| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
By cracky, this will solve the Iranian nuke problem! Get the two biggest jihad-enablers to enrich uranium together -- in the heart of Europe! Now, why didn't I think of that?
"Saudi offers deal to end Iran nuclear stand-off," by Richard Beeston for the Times (thanks to Chris):
Saudi Arabia today revealed details of an ambitious offer to Tehran, aimed at defusing the growing crisis over Iran’s controversial nuclear programme.Speaking at the end of the state visit to London by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, his Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said that every effort must be made to avert what many fear could turn into a military confrontation between the United States and Iran.
Washington and Tehran again attacked each other over the issue today. Nicholas Burns, the US under-secretary of political affairs, said that America was pushing to impose new sanctions on Iran. In Tehran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened retaliation against Europe if it followed America’s lead.
At the heart of the problem is Iran’s uranium enrichment plant at Natanz. Iran insists that enriched uranium will be used purely as fuel for its nuclear reactor at Buhsher. America and other Western nations suspect that the Iranians want to produce highly enriched uranium for use as a warhead in an atomic bomb.
Prince Saud said that to defuse the row, Saudi Arabia and a consortium of Arab Gulf states had invited Iran to produce enriched uranium jointly, where the plant could be properly monitored by international observers.
“We have proposed a solution, which is to create a consortium for all users of enriched uranium to do it in a collective manner that would distribute (nuclear fuel) according to need,” he said. “We hope the Iranians will accept this proposal.”
He said that the proposed plant would be built in a neutral third country, like Switzerland.
Posted by Robert at November 2, 2007 7:32 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
I wonder if King Abdullah has discussed this fantastic deal with the Swiss (or any other neutral country)??
Posted by: livefreeordie!![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 2, 2007 7:50 AM
what prevents the jihadis i.e. saudis and iranians to further enrich the uranium to weapons grade.what a joke.
Posted by: logicalthinker at November 2, 2007 8:00 AM
Gee – I’ll bet the Swiss are excited about that really nifty idea!
Posted by: descendantofacrusader at November 2, 2007 8:13 AM
Good thing these two countries hate each other's guts, eh? Nothing like Islamania to smooth over differences. Perhaps both figure they can kill off one another after the green flag triumphs over the infidels and that this would be a great way to get that ball rolling.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 2, 2007 8:15 AM
I think the swiss People's Party would have a lot so say about that.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3204412.stm
Posted by: Briars at November 2, 2007 8:41 AM
Saudi Arabia is running out of oil, or oil is too expensive for the Saudis to afford to pay themselves, or something. That's why they have, or will soon have, such a pressing desire to start a nuclear program -- perhaps using this sweet-sounding effort in nice neutral careful sober prudent Switzerland, all designed, no doubt, to "bring Iran under control," as a good beginning.
Posted by: Hugh at November 2, 2007 9:13 AM
Robert
I think you mean:
"By Crykey!" Or plain old "Crykey" will do it too.
(Crocodile hunter, sadly missed)
If this post wasn't dated November 2nd, I would have picked April 1st.
Damn, those saudis are sneaky little bastards!
But we all know that.
If anyone need to be taken over it's them: not Iran.
Posted by: Gramfan at November 2, 2007 9:19 AM
But no, Saudi Arabia doesn't support terrorism in any way, shape, or form. Nope. Of course not. Why would anyone suggest such a thing? What are they, Islamophobes?
Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 2, 2007 9:22 AM
Russia raps Saudi atomic fuel proposal for Iran: RIA
Looks like the Russians aren't impressed.
Posted by: Gramfan at November 2, 2007 9:31 AM
That the Russians are upset doesn't surprise me one bit. They're opposed to the plan because THEY want to be the ones to help Iran develop their program. Putin is trying to establish himself more firmly, and Saudi Arabia is getting in the way.
Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at November 2, 2007 9:33 AM
Abdullah arrived in Geneva yesterday for a "private visit".
