Kuwaiti Professor Abdallah Al-Nafisi “Thanks for Saving My Country; Please Die in Screaming Pain Now! Inshallah”

Here we have a Professor Abdallah Al-Nafisi at a KUWAITI university speaking his mind about the horrors he dreams about being inflicted upon the nation that saved his from destruction. Yes I said Kuwait, the country whose men were french kissing our troops just a few years ago when we saved them from Iraq.

This video is a comprehensive education for the ignorant moderate and the reactionarily Leftist. Watch this man’s face; see the “innocent” glee that warms his features at some of the things he says. Remember that to Reform Islam is not to destroy Islam. Reforming Islam is all that can save it; I am not the only soul in the West who will not lie down to what this man prays for Allah to make our fate.

What I find interesting is how people like trhis “professor” seem know that they cannot ever compete face to face with the Western nations. They wish for the success of evil, dirty tricks, or even for some infidel to do their job for them; Allah willing. It is this poor self image and lack of confidence masking as certainty that will help us to prevail. Why else are so many Muslims eager to live secular lives with Western sensibilities except when given positive correction from traditional  Muslim leaders.

Greece was conquered by Rome, Rome fell to the barbarian hordes but who did the Islamic empires fall to? Answer: themselves, greed and corruption and infighting did the deed with no outside interferance.
Patience, education and their own inherant self-destruction are all we need to win!

Voting inconclusive so far in search for new I.A.E.A. chief

By Alan Cowell Published: March 26, 2009

PARIS: Officials from 35 nations failed in initial voting Thursday to choose a successor to Mohamed ElBaradei as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog.

Taous Feroukhi, chairwoman of the agency’s 35-member board of governors, said that neither of the two candidates had secured a two-thirds majority in the first three rounds of voting so ‘‘we were not able at this stage’’ to elect a successor to Mr. ElBaradei, whose term expires in November.

The outcome raised the possibility of a stalemate that could lead to new candidates.

(HH here: That would be a disaster. The Japanese guy is already the best we could hope for. I mean really, who would be more dedicated to making sure NO ONE used the damn things as weapons ever again? He is solidly in the lead. He should get the leadership.)

Only last week President Barack Obama offered a video message to Iran urging the leadership in Tehran to talk out its many differences with the United States — an offer that was swiftly rebuffed by the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and other Iranian officials.

(HH: I keep telling my more conservative Friends that this reaching out is not naive at all. By putting countries like Iran in a corner by walking up with that Howdy Doody Grin of his and holding out his hand he makes THEM reject HIM. This frees up his possible responses considerably!! When the cruise missiles fly toward their nuclear facilities everyone in the world will see that it was IRAN that said they refused to talk.)

In the balloting Thursday, Yukiya Amano, 62, Japan’s ambassador to the organization, faced his South African counterpart, Abdul Samad Minty.

Under the organization’s rules, the winner needed 24 votes to secure a two-thirds majority.

But Ms. Feroukhi, who is from Algeria, said that in the first of three rounds Thursday Mr. Amano won 21 votes to Mr. Minty’s 14, while the margin in the second and third rounds was 20 to 15. Ms. Feroukhi was speaking to reporters in Vienna and her remarks were relayed by the I.A.E.A. on its Web site.

The agency’s rules provide for a second day of balloting Friday in which officials cast votes first for the leading candidate, and, if that ballot is inconclusive, for his rival. If neither wins, a new contest would be started from scratch.

(HH: That would really suck!!! Having someone outside the Europe-America/Islam conflict and from the only culture to have been on the receiving end is more than anyone could hope for!)

Both candidates are experienced diplomats and negotiators.

The choice of candidates reflects a division in the I.A.E.A. between those Western and industrialized nations that lead the nuclear club and see the atomic agency’s prime role as a watchdog (HH:in other words those who do not want ANYONE to EVER use the things again), and developing countries more interested in the broader use of nuclear energy. (HH:In other words the countries that have no clue that the bomb is anything more than a bigger popgun to threaten their neighbors with. They all feel that if countries like America can have them EVERYONE should have them. Atomic weapons do not level the playing field, too many players having them simply guarantees the playing field will be incinerated.)

Mr. Amano, depicted by experts as the candidate favored by the United States, favors a strict approach toward Iran, which Western countries contend is trying to build nuclear weapons.

Iran says that its nuclear program is purely for civilian purposes to generate energy.

