Some Middle East rulers are like Paul’s Cretians!
OBAMA, Ahmadinejad, AND ASSAD Administrations,
Have a VERY obvious characteristic in their Governing,
Having no transparency in their Governmental Programs!
Maybe IAEA should inspect Democratic closed Door Sessions
To find particles of concealed motives for ramming Opaque Bills
Down Throats of Americans Who are Being FOOLED by Politicians,
Who certainly have built up records demonstrating Cretian Behavior
Like Political Parties LED BY the Ahmadinejad & Assad Administrations!
November 21, 2009
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
Titus 1:12 – One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
Slow bellies. That is, “lazy gluttons
Here Paul is quoting from a Cretian poet and reputed prophet by the name of Epeminides who lived about six hundred years before Christ. Paul confirmed that this deplorable reputation was still valid in his day among the Cretians.
The highly-educated Paul, in inspired New Testament scripture, quoted three times from the works of Greek poets. These quotations are:
In Acts 17:28, Paul said and Luke wrote, “For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.” This is a quotation of a passage from Aratus’ Phaenomena 9.
In Titus 1:12,13, Paul quotes a saying from the 6th century BC Cretan poet Epeminides, found in his De Oraculis, and follows it by saying, “This witness is true…
In I Corinthians 15:33, Paul quotes from Menander’s Thais.
Begin Excerpt 1 from THE JERUSALEM POST
Preserving Cretan Jewry
November 19, 2009
STEPHEN GABRIEL ROSENBERG , THE JERUSALEM POST
On June 8, 1944 the Greek tanker Tanias, commandeered by the Germans, was torpedoed by the British submarine HMS Vivid 53 km.
west of Heraklion, capital of the Greek island of Crete. Aboard were several hundred Greek and Italian prisoners of war, and all of the 265 Jews of Crete, many of them children.
They had been taken by trucks, concentrated by the Nazis into a camp in Heraklion, herded onto the ship and were being sent off to Piraeus on the Greek mainland in transit to the death camps of Poland. There they were destined to meet their end by gassing, hard labor and starvation. The prisoners of war were to be forwarded to work in labor camps for the Nazi war effort, and would also most likely meet their deaths there.
As a result of the torpedoing, all the passengers and crew sank to a watery grave.
Admiralty records state that it was wartime policy to attack all enemy ships coming out of the harbors of Crete, which were being used to transport German troops back to the mainland, and the Royal Navy had several submarines on standby to monitor the ports.
Today, out of a total population of more than half a million, the Jews of Crete number just seven men and three women, and there is no official monument to those who perished in 1944. Of the eight or so synagogues that stood on the island before World War II, none remained after the German occupation of 1941 to 1944. All, except for one, were vandalized, taken over by squatters and eventually demolished.
Hania, the provincial capital of western Crete, had boasted two synagogues of which one, Beth Shalom, was destroyed by German bombing in the initial attack on Crete in 1941.
The other, Etz Haim, withstood the war but in a ru
ined state. It stood in the old Jewish quarter, called Ovraiki, around the original harbor, later extended by the Venetians, who called the area “Zudeccha” or Jewish ghetto.
Begin Excerpt 2 from DEBKAfile
IAEA wants to inspect three secret Syrian nuclear sites
DEBKAfile Special Report
November 16, 2009, 10:53 PM (GMT+02:00)
The new IAEA report on Iran’s formerly secret uranium enrichment site at Fordo near Qom also includes a section on Syria and a demand to inspect suspicious sites there too. The inspectors clearly suspect Both Tehran and Damascus of concealing from the UN nuclear watchdog secret facilities related to nuclear weapons production. Monday, Nov. 16, the seven-page IAEA inspectors’ report on their October visit to Fordo stated clearly that Tehran’s belated declaration of its uranium enrichment site suggested that more secret sites remained to be discovered in Iran.
With regard to Syria, IAEA inspectors are to visit Damascus on Tuesday, Nov. 17, for clarifications of the conflicting explanations Syria has offered for uranium traces. They will also insist on making return visits to three military sites which Damascus has so far refused, following information received by the agency of clandestine “nuclear activity” there. DEBKAfile’s intelligence sources reveal that Israel hit one of three at the same time as its air force bombed the unfinished plutonium plant at Dair Alzour in 2007, although this was never admitted by Israel or Syria.
The nuclear watchdog wants a close survey of this site because it is certain the ground would yield up important clues to Syria covert nuclear weapons program. Permission has been denied for a visit there as well as a request to visit to the Euphrates River’s west bank opposite the bombed plant.
The Assad regime has claimed the uranium particles discovered near Damascus could have come from domestically produced “yellow cake” or imports of commercial uranyl nitrate undeclared to the IAEA.
The Syrians also said they could have come from reference materials or from a transport container.
The report pointed out that the uranium traces found did not fit these explanations; nor could they be traced to Syria’s declared inventory.
Begin Excerpt 3 from THE JERUSALEM POST
‘IAEA demands immediate visit to Syrian nuclear facilities’
November 16, 2009
JPost.com Staff , THE JERUSALEM POST
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has demanded an urgent and immediate visit to suspected nuclear sites in Syria, Channel 10 cited foreign media reports on Monday night.
According to the report, IAEA inspectors discovered enriched uranium in three sites besides Dir Azur, where IAF jets destroyed an alleged reactor in September 2007.
These findings have led that UN nuclear watchdog to suspect that Syria has uranium stockpiles.
The main cause for suspicion was the discovery of nuclear material traces near a small research nuclear reactor outside Damascus, the TV channel reported.
When the evidence was presented to the Syrians, they failed to provide convincing explanations, senior IAEA officials were quoted as saying.
