Gutless Americans and Kisan of Mukto Mona
The gutless “kisan” of so called “Mukto-Mona” is not only an alleged child molester! This person is also a Zionised hypocrite and deliberately polluting our group for a long time with blatant and false anti-Muslim and anti-Arab filths. This shameless creepy crawly should be volunteering to the nearest gas chamber as it is long overdue.
Gutless kisan is silent about How the hell the American Terrorists gained the right to terrorise Iran or anyone for that matter? or Israeli slaves Nuclear Terrorism!
The Enemy of Mankind is Israel, Why do we have to suffer for Zionist Israel?, Why the hell we are tolerating this terrorist state? and We Got the Right to Punish Israel; the article below supports the fact that the whole world earned the right to eliminate this terrorist state called Israel. They are a threat to world peace and enemy of mankind.
The gutless “kisan” of so called “Mukto-Mona” is not only an alleged child molester! This person is also a Zionised hypocrite and deliberately polluting our group for a long time with blatant and false anti-Muslim and anti-Arab filths. This shameless creepy crawly should be volunteering to the nearest gas chamber as it is long overdue.
Gutless kisan is silent about How the hell the American Terrorists gained the right to terrorise Iran or anyone for that matter? or Israeli slaves Nuclear Terrorism!
The Enemy of Mankind is Israel, Why do we have to suffer for Zionist Israel?, Why the hell we are tolerating this terrorist state? and We Got the Right to Punish Israel; the article below supports the fact that the whole world earned the right to eliminate this terrorist state called Israel. They are a threat to world peace and enemy of mankind.
Amazing: PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know, I think in terms of the Israel question we certainly have not seen any indication that Israel is ready to introduce nuclear weapons as a weapon into the region.
This is a transcript from PM. The program is broadcast around Australia at 5:10p
Source: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2291334.htm
US State Department representative speaks on nuclear weapons
PM - Tuesday, 1 July , 2008 18:24:00
Reporter: Mark Colvin
Reporter: Mark Colvin
MARK COLVIN: The thaw in North Korea's relations with the rest of the world had its most visible expression a few days ago, with TV pictures of the cooling tower at the Yongbyon nuclear power plant being blown up.
But that was just another stage in a process that began towards the end of last year, in which the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program achieved a breakthrough.
The North Koreans agreed then to allow a six person US team to go in and observe the shutdown of the plant. In return, North Korea gets 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil.
The US is denying flatly that the arrival of a big consignment of emergency food in North Korea on Sunday is part of the same trade-off.
Patricia McNerney is Acting Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation with the US State Department.
She told me today the US team was still at Yongbyon, and the shutdown was being verified.
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, the team has been there basically overseeing and in some ways directing the disablement actions.
All the work is being done by North Koreans on the ground that are actually carrying out the disablement actions, but we've got some experts from our Department of Energy as well as our State Department giving guidance, giving ideas, basically making sure it's done according to the agreed implementation plan to do these disablement actions.
MARK COLVIN: So how sure are you then that it's all being done? I mean has it been completely transparent?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: It has been completely transparent, and in fact our experts are there watching the whole program.
And my bureau basically has the source of the funding for all of this activity. And we have a manager who's also in Pyongyang who is also coordinating with the North Korean authorities and making sure that we're doing it all as we agreed and as we've laid out.
MARK COLVIN: But John Bolton who used to be the top East Asia diplomat for the US and who is now sniping from the sidelines says that you've had the wool pulled over your eyes, and that the North Koreans, for instance, the cooling … they could do it without a cooling tower if they're prepared to pollute the environment enough.
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, John Bolton who used to be the Under Secretary of State actually and a former boss of mine has been critical of this agreement.
He, I think he's rightly, is sceptical of North Korean intentions, but in fact our own Secretary last week in her speech in Washington, as well as our President said, "Look, this is all about verifying. We're not going to just take the word of the North Koreans."
We've got agreements, we're implementing them. The next step is to put in place a serious verification regime, and that verification regime is our ability to make sure that what they say and what they promise are in fact what is carried out.
MARK COLVIN: The other really big non-proliferation hot spot of course is the Middle East. Seymour Hersh, the investigative journalist has a piece in the latest New Yorker, which suggests that the Bush administration has just diverted quite a large sum of money to intelligence on Iran's nuclear program and to operations inside Iran.
Do you have any comment on that?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, you know, I've never seen a writer get it wrong so many times and still get credence every time he writes something. Our ambassador in Iraq was very clear in his statements and he called them completely incorrect and not accurate. So let our ambassador speak for the United States on that.
