Article asked on this date

You have found the article

Dagelijks archief 31 maart 2011

The Gaza Bombshell

After failing to anticipate Hamas’s victory over Fatah in the 2006 Palestinian election, the White House cooked up yet another scandalously covert and self-defeating Middle East debacle: part Iran-contra, part Bay of Pigs. With confidential documents, corroborated by outraged former and current U.S. officials, the author reveals how President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, and Deputy National-Security Adviser Elliott Abrams backed an armed force under Fatah strongman Muhammad Dahlan, touching off a bloody civil war in Gaza and leaving Hamas stronger than ever. (april 2008)

he Al Deira Hotel, in Gaza City, is a haven of calm in a land beset by poverty, fear, and violence. In the middle of December 2007, I sit in the hotel’s airy restaurant, its windows open to the Mediterranean, and listen to a slight, bearded man named Mazen Asad abu Dan describe the suffering he endured 11 months before at the hands of his fellow Palestinians. Abu Dan, 28, is a member of Hamas, the Iranian-backed Islamist organization that has been designated a terrorist group by the United States, but I have a good reason for taking him at his word: I’ve seen the video.

It shows abu Dan kneeling, his hands bound behind his back, and screaming as his captors pummel him with a black iron rod. “I lost all the skin on my back from the beatings,” he says. “Instead of medicine, they poured perfume on my wounds. It felt as if they had taken a sword to my injuries.”

On January 26, 2007, abu Dan, a student at the Islamic University of Gaza, had gone to a local cemetery with his father and five others to erect a headstone for his grandmother. When they arrived, however, they found themselves surrounded by 30 armed men from Hamas’s rival, Fatah, the party of Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas. “They took us to a house in north Gaza,” abu Dan says. “They covered our eyes and took us to a room on the sixth floor.”

The video reveals a bare room with white walls and a black-and-white tiled floor, where abu Dan’s father is forced to sit and listen to his son’s shrieks of pain. Afterward, abu Dan says, he and two of the others were driven to a market square. “They told us they were going to kill us. They made us sit on the ground.” He rolls up the legs of his trousers to display the circular scars that are evidence of what happened next: “They shot our knees and feet—five bullets each. I spent four months in a wheelchair.”

Abu Dan had no way of knowing it, but his tormentors had a secret ally: the administration of President George W. Bush.

A clue comes toward the end of the video, which was found in a Fatah security building by Hamas fighters last June. Still bound and blindfolded, the prisoners are made to echo a rhythmic chant yelled by one of their captors: “By blood, by soul, we sacrifice ourselves for Muhammad Dahlan! Long live Muhammad Dahlan!”

There is no one more hated among Hamas members than Muhammad Dahlan, long Fatah’s resident strongman in Gaza. Dahlan, who most recently served as Abbas’s national-security adviser, has spent more than a decade battling Hamas. Dahlan insists that abu Dan was tortured without his knowledge, but the video is proof that his followers’ methods can be brutal.

Bush has met Dahlan on at least three occasions. After talks at the White House in July 2003, Bush publicly praised Dahlan as “a good, solid leader.” In private, say multiple Israeli and American officials, the U.S. president described him as “our guy.”

The United States has been involved in the affairs of the Palestinian territories since the Six-Day War of 1967, when Israel captured Gaza from Egypt and the West Bank from Jordan. With the 1993 Oslo accords, the territories acquired limited autonomy, under a president, who has executive powers, and an elected parliament. Israel retains a large military presence in the West Bank, but it withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

In recent months, President Bush has repeatedly stated that the last great ambition of his presidency is to broker a deal that would create a viable Palestinian state and bring peace to the Holy Land. “People say, ‘Do you think it’s possible, during your presidency?’ ” he told an audience in Jerusalem on January 9. “And the answer is: I’m very hopeful.”

The next day, in the West Bank capital of Ramallah, Bush acknowledged that there was a rather large obstacle standing in the way of this goal: Hamas’s complete control of Gaza, home to some 1.5 million Palestinians, where it seized power in a bloody coup d’état in June 2007. Almost every day, militants fire rockets from Gaza into neighboring Israeli towns, and President Abbas is powerless to stop them. His authority is limited to the West Bank.