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/11/01/europe/EU-GEN-Britain-Saudi-Arabia.php
http://www.ajm.ch/wordpress/?p=887
at November 2, 2007 9:39 AM
OT:
Wow! Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week!!!!!!
Congratulations Robert, David, Hugh and all others involved. You have really managed to energize discussion on this critical topic. Even though much criticism has surfaced (which was expected) you really got people thinking. Traffic is really picking up, I see a lot of new faces in the forum. I look forward to the articles and comments each and every day. And, some of you commentors completely blow me away with you vast knowledge of history, religion and politics.
Keep up the good work friends.
at November 2, 2007 9:46 AM
Iran and Saudi Arabia are the two least likely countries in the world who would need nuclear energy. It would be better for the entire world, present and future generations, if they would instead jointly develop their own solar energy industry.
Posted by: DrMack at November 2, 2007 9:54 AM
Iran and Saudi Arabia are the two least likely countries in the world who would need nuclear energy. It would be better for the entire world, present and future generations, if they would instead jointly develop their own solar energy industry.
Posted by: DrMack at November 2, 2007 9:54 AM
Better yet for the world would be if they ditched the Koran and behaved like responsible nations for a change.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 2, 2007 10:21 AM
I'm sure the Swiss would be more than happy with this as long as they get some of those petro bucks. Switzerland is under heavy muslim immigration and will naturally oblige anything the saudis request.
Posted by: TheOmegaMan at November 2, 2007 10:49 AM
"I think the swiss People's Party would have a lot so say about that."
We do have referendums on such matters,
.. and for once, the Left and the Green would agree.
at November 2, 2007 11:00 AM
It's going to be an interesting Century.
Posted by: pez at November 2, 2007 12:16 PM
The Saudi credo:
Let's fund 80% of the mosques in the West and let's suggest that these have Wahhabi imams who can remind the laity that Christians and Jews are to be shunned as apes and pigs.
Is this hate in the koran or is it hate ?
Forget the uranium enrichment and think of what the House of Saud are doing: they are masking hate under the guise of our tolerance of religion, and that is unforgiveable, must not be given a pass and must be exposed.
Posted by: dgene at November 2, 2007 12:50 PM
The proposal could be made to seem attractive. Civilian nuclear power plants do not need highly enriched uranium because the reactors can be designed to be large to minimize the loss of neutrons from the core.
Weapons-grade uranium needs to be highly enriched because of the small size of warheads. The Saudis could argue that by restricting uranium enrichment to civilian-use levels of enrichment, their plan is a win-win. Mohammed el-IAEA is probably making their case.
Problem is, once you’ve got a reactor up and running, the reactor itself generates weapons-grade material. Details, details.
at November 2, 2007 1:03 PM
My first question was, "did they consult Switzerland before making the press release"? Then it occurred to me that the Saudis probably own most of the gold in the secret Swiss Bank accounts.
--
CT Yank
at November 2, 2007 1:12 PM
Re: Saudis to Iran: Let's enrich uranium together, in Switzerland!
"Hey, look-what's a little nuclear arms among fiends, right? After all, we are both Jew-haters and feel the same way about Kuffirs, right"?
at November 2, 2007 1:37 PM
"Iran insists that enriched uranium will be used purely as fuel for its nuclear reactor at Buhsher."
Oh really. Then by what means were you planning on WIPING ISRAEL OFF OF THE MAP?!!!! And those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.
Posted by: champ at November 2, 2007 1:45 PM
I've got a better proposal.
Build it here in the USA.
Am I wrong in thinking the Saudi already have nuclear power?
The threat I'm-a-nut-job made about disrupting the Persian Gulf is the real reason for the stock market tank on Thursday.
The housing market is having a huge effect on banking of course and it ain't over yet. It took the better part of a year for our foreclosure to wind itself out. Those pesky adjustables can be Hell.
Most of the people who are in this dilemma will be seeing real problems quite a ways down the road.
