Macho McManly And The Simpleton's Doom

How Right Wing Fake "Tough Guy" and Chicken-Hawk Posturing Weakened a Nation, Attacked The Constitution, And Set American Progress Back Decades Or More

by Glenn Greenwald

A Dirty, Un-Serious Fringe Hippie

Just in case anyone is curious, El Baradei is of the opinion that IF a country can refine nuclear materials properly -- which is apparently important, given that Iraq had thousands and thousands and thousands of tons of low grade uranium and yet never made a bomb -- then they are "months away" from an atomic bomb.

from Transcript of the Director General´s Interview on Iran

SKY NEWS with James Rubin

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2006/skynews09012006.html

Aired 9 January 2006

SKY NEWS: To achieve that solution requires drawing a very delicate line between what is permitted by the Iranians in the area of, let´s call it pure research, and what is prohibited because it raises questions about the ability to enrich uranium. Drawing that line is the key to a successful negotiation. Where would you draw the line on permitted research for Iran? For example, would you draw the line that they could use some centrifuges but not so many that they could enrich uranium to a high level?

ELBARADEI: Well, the issue is very complex, Jamie, because as a matter of law Iran has the right to do all the nuclear activities, including enriching uranium, but that´s another issue where I have been bringing that issue to the attention of the international community saying in fact that we need to revisit the whole non-proliferation regime that not Iran or any other country should continue to have a full exclusive right to enrich uranium.

SKY NEWS: You agree on that line internationally?

ELBARADEI: Exactly, because if every country were to have an enrichment factory, that means they are really a few months away from a nuclear weapon which is a very thin margin of security. However, as a matter of law Iran has that right, nobody is questioning Iran´s right similar to everybody else, what people are saying is because of the history of the Iranian programme, because of the confidence deficit that has been created, we need to go through a transitional period meaning that Iran should not go now into an enrichment programme but make sure that Iran will get all its needs for civilian purposes through outside supply. The Russians have been making a very interesting proposal that they will establish a joint venture with Iran, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Russia who I just talked to this morning is going there over the weekend to discuss with Iran the Russian proposal and the Russian proposal in no way takes away Iran´s rights, it is simply saying let us go through a transitional period whereby we can build confidence, Iran can build confidence by which we will enrich in Russia, in the context of a joint venture, and let´s review that in say five, ten years from now. So I think that´s an excellent proposal.

So one thing El Baradei is emphasizing is that it's really not so difficult to build an atomic weapon IF you can get sufficiently processed radioactive materials.

Another important thing about that is that El-Baradei did not say that Iran had actually achieved such refining successes, despite the vague wording as quoted in the earlier-cited Jerusalem Post article.

John Kerry and 'em other fakers was just making stuff up. They talked a lot and tried to say that stuff happened one time o'v'ere in Vietnam but it didn't, they just made it all up and I heard this guy one time he proved it.

I don't even think there even was a war, maybe there was just this country over there and a lot of planes and American guys in some sort of uniforms but that don't prove that there was a war or nothing.

A lot of people say bad stuff happened somewhere over there like 30 or so years ago, but it didn't, those are just people who hate America, and I heard this other guy one time say that we never really went to the moon, it was all a bunch a pictures they took in Hollywood.

The single best two daily news broadcasts I have ever encountered in English are the morning and afternoon (for US Eastern, afternoon and evening UTC) edition of the BBC World Service's NewsHour.

Not the TV version, which isn't bad. But the radio version, which truly is aimed at the entire English speaking world including all those '3rd world' areas listening via shortwave, is just a mark above everything else.

I believe they are in the process of renaming it as Global News, but it is offered online either in streaming format or as a podcast.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/newshour/

Government officials do not get away with simply making vague or unsupported statements on this program.

OK people. One last time, and I'll speak slowly for the less fortunate.

I would be more fortunate if Pooter4x4 really did comment for the last time. But we are all less fortunate, because that's not what he meant. Darn.

Just in case the feeling of having been betrayed by an establishment which appears to care neither about any defensible principles nor of the strongly held yet admirable beliefs of the U.S. public begins to get you down...

...keep in mind that's not a new situation for us to be in.

Every time movements of people manage to get the U.S. government to follow morally defensible and objectively justifiable policies, or to respond also to worthwhile views of its public, it's an innovation. A victory. An accomplishment.

There was never any Constitutional Eden we had achieved which we lost; it has been for this nation's entire existence just an ongoing struggle, all the time, between the various forces of decency and democracy versus the typically power-holding forces of indecency and dangerous plutocracies.