It’s “a tough situation,” Bush admitted. “I don’t know whether you can solve it in a year or not.” What Bush neglected to mention was his own role in creating this mess.

According to Dahlan, it was Bush who had pushed legislative elections in the Palestinian territories in January 2006, despite warnings that Fatah was not ready. After Hamas—whose 1988 charter committed it to the goal of driving Israel into the sea—won control of the parliament, Bush made another, deadlier miscalculation.

Vanity Fair has obtained confidential documents, since corroborated by sources in the U.S. and Palestine, which lay bare a covert initiative, approved by Bush and implemented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams, to provoke a Palestinian civil war. The plan was for forces led by Dahlan, and armed with new weapons supplied at America’s behest, to give Fatah the muscle it needed to remove the democratically elected Hamas-led government from power. (The State Department declined to comment.)

But the secret plan backfired, resulting in a further setback for American foreign policy under Bush. Instead of driving its enemies out of power, the U.S.-backed Fatah fighters inadvertently provoked Hamas to seize total control of Gaza.

Some sources call the scheme “Iran-contra 2.0,” recalling that Abrams was convicted (and later pardoned) for withholding information from Congress during the original Iran-contra scandal under President Reagan. There are echoes of other past misadventures as well: the C.I.A.’s 1953 ouster of an elected prime minister in Iran, which set the stage for the 1979 Islamic revolution there; the aborted 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, which gave Fidel Castro an excuse to solidify his hold on Cuba; and the contemporary tragedy in Iraq.

Within the Bush administration, the Palestinian policy set off a furious debate. One of its critics is David Wurmser, the avowed neoconservative, who resigned as Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief Middle East adviser in July 2007, a month after the Gaza coup.

Wurmser accuses the Bush administration of “engaging in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory.” He believes that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand. “It looks to me that what happened wasn’t so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen,” Wurmser says.

The botched plan has rendered the dream of Middle East peace more remote than ever, but what really galls neocons such as Wurmser is the hypocrisy it exposed. “There is a stunning disconnect between the president’s call for Middle East democracy and this policy,” he says. “It directly contradicts it.”

Preventive Security

Bush was not the first American president to form a relationship with Muhammad Dahlan. “Yes, I was close to Bill Clinton,” Dahlan says. “I met Clinton many times with [the late Palestinian leader Yasser] Arafat.” In the wake of the 1993 Oslo accords, Clinton sponsored a series of diplomatic meetings aimed at reaching a permanent Middle East peace, and Dahlan became the Palestinians’ negotiator on security.

As I talk to Dahlan in a five-star Cairo hotel, it’s easy to see the qualities that might make him attractive to American presidents. His appearance is immaculate, his English is serviceable, and his manner is charming and forthright. Had he been born into privilege, these qualities might not mean much. But Dahlan was born—on September 29, 1961—in the teeming squalor of Gaza’s Khan Younis refugee camp, and his education came mostly from the street. In 1981 he helped found Fatah’s youth movement, and he later played a leading role in the first intifada—the five-year revolt that began in 1987 against the Israeli occupation. In all, Dahlan says, he spent five years in Israeli jails.

( / 31.03.2011)

Revealed: Gaddafi envoy in Britain for secret talks

Gaddafi supporters stage a rally in Tripoli Supporters of the Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi stage a rally in Tripoli. Photograph: Zohra Bensemra/Reuters

Colonel Gaddafi’s regime has sent one of its most trusted envoys to London for confidential talks with British officials, the Guardian can reveal.

Mohammed Ismail, a senior aide to Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam, visited London in recent days, British government sources familiar with the meeting have confirmed.

The contacts with Ismail are believed to have been one of a number between Libyan officials and the west in the last fortnight, amid signs that the regime may be looking for an exit strategy.

Disclosure of Ismail’s visit comes in the immediate aftermath of the defection to Britain of Moussa Koussa, Libya‘s foreign minister and the country’s former external intelligence head, who has been Britain’s main conduit to the Gaddafi regime since the early 1990s.

