Posts
It was reported today taht Iran had run into a serious problem at its newly completed nuclear reactor in Bushehr, which required the removal of the reactor's rods. Prattling to the New York Times, David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said that the shutdown "raises questions of whether Iran can operate a modern nuclear reactor safely.” “The stakes are very high," he added, "You can have a Chernobyl-style accident..."
Actually, the question the incident raises is the extent to which Israel is willing to jeopardize the region in order to insure its self-differentiated security.
It is no secret that Israel was involved in the Stuxnet Worm which recently required Iran to shut down its reactors. Basically the worm short-circuits safety mechanisms which are designed to shut down the reactors when the plutonium rods "get too hot". If the shut down does not work, then rods overheat and the felicitious result is a nuclear meltdown. Or, as Albright puts it, a "Chernobyl-style accident".
Now, a few months later, the Iranians have had to shut down their premier nuclear plant just as it was about to go on line and provide power to the country's electric grid. Is there a moron standing that requires a smoking memo?
But just to make extra sure that no one draws the correct conclusions, Israel shill par excellence, the New York Times, quotes Albright who raises questions about the competence of them Ayraps or Persians or who- cares-what-they-are. You know.... can we really trust these lesser menschen with such an dangerous thing as nuclear anything? Strike one for another zionist worm in the brain.
Needless to say, Albright himself is a walking-talking black face for Israel. The self-founding head of the so-called Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), Albright trots the globe declaiming against nuclear proliferation but never once manages to mention Israel's nuclear program.
According to a comprehensive review by Scott Ritter, David Albright has a track record of making half-baked analyses derived from questionable sources seem mainstream. He breathes false legitimacy into these factually challenged stories by cloaking himself in a résumé which is disingenuous in the extreme. Eventually, one must begin to question the motives of Albright and ISIS. No self-respecting think tank would allow itself to be used in such an egregious manner.
Actually, the question the incident raises is the extent to which Israel is willing to jeopardize the region in order to insure its self-differentiated security.
It is no secret that Israel was involved in the Stuxnet Worm which recently required Iran to shut down its reactors. Basically the worm short-circuits safety mechanisms which are designed to shut down the reactors when the plutonium rods "get too hot". If the shut down does not work, then rods overheat and the felicitious result is a nuclear meltdown. Or, as Albright puts it, a "Chernobyl-style accident".
Now, a few months later, the Iranians have had to shut down their premier nuclear plant just as it was about to go on line and provide power to the country's electric grid. Is there a moron standing that requires a smoking memo?
But just to make extra sure that no one draws the correct conclusions, Israel shill par excellence, the New York Times, quotes Albright who raises questions about the competence of them Ayraps or Persians or who- cares-what-they-are. You know.... can we really trust these lesser menschen with such an dangerous thing as nuclear anything? Strike one for another zionist worm in the brain.
Needless to say, Albright himself is a walking-talking black face for Israel. The self-founding head of the so-called Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), Albright trots the globe declaiming against nuclear proliferation but never once manages to mention Israel's nuclear program.
According to a comprehensive review by Scott Ritter, David Albright has a track record of making half-baked analyses derived from questionable sources seem mainstream. He breathes false legitimacy into these factually challenged stories by cloaking himself in a résumé which is disingenuous in the extreme. Eventually, one must begin to question the motives of Albright and ISIS. No self-respecting think tank would allow itself to be used in such an egregious manner.
Hey... "But I read it in the Times!"
.