A lot of the McMansions are not re-salable as our house was and these people are often credit-maxed to the hilt. This will get a lot worse before it gets better. I am afraid we will be seeing people at the end of their ropes, ala 1929.
I can only hope the Saudi's lose a lot due to being behind the shady mortgage deals.
at November 2, 2007 2:04 PM
What we have here is a degenerate Middle Eastern country making an offer to another degenerate Middle Eastern country about utilizing Western nuclear technology, a technology neither the Arabs nor the Iranians would have ever been able to develop on their own initiative since Islam ensures backwardness across an entire society once it gets a hold of a people. Yes, indeed, the ultimate parasite is Islam.
Posted by: Wellington at November 2, 2007 2:09 PM
RE BOMBING OF SYRIAN NUCLEAR REACTOR:
Al Jezeera Says: The US Air Force with the assistance of the Israeli air cover dropped tactical nuclear bombs on the reactor construction site.
1. First they don’t say anything
2. Then they say it was just an unauthorized incursion into their air space
3. Then when allegations were raised that N Korea sold them a reactor, they denied it but changed their story and agree that they were bombed.
4. Then they demo and scrape the site clean in less than a week.
5. Now they say we nuked them.
Sounds like they couldn't remove all traces of radioactive contamination at the site. Can’t wait to see the new Hamas and Hezbollah approved protest signs.
at November 2, 2007 3:55 PM
There is that saying, again: "Me against my brother, but both of us against our cousin".
The Sunni Saudis will work together with the Shi'ite Iranians, just long enough to kill (or subjegate) the infidels.
When wishing for a peaceful Middle East, be careful what you wish for.
Posted by: special_guest at November 2, 2007 4:00 PM
Who cares where it is produced. It is people getting it that's the problem. Now the Saudi's want to fund it? How swell of them.
Where is this Sunni/Shi split we hear so much about?
It must be one of those rare ocassions in History where the Factions in Islamic Tribel Life come to some understanding long enough to cause trouble with the Infidel.
The Slow and the Fast causing problems for all the rest of us.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at November 2, 2007 4:15 PM
Grimm-
Just like Islam. One Lie after another.
I always wondered how long the Radiation signature would take to be confirmed in some manor. This should be front page information.
Now Nuclear Forensics will determine where it was produced.
At some point Sparky's Fuse is going to get lit.
It is quickly going beyond Iran
Posted by: flowerknife_us at November 2, 2007 4:25 PM
By Crikey-Shias and Sunnis willing to share Nuclear Bed! As long as both are fighting Infidels-that is. Crafty King Abdullah mentioned
nary a word of intentions to Brits-both countries
having so many 'shared interests' that one would have imagined Gordon Brown's obsequious Govt would
have been offered the contract as 'neutral'
country instead of Switzerland.
at November 2, 2007 5:35 PM
The Iranians are 100% sincere and earnest in insisting that their nuclear program is intended for peaceful purposes.
Unfortunately, Iran, along with the vast bulk of the Islamic world, defines 'peace' in two broad terms, being (a) No more Israel, and (b) The whole world under Islamic rule.
Since it was hostage-taking that put their revolutionary regime on the map, I don't see why we should expect anything other than nuclear blackmail should they be allowed to wield the bomb.
Posted by: Goob at November 2, 2007 5:58 PM
Goob-
You are exactly right. When the Psychotic talks of peace he means that only a piece of Israel will be left for Jewish Dhimmis in former Israel and a piece of the world will left for the rest of the Dhimmi Kuffirs in a Fibrahim Hooper-Uriah Heep O'bunglawallah "Islam must dominate" world.
No thanks, runts.
Posted by: Frank at November 2, 2007 6:57 PM
I would like the price for this fuel to be in the $100,000 a micro ounce range. With a minimum purchase of what would be the cost of a year fighting in Iraq. And no more fuel than what would provide the power of a few thousand homes per year. Oh, and ask the Japanese if they would not mind being the neutral country.