A team led by the British ambassador to Libya, Richard Northern, and MI6 officers, embarked on a lengthy debriefing of Koussa at a safe house after he flew into Farnborough airport on Wednesday night from Tunisia. Government sources said the questioning would take time because Koussa’s state of mind was “delicate” after he left his family in Libya. The Foreign Office declined “to provide a running commentary” on contacts with Ismail or other regime officials. But news of the meeting comes amid mounting speculation that Gaddafi’s sons, foremost among them Saif al-Islam, Saadi and Mutassim, are anxious to explore a way out of the crisis in Libya.

“There has been increasing evidence recently that the sons want a way out,” said a western diplomatic source.

Although he has little public profile in either Libya or internationally, Ismail is recognised by diplomats as being a key fixer and representative for Saif al-Islam.

According to cables published by WikiLeaks, Ismail has represented the Libyan government in arms purchase negotiations and acted as an interlocutor on military and political issues.

“The message that was delivered to him is that Gaddafi has to go and that there will be accountability for crimes committed at the international criminal court,” a Foreign Office spokesman told the Guardian , declining to elaborate on what else may have been discussed.

Some aides working for Gaddafi’s sons, however, have made it clear that it may be necessary to sideline their father and explore exit strategies to prevent the country descending into anarchy.

One idea that the sons have reportedly suggested – which the Guardian has been unable to corroborate – is that Gaddafi give up real power.

Mutassim, presently the country’s national security adviser, would become president of an interim national unity government which would include the country’s opposition.

It is an idea, however, unlikely to find support among the country’s rebels or the international community who are demanding Gaddafi’s removal.

The revelation that contacts between Britain and a key Gaddafi loyalist had taken place came as David Cameron hailed the defection of Koussa as a sign the regime was crumbling. “It tells a compelling story of the desperation and the fear right at the very top of the crumbling and rotten Gaddafi regime,” he said.

Ministers regard Koussa’s move to abandon his family as a sign of the magnitude of his decision. “Moussa Koussa is very worried about his family,” one source said. “But he did this because he felt it was the best way of bringing down Gaddafi.”

Britain learned that Koussa wanted to defect when he made contact from Tunisia. He had made his way out of Libya in a convoy of cars after announcing that he was going on a diplomatic mission to visit the new government in Tunis.

Britain took seriously reports last night that Ali al-Treki, Libya’s minister for Africa, had announced in Cairo that he too had abandoned the regime. Officials were checking reports last night that Tarek Khalid Ibrahim, the deputy head of mission in London, is also defecting.

The prime minister insisted that no deal had been struck with Koussa and that he would not be offered immunity from prosecution.

“Let me be clear, Moussa Koussa is not being granted immunity. There is no deal of that kind,” Cameron said.

Within hours of his arrival in Britain, Scottish prosecutors asked to interview Koussa about the Lockerbie bombing. The Crown Office in Edinburgh has said it is formally asking for its prosecutors and detectives from Dumfries and Galloway police to question Koussa about the 1988 bombing.

“We have notified the Foreign and Commonwealth Office that the Scottish prosecuting and investigating authorities wish to interview Mr Koussa in connection with the Lockerbie bombing,” it said. “The investigation into the Lockerbie bombing remains open and we will pursue all relevant lines of inquiry.”

But government sources indicated that Britain does not believe that Koussa was involved in ordering the Lockerbie bombing.

Koussa was at the heart of Britain’s rapprochement with Libya which started when Tripoli abandoned its support for the IRA in the early 1990s.

He was instrumental in persuading Gaddafi to abandon his weapons of mass destruction programme in 2003. One source said: “Nobody is saying this guy was a saint because he was a key Gaddafi lieutenant who was kicked out of Britain in 1980 for making threats to kill Libyan dissidents. But this is the guy who persuaded Gaddafi to abandon his WMD programme. He no doubt has useful and interesting things to say about Lockerbie but it doesn’t seem he said ‘go and do it’.”

William Hague, the foreign secretary, said he had a sense that Koussa was deeply unhappy with Gaddafi when they spoke on Friday.

“One of the things I gathered between the lines in my telephone calls with him, although he of course had to read out the scripts of the regime, was that he was very distressed and dissatisfied by the situation there,” Hague said.

( / 31.03.2011)

Israel Warns Against Recognition of Independent Palestine

RAMALLAH, Mar 31, 2011 (IPS) – The Israeli government has warned the U.N. Security Council and the EU that it will resort to unilateral countermeasures if the international community recognises Palestine as an independent state at the U.N. General Assembly session next September.

