Bye bye Muhammad


by Fred

On Friday Muhammad ElBaradei the outgoing Egyptian Secretary General of IAEA, who will be vacating his post in nine days  in regards to the rejection of his latest nuke plan by the IRR, the Islamist Rapist Republic said:

"I believe frankly the ball is very much in the Iranian court. I hope they will not miss this unique but fleeting opportunity."

That statement coming from a person who based on words and deeds cannot be accused of having any unfriendly posture toward the IRR, is very telling. ElBaradei doggedly held the sane world’s feet to the fire for as he alleged not trying hard enough but always spoke softly with and about the Islamist Rapists.

Of course the outgoing Secretary General is not going to leave the IRR all high and dry, that wouldn’t be ElBaradei of him. In the same press conference the wise Egyptian also said he was opposed to sanctions even if Tehran officially rejected his plan:

"Are sanctions going to resolve the issue? I don't think so. In my view sanctions are going to make things much worse," he said, adding that this would probably make Iran "more hawkish."

With that ElBaradei is reiterating his long held position which without offering any plan to force the Islamist Rapists to abide by the NPT rules is opposed to application of pressure on the IRR. When it comes to the Islamist rapists this nonsensical approach is held by some other individuals and lobbies extending it to all its gross violations of rules and civilized behavior.

With all the attention on how best to appease IRR, Iranian men, women and children are being raped, tortured and murdered and them illegal nuke centrifuges are spinning producing more and more dual use uranium. 

Another IRR delaying tactic is just gathering strength.  Islamist Rapists’ foreign minister, nuke lobbyists and other Islamist gofers of IRR have just begun floating a ridiculous nonstarter idea of inside Iran uranium for fuel rod swap deal.

Before it is too late and the nuke acquiring IRR imposes a devastating war on Iran and the region the sane world has to step in. Airtight sanctions in tandem with moral and material supports to the Iranian people to soften the sanction blow and empower them to overthrow the Islamist menace is a must. Time is of the essence.


Recently by FredCommentsDate
ادا اطوار اسلامی
Dec 05, 2012
مسجد همجنسگرایان
Dec 05, 2012
Iranians are legitimate target
Dec 04, 2012
more from Fred

Good riddance. El Bardai's

by vildemose on

Good riddance. El Bardai's doosti khaleh kherseh bedarde khodesh mikhoreh.


well said Fred

by mahmoudg on

Airtight sanctions and the people's uprising will perhaps happen.  But I believe that a naval blockade coupled with surgical attacks on the regime's assets, will actually do the job quicker and with fewer loss of human life.


Elbaradei gets it. Fred doesnt.


Airtight sanctions dont get us anywhere other than getting us closer to war.



"Criminalizing Consequences of
Sanctions," Peter Andreas,
Studies Quarterly
49 (June
2005): pp. 335-60.


One of the biggest flaws of the sanctions literature has been the
failure to discuss unintended consequences. Humanitarian costs have been
raised above, but what about other side effects? Peter Andreas looks at
the consequences of the multilateral sanctions directed at the former
Yugoslavia during the 1990s and finds a disturbing legacy. Economic
sanctions, it turns out, can unintentionally contribute to the
criminalization of the state, economy, and civil society of both the
targeted country and its immediate neighbors. By trying to evade the
sanctions, private entrepreneurs and public officials are encouraged to
disregard the rule of law. This fosters an unhealthy symbiosis among
political leaders, organized crime, and transnational smuggling
networks. These criminal networks can persist even after sanctions are
lifted, contributing to public corruption and undermining governance.


"Are Smart Sanctions Feasible?" By
Arne Tostenson and Beate Bull.
World Politics
(April 2002): pp. 373-403.


The comprehensive United Nations sanctions on Iraq during the 1990s
were a humanitarian disaster, leading policymakers to recognize that for
any future sanctions regimen to be politically sustainable its human
costs would have to be limited. Thus was born the concept of "smart
sanctions" -- tailored measures, such as asset freezes, travel bans, and
arms embargoes, that would supposedly target an offending regime while
minimizing collateral damage to the country's population at large. The
question now is whether smart sanctions can achieve significant results
with fewer downsides than more conventional forms of economic coercion.
Arne Tostenson and Beate Bull review the evidence and conclude that the
answer is no: "Although smart sanctions may seem logically compelling
and politically attractive, such regimes are difficult to establish and
enforce because of numerous inherent operational problems and the
intricacies of the Security Council's political processes."