I got it, build a nuclear power plant in a third world country and a high power transmission line running to Iran. If they get frisky we can always cut the power. SIMPLE
All in all its a bad idea because you can't trust the idiots as far as you can spit. Stop the attacks world wide and then after ten years of peace we might see who we could trust.
Ecc 8:8
No one has power over the spirit to retain the spirit,
And no one has power in the day of death.
There is no release from that war,
And wickedness will not deliver those who are given to it.
رعايه الطفولة المبكره 8:8
وليس لأحد سلطة على روح الابقاء على الروح ، وليس لأحد سلطة في يوم من الموت.
ليس هناك افراج عن تلك الحرب ،
و الشر لن تسليم اولئك الذين ترد اليها.
at November 2, 2007 7:02 PM
what if the swiss people dont want this? oh that's right, the UN will demand it and then set the EU to impose sanctions. (of course this is all a coincidence timing with the right wing in switzerland gaining massive support.)
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 2, 2007 8:19 PM
lol@ topic...as if that's actually going to happen...
Now, contain your shock & surprise everyone...
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380720002&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Bahrain says 'Iran trying to acquire nuclear weapons'
at November 2, 2007 11:30 PM
As the M.E. runs dry of the oil, they would do much better turning to any other form of power production. Nuclear is VERY costly, in every way, shape and form, along with the dangers of storage of spent waste.
If cost is considered, they would do well to look elsewhere.
The agenda of islam will take the lead, from bad to worse. I would like to know what the current leadership of the U.S. thinks of this idea from our great "frends" in the kingdom.
Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at November 3, 2007 1:29 AM
2010 Generation Costs in US:
$0.46/kw/hr: Nuclear
$0.37/kw/hr: Coal
$0.49/kw/hr: Gas
Lose reactionary anal operating restrictions and nuclear becomes low-cost option by wide margin. Nuclear power is our future.
http://www.uic.com.au/nip08.htm
at November 3, 2007 1:53 AM
Aunt Bea
If you are still checking this thread could you put in some more info re the foreclosures? I saw something similar on an Irish news site and it is no longer there.
Thanks:)
Posted by: Gramfan at November 3, 2007 2:04 AM
Gramfam;
It’s real; tracking some highlights:
http://www.brickoven.blogspot.com
at November 3, 2007 2:23 AM
pez,
any more re the involvement of the saudis?
Also the Aussie dollar is the highest it has been in many years - 93 US cents. Although this is good for me if I buy stuff at Amazon, it is rather disconcerting.
thanks:)
at November 3, 2007 3:09 AM
Gramfan; A big-boy banker friend explained to me that, no matter what, the federal government cannot let the big banks fail. The solution is to drive the dollar into the dirt. The problem is that once you start printing money…
The Saudis are small change in the big picture.
Posted by: pez at November 3, 2007 3:20 AM
Pez,
thanks again.I am very interested in this.
(gotta go out, but I'll check back later).
at November 3, 2007 3:28 AM
Seconding gramfan - right now with the Australian dollar riding high (I'm sure it won't last that long) is a GREAT time for any Australian readers and lurkers here to stock up on any Robert Spencer, Bat Yeor, Andrew Bostom, etc etc must-have books that you do not currently have or that you are thinking of getting for friends, family, your state and federal member of parliament/ mayor/ parish priest/ church library/ school library, and so on.
Relevant to the topic under discussion - we Australians, like the Canadians, are sitting on a LOT of the hot stuff (we've got some of the biggest reserves of it in the world, period, which is why both Russia and China were cosying up to us at APEC). What's more, all those reserves are in our north end, way too close to Moderate Muslim Indonesia for comfort. Well-equipped Indonesian fishing trawlers are already raiding our territorial waters all along our northwest coast and pinching our fish and clams wholesale - classic Muslim raiding techniques, they've devastated their own fisheries and now they're setting out to ruin ours.
I kind of wonder what's coming next.