The warning is in response to what the Israeli government perceives as attempts by critics, local and international, to “de-legitimise” the Jewish state.

Over the last few months a growing number of Latin American countries have granted recognition to an independent Palestinian state. These include Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Chile and Guyana. Paraguay and Peru are likely to follow suit in the near future while Venezuela recognised Palestine as an independent state in the mid-2000s.

Norway upgraded the Palestinian representative’s office in Oslo from a ‘general delegation’ to a ‘diplomatic delegation’. And over the past four months, several countries, including none other than the U.S. – followed by other Israeli-friendly states such as France, Spain, and Portugal – upgraded the Palestinian representations.

Another one hundred or so other countries – most of them developing nations – had recognised ‘Palestine’ after Yasser Arafat unilaterally declared “independence” in 1988.

Other states, mostly from the former Eastern Bloc, recognised Palestinian statehood in the wake of the 1993 Oslo peace accords.

The diplomatic tide that originated in Latin America could pick up steam in Africa and Asia. A tell tale sign was when the University of Johannesburg in South Africa decided last week to cease cooperation with Israel’s Ben Gurion University and to boycott other Israeli universities.

The former apartheid regime in South Africa used to be one of Israel’s closest allies. Military, political and economic cooperation between the two ostracised members of the international community was extremely close.

Israel helped train South African security forces, renowned for their brutality, and helped the apartheid state with its nuclear programme – since disbanded by the post-apartheid democratic government. In return, South Africa is believed to have supplied the Israelis with uranium for their own nuclear programme.

Israel’s outrage at international criticism peaked after Mahmoud Abbas, or Abu Mazen as he is better known, the president of the Palestinian Authority (PA), stated on Thursday that the Palestinians remain frozen.

Last week Israel informed 15 members of the United Nations Security Council, and major EU (European Union) countries, that if the PA persisted in its efforts to gain recognition as a state within the 1967 borders, Israel would respond with a series of unilateral measures.

Also last week, the Israeli foreign ministry sent a classified cable to more than 30 Israeli embassies abroad ordering them to lodge diplomatic protests at the highest possible level in response to Palestinian efforts for international recognition of statehood at the U.N. General Assembly session in September.

Last September, U.S. President Barack Obama told the General Assembly that he wished to see a Palestinian state become a member of the U.N. within a year. Israel and the Palestinians also agreed that the talks they began last Sep. 2 in Washington would last for about a year.

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad stated that his efforts to establish state-building institutions would be completed by September.

What exactly the Israeli government has in mind in regard to the “unilateral actions” it is threatening is not known. But these could involve the annexation of major Israeli settlement blocs illegally built in the occupied Palestinian West Bank.

More bad news for Israel followed on Wednesday when U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called on Israel to halt settlement building in the West Bank and put a stop to all forms of violence and incitement.

Speaking in Uruguay at the U.N. Latin American and Caribbean Meeting in support of Middle East peace Ban said it was a “crucial time” for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

“Time is of the essence in realising the two-State solution,” Ban said. “The occupation that started in 1967 is morally and politically unsustainable, and must end. The Palestinians have a legitimate right to the establishment of an independent and viable State of their own.”

But Dr. Samir Awad from Birzeit Universitiy, near Ramallah, believes the Israelis care a lot more about establishing facts on the ground and a lot less for international opinion.

“The Israelis, contrary to their claims of saying they support the creation of an independent Palestinian state, have decided, albeit off the record, that the establishment of a Palestinian state is not in their interest,” Awad told IPS.

“For international consumption and to keep up appearances they will keep the charade of supporting a two-state solution up so as not to appear the peace spoilers.

“But actually they care more about establishing facts on the ground vis a vis the settlements and to hell with international opinion. Building more settlements and preventing a contiguous and viable Palestinian state concerns them far more than global approval.”

( / 31.03.2011)

1,000,000 Man March in Solidarity with the Libyans and the Bahraini people

zaterdag 18 juni · 14:30 – 17:30


Gemaakt door:

Meer informatie
We’re hoping to get a 1,000,000 protestors in support with the Bahraini revolution and the Libyan revolution.