MARK COLVIN: So what is the United States' position at the moment on Iran's nuclear program?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: The United States' is working through the so-called P5+1 process, working together to push the Iranians to reassess their decision to pursue a nuclear program through the UN Security Council. We have outlined a number of sanctions, measures, that are binding in all states.
And we've also said that we're going to stop those sanctions if Iran ceases its enrichment reprocessing activities. And additionally we've created a package of incentives that were Iran to cease its enrichment and reprocessing activities, we are prepared to negotiate a number of benefits that flow from that package, including even development of civil and nuclear energy cooperation in a way that obviously is not proliferation sensitive.
MARK COLVIN: Meantime, though, there's a constant drumbeat particularly from Israel saying you've got very little time to do anything about this and that Iran may be a year, two years, three years away from a nuclear weapon and that the suggestion is that the Israelis may do something about it.
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Obviously, Israel sees Iran as the existential threat, will obviously look at its own strategic interest. Our national intelligence estimate says the worst case scenario is 2009, but more likely the development of the fissile material needed for a nuclear weapon would occur into the next decade.
So there is some time to make diplomacy work, not a lot of time, and we are committed to work through the diplomatic path. A mix of sanctions, of pressure, a collaboration with our partners.
Not only in the P5+1, but also in the Gulf region as well as working closely here in Asia. Many of the supplies and the (inaudible) items that are getting to Iran for these programs have a source here.
MARK COLVIN: Whenever we look at this subject on this program, I get emails and letters from people saying, "Well, Israel's got the nuclear bomb. Why is there not similar outrage about that? Because they're outside the non-proliferation treaty too."
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Well Iran is a member of the non-proliferation treaty. They ratified it, they committed to implement it, and we believe they are acting in contravention to that binding legal commitment that they took. And so, this process…
MARK COLVIN: That really doesn't answer the question about Israel though, does it?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know, I think in terms of the Israel question we certainly have not seen any indication that Israel is ready to introduce nuclear weapons as a weapon into the region.
MARK COLVIN: What do you mean?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: And they have always indicated as a better policy that is not … that they will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the region.
MARK COLVIN: You mean no first strike? I mean that doesn't say they haven't got them?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know I sort of don't want to articulate their policy, that's something that they've done.
MARK COLVIN: So the US doesn't believe Israel has a nuclear weapon?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: I really wouldn't want to characterise what the US calculations, our assessments are on that point.
My major point would be that Iran is pursuing its nuclear weapons in contravention to its legal commitments. Iran is also a deep, stabilised force in the region.
MARK COLVIN: What I'm asking you, that the people write in and they say, "Why get so worried about Iran's nuclear weapons, when everybody knows that Israel has the nuclear weapon?"
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: I think we all need to be worried about Iran. It's a destabilising influence in the region. It's supplying arms, not only to Iraqi insurgents, but even to its sworn enemy, the Taliban. It is supplying support to Hezbollah, it is supporting actions on the part of Syria.
So it is having a larger destabilising influence in the region. It is also has the potential for the nuclear cascade. If you look at countries in the Gulf states, they look to Iran and were Iran to acquire the nuclear weapons capability, the potential for further acquisition of nuclear weapons capabilities in that region would certainly augment in the view of many who have assessed that region.
MARK COLVIN: Patricia McNerney, Acting Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation with the US State Department.
But that was just another stage in a process that began towards the end of last year, in which the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program achieved a breakthrough.
The North Koreans agreed then to allow a six person US team to go in and observe the shutdown of the plant. In return, North Korea gets 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil.
The US is denying flatly that the arrival of a big consignment of emergency food in North Korea on Sunday is part of the same trade-off.
Patricia McNerney is Acting Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation with the US State Department.
She told me today the US team was still at Yongbyon, and the shutdown was being verified.
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, the team has been there basically overseeing and in some ways directing the disablement actions.
All the work is being done by North Koreans on the ground that are actually carrying out the disablement actions, but we've got some experts from our Department of Energy as well as our State Department giving guidance, giving ideas, basically making sure it's done according to the agreed implementation plan to do these disablement actions.
MARK COLVIN: So how sure are you then that it's all being done? I mean has it been completely transparent?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: It has been completely transparent, and in fact our experts are there watching the whole program.
And my bureau basically has the source of the funding for all of this activity. And we have a manager who's also in Pyongyang who is also coordinating with the North Korean authorities and making sure that we're doing it all as we agreed and as we've laid out.