Agency inspectors who visited the Dir Azur site after the 2007 bombing found highly processed plutonium, so the uranium traces may indicate Syria’s nuclear program was more advanced than was previously assessed.
It was not yet clear whether authorities in Damascus would allow the inspectors into the alleged nuclear sites.
Begin Excerpt 4 from AP and THE JERUSALEM POST
IAEA: Iran may be hiding more facilities
November 16, 2009
AP and JPost.com staff , THE JERUSALEM POST
After a new uranium enrichment site at Qom in Iran was revealed several weeks ago, the International Atomic Research Agency raised concern about possible further secret nuclear sites, Reuters reported quoting an IAEA report obtained by the news agency on Monday.
According to the report, Iran told the IAEA it had begun building the site at Qom in 2007 – but the IAEA, the United Nations’ global nuclear proliferation watchdog, had evidence the project had begun in 2002, paused in 2004 and resumed in 2006.
The report said Iran had provided full access for IAEA inspectors on their first visit to the Qom site three weeks ago, but had yet to provide full, credible answers to verify that the plant was only for civilian purposes.
The IAEA’s report states “The agency has indicated (to Iran) that its declaration of the new facility reduces the level of confidence in the absence of other nuclear facilities under construction and gives rise to questions about whether there were any other nuclear facilities not declared to the agency. Moreover, Iran’s delay in submitting such information to the agency does not contribute to the building of confidence.”
The report also says Iranian technicians have moved highly sophisticated technical equipment into the Qom site in preparation for starting it up in 2011.
The report offered no estimate of the new plant’s capabilities but a senior international official familiar with the agency’s work in Iran said that it appeared designed to produce about a ton of enriched uranium a year.
That would be enough for a nuclear warhead but too little to fuel the nearly finished plant at the southern port of Bushehr and other civilian reactors Iran is planning to bring on line in the coming years.
The IAEA also noted that Iran’s enrichment at the Natanz site – revealed by dissidents in 2002 and under agency monitoring – was stagnating, with output remaining at mid-2009 levels.
The report did not offer a reason. But the official suggested that nuclear experts previously working at Natanz could now be preoccupied with putting the finishing touches on the newly discovered site, called Fordo.
As early as three years ago, Iranian officials had announced that immediate plans for the Natanz site were to install about 8,000 enriching centrifuges, and Monday’s report suggested that Tehran had reached that goal
The 7-page report – the latest IAEA summary of what it knows about Iran – said that as of Nov.
2, about 8,600 centrifuges had been set up but only about 4,000 were enriching – or 600 less than in September.
Still, the official said output had been steady since June with about 100 kilograms – 220 pounds – of enriched uranium being produced a month.
The report said that Natanz had churned out close to 4,000 kilograms of low-enriched, or nuclear fuel-grade uranium by Nov. 2 – close to the amount considered by experts that would be needed for two nuclear weapons.
But the report’s main focus was Fordo, the name of highly fortified underground space near Qom.
Iran said it fulfilled its legal obligations when it revealed the plant’s construction, although IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei has said Teheran was “outside the law” and should have informed his agency when the decision to construct was made.
Nations suspicious of Teheran’s nuclear program believe the the Islamic Republic decided to inform the IAEA only after it became convinced that the plant’s existence had been noted by foreign intelligence services – and was about to be revealed by Western leaders.
A senior Western official recently told The Associated Press that Fordo appeared too small to house a civilian nuclear program but large enough to serve for military activities.
Monday’s report – prepared for a meeting next week of the IAEA’s 35-nation board – did not address the issue of size or function, beyond saying that the Fordo facility would house about 3,000 centrifuges, which the senior international official said could turn out about just over a ton of enriched uranium annually.
Moscow on Monday dashed Iranian hopes that the Russian-built nuclear reactor at Bushehr will be switched on this year.
Officials in Russia and Iran had previously announced plans to switch it on in 2009, giving Iran its first operating nuclear power plant decades after construction started.
“We expect serious results by the end of the year, but the launch itself will not happen,” Russia’s state-run RIA Novosti news agency quoted Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko as saying. ITAR-Tass and Interfax had similar reports.
Iran’s president warned the West not to pressure Teheran over its nuclear program, saying this only makes the country more determined to gain power by advancing its nuclear technology.
The comment by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appeared to be a veiled threat that Iran would try to intensify its efforts to enrich uranium if nuclear negotiations with the international community fail.
“Cooperation with Iran in the nuclear field is in the interests of Westerners.
Their opposition will make Iran more powerful and advanced,” Ahmadinejad said in a statement posted late Sunday on the presidential Web site.
US President Barack Obama turned up the pressure Sunday by saying Iran is running out of time to agree a UN-brokered plan to ship its low-enriched enriched uranium out of the country to enrich it to a higher level. The West had hoped this plan would dramatically reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium and thwart any attempts to build nuclear weapons.
Instead of responding to the UN proposal, Iran made a series of counterproposals.
It said instead it wanted to buy nuclear fuel from abroad and also suggested UN inspectors could supervise uranium enrichment in the country.
Teheran has also said it only wants to send part of its stockpile in several shipments abroad.
The UN offer drafted October requires Tehran to ship around 70 percent of its stockpile of low-enriched uranium to Russia in one batch by the end of the year for further enrichment.
Iran is currently enriching uranium to less than five percent, which is sufficient to produce fuel for its future nuclear power plant, but not for arms making. Enriching uranium to even higher levels can produce weapons-grade materials.
According to the UN plan, after further enrichment in Russia, France would convert the uranium into fuel rods that would be returned to Iran for use in a reactor in Tehran that produces medical isotopes. Fuel rods cannot be further enriched into weapons-grade material.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.