We will assemble at Hyde Park corner and from there we will march to the Bahraini embassy and off to the Libyan embassy.

What we demand? We want the freedom of both countries.
We want the US and the NATO to withdraw from Libya
We want Saudi and the UAE troops to withdraw from Bahrain
We want the Pro Democracy civillians to have their DEMOCRACY!


“Do they not then consider the Qur’an carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much contradiction and error.”

[Qur’an, An-Nisa 4:82]

Beginning of Revelation

The revelation of the Qur’an began in the laila al-qadr of Ramadan (one of the odd nights after the 21st till end Ramadan) after the Prophet Muhammad had passed the fortieth year of his life (that is around the year 610), during his seclusion in the cave of Hira’ on a mountain near Makka.

During the life of the Prophet (saas) (570-632 CE)

  • The Prophet (saas) used to recite the Qur’an before angel Jibreel (Gabriel) once every Ramadan, but he recited it twice (in the same order we have today) in the last Ramadan before his death. Jibreel also taught the Prophet (saas) the seven modes of recitation.
  • Each verse received was recited by the Prophet, and its location relative to other verses and surahs was identified by him.
  • The verses were written by scribes, selected by the Prophet, on any suitable object – the leaves of trees, pieces of wood, parchment or leather, flat stones, and shoulder blades. Scribes included Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Mu’awiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan, Ubey Ibn Ka’ab, Zayed Ibn Thabit.
  • Some of the companions wrote the Qur’an for their own use.
  • Several hundred companions memorized the Qur’an by heart.

During the caliphate of Abu Bakr (632-634 CE)

  • Umar Ibn Al-Khattab urged Abu Bakr to preserve and compile the Qur’an. This was prompted after the battle of Yamamah, where heavy casualties were suffered among the reciters who memorized the Qur’an.
  • Abu Bakr entrusted Zayed Ibn Thabit with the task of collecting the Qur’an. Zayed had been present during the last recitation of the Qur’an by the Prophet to Angel Jibreel (Gabriel).
  • Zayed, with the help of the companions who memorized and wrote verses of the Qur’an, accomplished the task and handed Abu Bakr the first authenticated copy of the Qur’an. The copy was kept in the residence of Hafsah, daughter of Umar and wife of the Prophet.

During the caliphate of Uthman (644-656 CE)

  • Uthman ordered Zayed Ibn Thabit, Abdullah Ibn Al Zubayr, Saeed Ibn Al-Aas, and Abdur-Rahman Ibn Harith Ibn Hisham to make perfect copies of the authenticated copy kept with Hafsa. This was due to the rapid expansion of the Islamic state and concern about differences in recitation.
  • Copies were sent to various places in the Muslim world. The original copy was returned to Hafsa, and a copy was kept in Madinah.

Three stages of dotting and diacritization

  • Dots were put as syntactical marks by Abu Al-Aswad Al Doaly, during the time of Mu’awiya Ibn Abi Sufian (661-680 CE).
  • The letters were marked with different dotting by Nasr Ibn Asem and Hayy ibn Ya’amor, during the time of Abd Al-Malek Ibn Marawan (685-705 CE).
  • A complete system of diacritical marks (damma, fataha, kasra) was invented by Al Khaleel Ibn Ahmad Al Faraheedy (d. 786 CE).

(Found on Facebook / 31.03.2011)

America’s true reason for attacking Libya becomes clear with new central bank

America’s true reason for intervention, and missile attacks against Libya has become very clear today with a sudden creation by the rebels of a new central bank on March 29th.

The rebels in Libya are in the middle of a life or death civil war and Moammar Gadhafi is still in power and yet somehow the Libyan rebels have had enough time to establish a new Central Bank of Libya and form a new national oil company.  Perhaps when this conflict is over those rebels can become time management consultants.  They sure do get a lot done.  What a skilled bunch of rebels – they can fight a war during the day and draw up a new central bank and a new national oil company at night without any outside help whatsoever.  If only the rest of us were so versatile!  But isn’t forming a central bank something that could be done after the civil war is over?  According to Bloomberg, the Transitional National Council has “designated the Central Bank of Benghazi as a monetary authority competent in monetary policies in Libya and the appointment of a governor to the Central Bank of Libya, with a temporary headquarters in Benghazi.” – The Economic Collapse via Uruknet

Libya has been one of the last nations in the world that had its own state run banking system, and control over its own money supply.  By having this system in place, they could demand oil purchases from their oil fields to be made in Lybyan Dinar, and not the US Dollar.  It also means that Libya has ensured themselves a stable economy, with little inflation and currency devaluing as most of the industrialized world has under private central banks.