MARK COLVIN: But John Bolton who used to be the top East Asia diplomat for the US and who is now sniping from the sidelines says that you've had the wool pulled over your eyes, and that the North Koreans, for instance, the cooling … they could do it without a cooling tower if they're prepared to pollute the environment enough.
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, John Bolton who used to be the Under Secretary of State actually and a former boss of mine has been critical of this agreement.
He, I think he's rightly, is sceptical of North Korean intentions, but in fact our own Secretary last week in her speech in Washington, as well as our President said, "Look, this is all about verifying. We're not going to just take the word of the North Koreans."
We've got agreements, we're implementing them. The next step is to put in place a serious verification regime, and that verification regime is our ability to make sure that what they say and what they promise are in fact what is carried out.
MARK COLVIN: The other really big non-proliferation hot spot of course is the Middle East. Seymour Hersh, the investigative journalist has a piece in the latest New Yorker, which suggests that the Bush administration has just diverted quite a large sum of money to intelligence on Iran's nuclear program and to operations inside Iran.
Do you have any comment on that?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, you know, I've never seen a writer get it wrong so many times and still get credence every time he writes something. Our ambassador in Iraq was very clear in his statements and he called them completely incorrect and not accurate. So let our ambassador speak for the United States on that.
MARK COLVIN: So what is the United States' position at the moment on Iran's nuclear program?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: The United States' is working through the so-called P5+1 process, working together to push the Iranians to reassess their decision to pursue a nuclear program through the UN Security Council. We have outlined a number of sanctions, measures, that are binding in all states.
And we've also said that we're going to stop those sanctions if Iran ceases its enrichment reprocessing activities. And additionally we've created a package of incentives that were Iran to cease its enrichment and reprocessing activities, we are prepared to negotiate a number of benefits that flow from that package, including even development of civil and nuclear energy cooperation in a way that obviously is not proliferation sensitive.
MARK COLVIN: Meantime, though, there's a constant drumbeat particularly from Israel saying you've got very little time to do anything about this and that Iran may be a year, two years, three years away from a nuclear weapon and that the suggestion is that the Israelis may do something about it.
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Obviously, Israel sees Iran as the existential threat, will obviously look at its own strategic interest. Our national intelligence estimate says the worst case scenario is 2009, but more likely the development of the fissile material needed for a nuclear weapon would occur into the next decade.
So there is some time to make diplomacy work, not a lot of time, and we are committed to work through the diplomatic path. A mix of sanctions, of pressure, a collaboration with our partners.
Not only in the P5+1, but also in the Gulf region as well as working closely here in Asia. Many of the supplies and the (inaudible) items that are getting to Iran for these programs have a source here.
MARK COLVIN: Whenever we look at this subject on this program, I get emails and letters from people saying, "Well, Israel's got the nuclear bomb. Why is there not similar outrage about that? Because they're outside the non-proliferation treaty too."
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Well Iran is a member of the non-proliferation treaty. They ratified it, they committed to implement it, and we believe they are acting in contravention to that binding legal commitment that they took. And so, this process…
MARK COLVIN: That really doesn't answer the question about Israel though, does it?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know, I think in terms of the Israel question we certainly have not seen any indication that Israel is ready to introduce nuclear weapons as a weapon into the region.
MARK COLVIN: What do you mean?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: And they have always indicated as a better policy that is not … that they will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the region.
MARK COLVIN: You mean no first strike? I mean that doesn't say they haven't got them?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know I sort of don't want to articulate their policy, that's something that they've done.
MARK COLVIN: So the US doesn't believe Israel has a nuclear weapon?
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: I really wouldn't want to characterise what the US calculations, our assessments are on that point.
My major point would be that Iran is pursuing its nuclear weapons in contravention to its legal commitments. Iran is also a deep, stabilised force in the region.
MARK COLVIN: What I'm asking you, that the people write in and they say, "Why get so worried about Iran's nuclear weapons, when everybody knows that Israel has the nuclear weapon?"
PATRICIA MCNERNEY: I think we all need to be worried about Iran. It's a destabilising influence in the region. It's supplying arms, not only to Iraqi insurgents, but even to its sworn enemy, the Taliban. It is supplying support to Hezbollah, it is supporting actions on the part of Syria.
So it is having a larger destabilising influence in the region. It is also has the potential for the nuclear cascade. If you look at countries in the Gulf states, they look to Iran and were Iran to acquire the nuclear weapons capability, the potential for further acquisition of nuclear weapons capabilities in that region would certainly augment in the view of many who have assessed that region.
MARK COLVIN: Patricia McNerney, Acting Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation with the US State Department.