Read it all by clicking on the title

From the top of the “this is not good” file

Sunday, March 08, 2009

Print ShareThisIran has launched a new long-range missile, Reuters reported Sunday, days after the Islamic Republic’s military chief warned Israel that Tehran’s missiles are within range of its nuclear facilities.

“Iran test fires new long range missile,” Press TV, Iran’s English-language television station, said in a scrolling headline, Reuters reported.

The report comes days after Iran’s military chief warned Israel that its nuclear facilities are within the range of Iranian missiles.

The warning from Revolutionary Guards commander Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari is the latest message from Tehran that it will strike back if attacked.

Israel and the United States suspect Iran’s nuclear program is a cover for weapons production and say they would not accept a nuclear-armed Iran.

Tehran denies the accusation and says its nuclear activity is for generating power.

Iran’s Shahab-3 missiles have a range of up to 1,250 miles, putting Israel within striking distance.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.

The proliferation chain that links North Korea and Iran


AP
THE final frontier is being assaulted by a couple of troubling pioneers. North Korean officials are boasting that they will soon launch a rocket that will lift a communications satellite into space. With this defiant spectacular, they seem to be cocking a snook at America, South Korea, Japan, China and Russia, who have been trying through six-party talks to curb North Korea’s equally vaunted nuclear-weapons efforts. Meanwhile, earlier in February, Iran—suspected of harbouring similar nuclear ambitions to North Korea’s, though it denies this—lifted its own small, supposedly home-made satellite into orbit too.

Both regimes trumpet their space prowess, and indeed such technological feats are not easy to achieve. But how do these “civilian” space efforts complement their terrestrial nuclear work? That is the question that deeply worries outsiders.

Quite simply, the technology needed to lift a satellite off the launch pad and shield it from damage on its way into space is indistinguishable from that needed to launch a far-flying nuclear-tipped ballistic missile.

… Kim Jong Il’s regime claims to have first embarked on its space adventures in 1998, when it launched a Taepodong-1 rocket over an alarmed Japan, across the Pacific towards a startled America. Mr Kim even issued a stamp to celebrate what was said to have been the successful launch of a satellite that had since been warbling patriotic tunes back from space. Oddly, no one else ever picked up its signal. A failed missile test, concluded America, after watching the rocket plop down in the Pacific.

Whether the satellite was a figment of Mr Kim’s imagination hardly matters. The latest promised test-launch will violate resolution 1718, which bans North Korea from all such activity. This was passed by the United Nations Security Council in 2006, unusually with China’s backing, after North Korea first tried (but failed) to launch a still more capable missile and then conducted what is thought to have been its first nuclear test. Its determination now to carry on launching regardless has led to speculation in some quarters that the missile, assuming it launches successfully, could even be shot down by the new ballistic-missile defences that Japan and America have been frantically cobbling together to protect Japan from North Korea’s missile threats.

…The North Korean media claim, not for the first time, that the two Koreas are at “the brink of war”, and that America is preparing a pre-emptive strike against the North.

Certainly Mr Kim is determined to look as threatening as possible. Writing in the Washington Post on February 19th, Selig Harrison, who is a frequent visitor to North Korea, said that the foreign-ministry and defence officials he talked to recently had left him with the impression that North Korea’s stash of plutonium (which is exhibit-A in the six-party talks, though there are lingering concerns that Mr Kim has also dabbled in enriched uranium, another possible bomb ingredient) had already been “weaponised”—that is, converted into missile warheads.

If that is the case, then North Korea’s “satellite” test will be doubly alarming. Although the 2006 nuclear test was thought to have fizzled, it may nonetheless have helped North Korea master a design for the sort of smaller warhead that a missile could carry.

Strutting its stuff
North Korea is evidently quite happy to brandish its bombs. It flounced out of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty back in 2003 after evidence emerged that it had been cheating on an earlier denuclearisation deal with America. Iran, by contrast, claims to be an NPT member in good standing. It insists that it has no use for nuclear weapons, and that all its nuclear activities, including a uranium-enrichment effort that continues to expand in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions and sanctions, are entirely peaceful in intent; the uranium, it says, is simply intended to fuel a future fleet of power stations.

Nothing if not brazen, it claims backhanded vindication in a controversial National Intelligence Estimate by America’s spooks, which concluded a little over a year ago that Iran had indeed had a bomb programme, but that it had stopped in 2003 when its formerly secret uranium activities came to light. But what that report failed to explain clearly was that Iran was continuing work quite openly on the two other necessary components of a weapons programme: first, uranium enrichment (with a bit of time and redirection of piping, low-enriched uranium can easily be turned into the highly enriched sort needed for a bomb) and efforts to produce plutonium; and second, the efforts under way for the development of a missile that could carry a nuclear warhead.