The parallels for both European and US intervention now in Libya is very reminiscent to why the United States attacked Iraq in 2003.  Six months before the US moved into Iraq to take down Saddam Hussein, the oil nation had made the move to accept Euro’s instead of dollars for oil, and this became a threat to the global dominance of the dollar as the reserve currency, and its dominion as the petrodollar.

The American people were given the lie that there were weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and that there were Al Quida training bases in the Arab state, both of which were proven to be false.  No, these were false flags given by the government to try to justify a punishment on Iraq for moving away from dollars as payment for oil.

To be able to create a new central bank under the blueprint that is used by Western powers in less than two weeks by the rebels gives vast credence that the rebellion itself in Libya was initiated by outside forces, and not over demands by the citizens of Libya for social reform.  This plan was put in place by the world’s game changers who want complete global control over oil and economic systems.

It did not take long before we discovered the real reason why America chose to intervene and attack Libya, and not any of the other nations in the Middle East that are going through internal rebellion.  The rebels creation of a central bank, coupled with the United Nations report two days ago that there would be no sanctions on the selling of oil by the rebels who control certain fields and refineries, proves that this war is not about human rights, but about punishment for a nation that refused to give up its sovereignty to the global banking and oil cabals.

( / 31.03.2011)

Israeli Air Force landed at Saudi Base

The Israeli Air Force recently unloaded military equipment at a Saudi Arabia base, a semi-official Iranian news agency claimed Wednesday, while a large American force has massed in Azerbaijan, which is on the northwest border of Iran.Both reports follow by less than a week the Pentagon’s confirmation that an unusually large American fleet sailed through the Suez Canal Saturday. Several reports stated that an Israeli ship joined the armada.

The Pentagon played down the news, saying the American maneuvers were routine. However, a report by Iran on Wednesday that it has enriched dozens of pounds of 17 per cent enriched uranium serves as a reminder that time is running out to stop Iran from being able to produce a nuclear weapon.
Iran’s Fars News Agency said the Israeli military aircraft landed 10 days ago at the Saudi base near the city of Tabuk, located in northwest Saudi Arabia, one of the closest areas in the oil kingdom to Iran.
Fars said that the Tabuk base will be the central station for an Israeli attack on Iran. It quoted an Islamic news site that a commercial airline passenger said the airport in Tabuk was closed to all other traffic during the alleged Israeli landings. The passenger said that “no reasonable explanation” was given for shutting down the airport and those passengers were compensated financially and booked in four-star hotels.
“The relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel have become the talk of the town,” the passenger added. The chief authority in Tabuk, Prince Fahd ben Sultan, was reported be coordinating the cooperation with Israel.

Iran’s government-funded Press TV reported that the Revolutionary Guards began closely patrolling the Islamic Republic’s northwestern border after noticing the American forces, which Iran claimed also included Israeli troops. Azerbaijan’s independent Trend news site also reported on Wednesday that American armed forces are in the country, which is in an armed conflict with rebels.
Revolutionary Guards Brigadier General Mehdi Moini said Tuesday that his forces are mobilized “due to the presence of American and Israeli forces on the western border.” The Guards reportedly have called in tanks and anti-aircraft units to the area in what amounts to a war alert.
Enriched Uranium

As signs point to a higher American-Israeli military profile aimed at Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, the Islamic Republic’s vice president and director of the nuclear program, announced Wednesday that Iran has produced another 37 pounds of uranium enriched to 20 percent. The production of the uranium defies United Nations demands that Iran stop its unsupervised nuclear development, although the 20 percent level is far below level that is needed to build a nuclear weapon.
“Potentially, we can produce 5 kilograms (11 pounds) a month, but we are not in a hurry over this,” Salehi told the semiofficial ISNA news agency. (
( / 31.03.2011)