it all kicks off i look forward to your dispatches from the front line, where as a man of principle you will surely be!

[midas]

I read this statement today which I thought was particularly stunning..............

" The irony would be Israel, in an attempt to prevent itself from being nuked in the future, provokes a war that forces it to become the nuclear aggressor. "

[Scott]

Please stay on-topic and be civil toward other posters.

[theblether]

Here is commentary arguing Israel are more likely to attack than not before November as an Obama regime pre-election is less likely to throw Israel under a bus.

http://www.commentar...ll-strike-iran/

Events will overtake all commentators, they always do. Unfortunately I can see a series of Al Queda style attacks on London later this year, and if they are successful to any extent then that will be the event that will result on a full scale attack on Iran. Even if Iran is not directly implicated it will be blamed.

Non Brits don't understand the concept of John Bull, he represents the Brits of the ages, and he still sticks his head above the parapet. Politicians are terrified of him, as when John Bull stirs the entire country stirs. The last time John Bull started shifting wasn't the July 7 attacks in 2005, it was 2 weeks later when the 21st July attacks failed.

If those attacks had succeeded the John Bull would have risen from his sleep and you would have seen civil disobedience in the UK such as you have never seen before. There would be well nigh the same reaction as Kristallnacht......that might seem like an extreme example, however that is what is at stake.

British politicians fear John Bull, they try to harness the best of him with his bulldog spirit, but they fear his power when angered. Where does this attach itself to Iran? You would have one permanent member of the security council on a war footing, the French are struggling right now to keep their version of John Bull under control after the murders in the last few days, and a Pro - Israeli US government being pressured by two long time allies to make a move.

So my prediction is, don't watch Iran this year............watch London. What happens in London will dictate much this year.

[myfriendu]

A "pro-Western bias". Can't have that.

the truth often hurts

[Steely Dan]

Here is commentary arguing Israel are more likely to attack than not before November as an Obama regime pre-election is less likely to throw Israel under a bus.

http://www.commentar...ll-strike-iran/

Events will overtake all commentators, they always do. Unfortunately I can see a series of Al Queda style attacks on London later this year, and if they are successful to any extent then that will be the event that will result on a full scale attack on Iran. Even if Iran is not directly implicated it will be blamed.

Non Brits don't understand the concept of John Bull, he represents the Brits of the ages, and he still sticks his head above the parapet. Politicians are terrified of him, as when John Bull stirs the entire country stirs. The last time John Bull started shifting wasn't the July 7 attacks in 2005, it was 2 weeks later when the 21st July attacks failed.

If those attacks had succeeded the John Bull would have risen from his sleep and you would have seen civil disobedience in the UK such as you have never seen before. There would be well nigh the same reaction as Kristallnacht......that might seem like an extreme example, however that is what is at stake.

British politicians fear John Bull, they try to harness the best of him with his bulldog spirit, but they fear his power when angered. Where does this attach itself to Iran? You would have one permanent member of the security council on a war footing, the French are struggling right now to keep their version of John Bull under control after the murders in the last few days, and a Pro - Israeli US government being pressured by two long time allies to make a move.

So my prediction is, don't watch Iran this year............watch London. What happens in London will dictate much this year.

That's an interesting take on things, the British sense of fair play and tolerance usually makes us less prone to civil unrest than some places, but yes something is stirring for sure. Actually it is the disconnect between what populations perceive and what they are told that eventually leads to a breakdown in the social contract between those that govern and those that are governed. Iran despite the denials of their apologists are knee deep in the current mayhem, not only threatening Israel and oil supplies, but also causing deep anxiety with the Sunni gulf states viz their nuclear program. The timing of the OP report is actually more significant than it's content and is seemingly part of a gathering storm.

[cheeryble]

You think these people are not mad enough to pull the trigger? I wouldn't trust them any further than I could see them....and from here they are out of sight !

Zbigniew Brezinski would beg to differ with you Trainman.

Perhaps you are better informed, but he thinks Iran is very much a "rational nation".

Israel is in considerable danger of course.

They're in the considerable danger of losing their nuclear monopoly.

Cheeryble

ps: always amuses me how the US tried to persuade the Shah they installed in place of the democratically elected PM to go nuclear and show foresight as the oil wouldn't last forever.

That was 50 years ago and the oil supply hasn't grown.

Edited March 23, 2012 by cheeryble

[mowgus]

Like Iran wants to get into a nuclear war with anyone. Seriously? They know they would be annihilated if they even got one off the ground. This sounds to me more like an Iraq WMD deal. The timing is perfect...the US has been poking its nose everywhere there's oil and we know tension with Iran is high. They just need an excuse that has NATO backing to stroll in there and make some changes (and get access to that oil).

[sbk]

Baiting attempt at another member removed, if you can't refrain from getting personal then I would highly recommend that you refrain from posting period.

[endure]

Here is commentary arguing Israel are more likely to attack than not before November as an Obama regime pre-election is less likely to throw Israel under a bus.

http://www.commentar...ll-strike-iran/

Events will overtake all commentators, they always do. Unfortunately I can see a series of Al Queda style attacks on London later this year, and if they are successful to any extent then that will be the event that will result on a full scale attack on Iran. Even if Iran is not directly implicated it will be blamed.

Non Brits don't understand the concept of John Bull, he represents the Brits of the ages, and he still sticks his head above the parapet.

Just as, I suspect, non Iranians don't understand the concept of Cyrus the Great.