TEHRAN – Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei insisted on Thursday that Iran has never been seeking to produce nuclear weapons.
However, the Leader said Iran “will never give up” its right to a peaceful use of nuclear energy.

“I stress that the Islamic Republic has never been after nuclear weapons and that it will never give up the right of its people to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes,” the Leader said in an inaugural speech to the Non-Aligned Movement summit in Tehran.

The Leader added, “The Islamic Republic of Iran considers the use of nuclear, chemical and similar weapons as a great and unforgivable sin. We proposed the idea of ‘Middle East free of nuclear weapons’ and we are committed to it.”

Elsewhere in his speech the Leader advised the United States to stop supporting Israel, saying “this regime has created countless problems” for the U.S.

“Now I would like to give a benevolent piece of advice to American politicians who always stood up to defend and support the Zionist regime. So far, this regime has created countless problems for you.”

During his speech to the high-profile summit attended by international figures including UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Ayatollah Khamenei said, “The UN Security Council has an illogical, unjust and completely undemocratic structure and mechanism… whose expiry date has passed.”
http://tehrantimes.com/politics/101048-iran-committed-to-mideast-free-of-nuclear-weapons-leader-tells-nam

This all sounds reasonable.

Send in the inspectors, NOT the bombs!!!

and this comes from the country that was using chemical weapons on Iraqi citizens....

In a declassified report from 1990 (DST-1620S-464-90, dated 15 March 1990), the Defense Intelligence Agency reported that "Iran used chemical weapons late in the war, but never as extensively or successfully as Iraq."

Reports that Iran used chemical agents to respond to Iraqi chemical attacks on several occasions during that war were controversial. Iraq presented chemical casualties to visiting UN chemical experts in 1987 and 1988. These individuals could also have been victims of Iraq's careless use of its own chemical munitions. On 14 May 1987 the UN Security Council stated that Iraqi military personnel had sustained injuries from chemical warfare agents, without actually affirming that Iran used chemical weapons against them.

Skeptics argue that the only evidence for the claim that Iran used chemical weapons during the war were unsubstantiated claims of the US government. There were allegations by the US Government at the time that Iran had used chemical weapons against the Kurdish village of Halabja in March 1988. Subsequently, these attacks were attributed by the US Government to Iraq alone.

As reported by Islamic Republic News Agency, on 19 October 1988 (two months after the war had ended), Parliamentary speaker (and future president) Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani declared that "...chemical bombs and biological weapons are poor man's atomic bombs and can easily be produced. We should at least consider them for our defense... Although the use of such weapons is inhuman, the war taught us that international laws are only drops of ink on paper."

Iran was believed to have manufactured weapons for blister, blood, and choking agents. It was also believed to be conducting research on nerve agents. Iran's stockpile of CW was believed to include nerve and blister agents. Iran was working on developing a self-sufficient CW production capacity that included more effective nerve agents. Along with its shell and bomb delivery systems, Iran was also thought to have been producing CW warheads for its Scud missile systems.

Its production capacity was estimated at as much as 1000 tons a year, with major production facilities located at Damghan, 300 km east of Tehran. Other facilities were believed to be located at Esfahan, Parchin and Qazvin. The Iranian chemical weapons infrastructure was very poorly characterized in the open literature, and given the reported scope of the program some had suggested that as many as a dozen other facilities had some significant chemical weapons development, production, storage or training role.

With extensive foreign assistance, Tehran obtained technology, chemical agent precursors, production equipment, and entire production plants. Although Iran made a concerted effort to attain an independent production capability for all aspects of its CW program, especially, its nerve agent program, it remained dependent on foreign sources for some chemical warfare-related technologies. China, as well as Russia were important suppliers of technologies and equipment for Iran's chemical warfare program.

Iran signed and ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention (in 1993 and 1997 respectively). Under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), Iran was obligated to eliminate its chemical program over a period of years. In approving the Convention, the Majlis accession statement included the notation that "Accusations by States Parties against other States Parties in the absence of a determination of non-compliance by OPCW will seriously undermine the Convention and its repetition may make the Convention meaningless."


http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/cw.htm

Iran committed to trying to harm Israel. Anything to harm Israel
but Iran not committed to destroying their own underground fortified
uranium enrichment plants.



Iran committed to support terrorist groups.

All this from a government controlled media outlet. Of course it sounds 'reasonable'.

Oh, Dude....

Of course if the mid-east is free of nukes Israel can then be overwhelmed.

NOTE:

If Iran is really committed to a nuclear free middle east then they
can do their part by honoring their NPT agreements and ending their
very own bunker fortified underground uranium enrichment plants!



They would even end the UN Security Council sanctions in the process!



For some reason Iran is not so committed that they are willing to
actually comply with their previous agreements and stop high grade
enrichment...Gee...



Let Iran stand down their nuclear program first, dismantle Natanz
and uranium enrichment and accept previously proposed solutions to
Iran's own violations - they we'll see....

Thanks I needed a good laugh tonight!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s27Oq5ot0ZI

We clean our country from their dirt. They fly like rats!

What is amusing is that so many people on here who cheer and clap for a war that kills and maims and robs us of our nations treasure have never once served their country.

The bravest and the loudest who had a chance to serve had other priorities.

Chickenhawk (also chicken hawk and chicken-hawk) is a political term used in the United States to describe a person who strongly supports war or other military action (i.e., a War Hawk), yet who actively avoided military service when of age.

The term indicates that the person in question is hypocritical for personally dodging a draft or otherwise shirking their duty to their country during a time of armed conflict while advocating that others do so. Generally, the implication is that chickenhawks lack the moral character to ask others to support, fight and perhaps die in an armed conflict. Those who avoid military service and continue to oppose armed aggression are not chickenhawks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickenhawk_%28politics%29

Why am I not surprised?

thats what the muslims want... they don't want an Israeli country on the map.

I wouldn't be surprised if they don't announce soon that they already have the bomb, whether they actually have it or not... just to get a little more time. So far, anyone with the bomb has been mostly immune from major attack. What I am completely sure of is that Iran can't be trusted to tell the truth about anything.

If they announce they have the bomb Israel would wipe them off the map, they would be stupid not to. Israel has a lit bigger supply of them compaired to Iran's total of one.

HILARIOUS!

only need one to usher in the 12th Imam!

I have seen no-one supporting a war. That accusation is offensive. Let me get this straight, if someone doesn't believe the Iranian government's spin, they are supporting a war?

I hope you can see what is wrong with this logic.