Some time ago I read a gushing article in the National Indigenous Times online, raving about this WONDERFUL Muslim guy, one Abdul Khan - from Afghanistan via Pakistan, came to Australia in the 1970s, who's been tooling around the Top End doing daawa among the Aborigines and PR with Euro-Australians ever since. He founded a mosque in Darwin and currently runs the one in Alice Springs, along with a nice daawa program involving getting Aboriginal men off the grog (and, presumably, trying to hook them onto Islam while he's at it).
And he's a geologist by training. And I'll bet my bottom dollar that in his travels over the past 30 years he's been making notes on every mineral resource we've got in West Australia and the Northern Territory, especially the stuff that can be used to make WMDs.
(BTW an Aussie company recently made a nice little oil strike on our land territory...).
Frankly, I hope ASIO has got their eye on him. Because everything about his biography, as described in the article, screamed "sleeper!" "mole!" "scout sussing out the future booty!"
Because he's not a 'Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslim. HE BUILDS MOSQUES.
I'd just love to know who his father and his uncles and brothers are, and his cousins, and his tribe, back home in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and which mosques they go to. And whether his wife is Australian or Pakistani. And how often he goes back to the Old Country to visit, and who he visits while he's there. And what kind of sermons are preached in Darwin and Alice Springs when the Infidels aren't there; and what kind of literature they keep in the mosque library.
Being as I'm a housewife-and-mother with limited resources, I can't do that kind of research. But I hope SOMEONE is! (If any Australian journalist or ASIO employee is lurking here, PLEASE investigate this Abdul Khan guy in Alice Springs - thoroughly. Turn his background and biography inside out).
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at November 3, 2007 3:34 AM
'It's going to be an interesting Century.
Posted by: pez'
...for the buffoons who refuse to combat the Islamic onslaught...it will be an abbreviated century....
at November 3, 2007 10:04 AM
It's going to be an interesting Century.Posted by: pez'
I wish we had a century... we may be able to wait for a reformation or the aging of the Islamic population, but we don't have the luxury of time here. We have ? 10 years ?
We'll see more of this:
RE BOMBING OF SYRIAN NUCLEAR REACTOR:Al Jezeera Says: The US Air Force with the assistance of the Israeli air cover dropped tactical nuclear bombs on the reactor construction site.
1. First they don’t say anything
2. Then they say it was just an unauthorized incursion into their air space
3. Then when allegations were raised that N Korea sold them a reactor, they denied it but changed their story and agree that they were bombed.
4. Then they demo and scrape the site clean in less than a week.
5. Now they say we nuked them.Sounds like they couldn't remove all traces of radioactive contamination at the site. Can’t wait to see the new Hamas and Hezbollah approved protest signs.
Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at November 2, 2007 3:55 PM
I'm getting impatient. The clock is ticking but American Idol is on at eight. Help me make it through the night..
at November 3, 2007 10:47 AM
"The pro-nuclear argument relies on twofold inhibition. Amid contrary facts, the economic advantages are praised. The risks are minimized or declared technically surmountable. At the same time, renewable energies are denounced as uneconomical, with their potential marginalized in order to underscore the indispensability of nuclear energy..."
Pez,
There are two sides to the issue, the site you link to is like sending one to a immam to learn about islam.
Do you really believe 70 people died from the nuclear disaster in Russia? That the Nevada Nuclear waste storage site is without issues?
Why have concern about the followers of islam, and their chase of power of Nuclear reactors, can we decide who gets this type of energy? What about the U.K., and the growing threat of islam inside the borders of these countrys and states, with the access to the nuclear plants, weppons?
These ,and other questions should be considered before any decide its all going to happen, like it or not.
Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at November 5, 2007 3:07 AM
Japan's earthquake damage at nuclear plant..
and..
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/12/asia_letter/main3256647.shtml
And then the U.N. take of the issue..
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/93742.html
The point is there are two sides, which you decide to listen to should be based on truth, and details of both sides positions.
And Deans World looks to support Nuke power as well.
Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at November 5, 2007 4:01 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)