Iran tests its first nuclear power plant


BUSHEHR, Iran (CNN) — Iran tested its first nuclear power plant Wednesday, a stride that prompted one Iranian technician to declare it was “independence day” for the Islamic republic.

Officials said the next test will use enriched uranium, but it’s not clear when the test will be held or when the facility will be fully operational.

“Of course we’re proud. Our power plant is on its way to being ready,” engineer Mohsen Shirzai said. “We’re definitely proud.”

Russia’s nuclear power equipment and service export monopoly, Atomstroiexport, is building the plant under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency.

The United States, several European nations and Israel suspect Tehran has been trying to acquire the capacity to build nuclear weapons, but Iran has said its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. Watch the world’s reaction to the nuclear plant test »

Last week, the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security released a report stating that Iran has reached “nuclear weapons breakout capability” — it has enough uranium to make a nuclear bomb. The report was based on an analysis of IAEA data.

However, an IAEA official who asked not to be named cautioned against drawing such dramatic conclusions from the data, saying Iran’s stock of low-enriched uranium would have to be turned into highly enriched uranium to be weapons-grade material. That hasn’t been done, the official said.

Hassan Qashqavi, a spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, denied accusations that Iran intends to make a nuclear bomb.

“Based on our religion and our human values, we totally reject all kinds of using all these WMDs, weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear bombs,” Qashqavi said in an interview this week with CNN.

“We would like our Western friends to recognize our undeniable right to reach this technology peacefully,” he added.

Read the whole thing by clicking on the post title

(HH here: well it maybe OK and it may not. Iran can now build a bomb if it wants too, just not an efficient one able to be carried by plane or missile. If you find that consoling I have a friend by the name of Madoff you should talk to about investments.
The bottom line is whether NATO and the U.S. and Israel can depend on a nuclear capable Iran never wanting to weaponize it’s technology. That is a euphemism for building real bombs that can kill millions of people at a time. Poof! All dead, more dying. Of course after a bomb goes off we can identify the source of the nuclear material. That is a nice piece of information to put on the epitaph of the city that no longer exists due to a rogue device.

People often yammer about how the U.S. is STILL the only country to actually use an atomic bomb. Of course they ignore just how close Germany and Japan were to have an atomic weapon. You might notice I did not say close to having “the bomb”. From all historical accounts it seems that Japan HAD one. In fact it had two complete competing projects. One was i Japan and was bombed out of existence even though the Allies had no clue of the facility’s use. The other was in Korea and from all evidence got as far as completing at least one successful explosion of an atomic device. But there was no time to build and deploy a weapon. Nagasaki had been bombed three days before and only two days before the Supreme War Council had decided to capitulate. Because of an attempted coup the actual surrender was not announced until the 15th of august 1945 only 3 days after Japanese forces in Konan, Korea.

The remains of the Japanese atomic project in Korea was dismantled by the Soviets and personnel and material were removed to Russia.

From the first analysis of the use of Atomic bombs on Japanese soil it was apparent that they were a dead end technology more dangerous to use than to leave alone. The focus on weapons has almost always been about focusing force for a purpose. With atomic weapons there is NO focus. Just destruction. As mad as it was M.A.D. Mutually Assured Destruction was a stable situation. IT WAS unthinkable for the U.S. (or NATA) or the Soviets to actually “push the button” knowing the chaos it would unleash in the best of circumstances. Stalin was dead and the leaders of Russia and America were not insane.

But today the situation is not the same. While the early nuclear powers want nothing more than to negotiate the whole idea into oblivion the smaller and less stable view nuclear weapon as some sort to coming of age like growing a beard. They whine at the atomic powers that “you have it why can’t we have it TOO?” Missing completely the idea that we don’t want ANYONE to EVER use them. On ANYONE.

A Westerner knows in their bones that if we start throwing nuclear weapons around like grenades all bets are off and the world can essentially declare GAME OVER. The problem arises though that we have a number of regimes running around loose on this planet who think that breaking the bat and throwing away the ball and forcing the game to end simply because they are losing is a sacred ideology. What can you say of the mindset of someone who thinks nothing of threatening to nuke land they claim to want to occupy? Would M.A.D. mean anything to such a mind?

So, the question is not if the present regime is presently seeking to create usable atomic weapons. The question is, do the stable, peaceful nations of the world trust Iran to have the capability?