August 22nd is upon us

*********TOP THREAD TODAY***********

***SCROLL FOR UPDATES AND NEW POSTS***

In his 2002 State of the Union address, President Bush promised that he would not "wait on events while dangers gather." The United States, he vowed, "will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."  TIA Daily TIA Daily

IRAN'S KHAMEINI: WE'LL PURSUE NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT

IRAN DENIES INSPECTORS ACCESS TO SITE 

IRAN TESTS SHORT-RANGE MISSILE

It is August 22nd on the other side of the world. Darkness covers the Middle East. By the Islamic calendar, Tuesday is  a holy date: the night when Mohammed rose to heaven from the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem on a "buraq", a fabulous winged beast with the body of a horse and the face of a woman, and reappeared in Mecca.

Perhaps the Islamic Republic of Iran will refrain from acting upon their apocalyptic vision seeing as that they are getting their way anyway and the West has been sufficiently subjugated, behaving like good little dhimmis and paying Hezb'Allah the jyza.

VIDEO: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: The U.S and England Are Not Worthy of Security Council Membership. Those Who Want Good Relations with the Iranian People Should Bow and Surrender to its Right and Might From MEMRI here

From Ambassador Bolton's press briefing today;

Reporter:  The Iranian leader has declared today that they will continue their program despite the Security Council resolution.  Is there any comment?

Ambassador Bolton:  None that I will give for the moment.  What we're awaiting their definitive response and which is overdue by our lights, but the Security Council gave them until the 31st of August to complete the suspension of their uranium enrichment activity.  So they still have a few days

QUESTION: What is your reaction to the report that Iran has turned away nuclear inspectors today?

BOLTON: Nothing surprises me about the way Iran treats its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which it's been violating for many years now in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. I haven't heard that report, but they've done it before.

They've obstructed the work of the IAEA repeatedly in Iran. They've concealed things from the IAEA inspectors. They've falsified data. They've destroyed facilities. So more obstruction isn't -- doesn't surprise me at all.

UPDATE: The government of Iran appears set to reject the European incentive package on Tuesday.

UPDATE: Iran says it is ready to start immediately what it called "serious" talks with six world powers about their offer to defuse Tehran's nuclear standoff with the West. "Ready to start?" I must be missing something here

Chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani delivered Iran's formal response to the offer at a meeting yesterday with foreign envoys from the six world powers in Tehran.

"Although there is no justification for the other parties' illegal move to refer Iran's case to the Security Council,... the answer was prepared ... to pave the way for fair talks," Mr Larijani said.

"Iran is prepared to hold serious talks from Aug. 23," he was quoted as saying by Iran's student news agency ISNA.

He said Iran was ready to play a "constructive" role regarding all issues in the package.

Article here

Bolton addresses Iran's statement.

Ambassador Bolton:  Okay.  Let me just say one word on the subject of Iran's response, which apparently has been delivered to ambassadors in Tehran.  Obviously, this is a significant moment.  The Iranians have had approximately two and a half months to consider the very, very generous offer that the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany have made to them.  So in their response today, which I take it, after months of rhetoric, should constitute the definitive Iranian answer, we will see whether they are now prepared to abide by their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and convince the world that their intentions are as they say they are --peaceful.  We will obviously study the Iranian response carefully, but we are also prepared if it does not meet the terms set by the Perm 5 foreign ministers to proceed here in the Security Council, as the ministers have agreed, with economic sanctions.  If, on the other hand, the Iranians have chosen the path of cooperation, as we've said repeatedly, then a different relationship with the United States and the rest of the world is now possible.

Reporter:  Ambassador, will you consider today's response by Iran to the incentives offer from the group of ambassadors you mentioned also the response to the Security Council demands or will you wait until the 31st of August to proceed with whatever responses you will have to their response?

Ambassador Bolton:  I think this is a case where I'd have to say it depends on what the Iranians say.  Certainly, the rhetoric, particularly in the past few days, has indicated they're not prepared to suspend their uranium enrichment activities.  But we have consistently said for two and a half months that we would not rise to the rhetoric; we would wait for the definitive response.  The president emphasized that again yesterday, and as we understand it, this should be the definitive response, and we'll move on the basis of our reading of it.

Reporter:  Ambassador, would you please reiterate what the expectation is of Iran to satisfy the requirements of - that the United States and the Security Council have outlined?

Ambassador Bolton:  We've made it clear in Security Council Resolution 1696 that Iran has a choice.  They can either take up the very generous offer that the five permanent members and Germany have extended to them, and if they do, there's a possibility of a different relationship with the United States and others.  But if they don't, we've also made it clear that their unwillingness to give up their pursuit of nuclear weapons will result in our efforts in the Security Council to obtain economic sanctions against them.

So the choice for two and a half months now has been with Iran, and if in fact, as we expect, this is the definitive response today, we'll know which path they've chosen.

Reporter:  Mr. Ambassador, French sources have said that a second resolution on Lebanon on the UNIFIL mandate is out of the question. Will that - the lack of consensus in the council - will it affect the U.S. position?

Ambassador Bolton:  Well, let's be clear what we're talking about. We have said for quite some time that the issue of Hezbollah's disarming would not be taken up in the first resolution.  Now, how exactly we address that in another resolution is still the subject of consultations.  As I said yesterday, there was no issue of timing there, but there's never been any doubt - there's been any doubt that full implementation of 1559 is going to require the elimination of all armed militias inside Lebanon and the restoration of a full democratic process there.

Reporter: And when do you foresee this (inaudible)?

Ambassador Bolton:  As I said, we don't have a particular timing in mind. We're going to watch the unfolding of Resolution 1701 and make a judgment as appropriate.

Reporter:  Given the difficulties in reaching a consensus on previous Iran resolutions in the Council here and given that this is going probably be a very serious resolution if Iran gives a negative response, how quickly do you think you can get moving on this?

Ambassador Bolton:  Well, you're trying to get me to make a timing prediction again -

Reporter: (Inaudible) are you imagining within the next month or do you imagine -

Ambassador Bolton:  I think we will be prepared to move to submit elements of a resolution to the Council very quickly.  But it really is a test for the Council, and we'll see how it responds.  Let me just take one more here, if there are any.  Otherwise -

Reporter:  A question on the UNIFIL force.  Do you know anything more today about the progress the United Nations is making in getting countries, particularly European countries, to sign up?

Ambassador Bolton:  My understanding is that the Europeans will be meeting in Brussels tomorrow, although I'm told just before coming over here perhaps that meeting may be postponed for a few days, so I'm hesitant to say anything definitive.  I think we will know more later in the day. Perhaps we can talk about it then.  And we'll be addressing some of these questions, obviously, in the meeting of the Security Council we're about to have, okay?  Thanks very much.

Comments

[planck's constant]

Sometimes buraq is a chimera as you described and sometimes just a flying horse as shown in the logo to my website; see August 22 - End of the World -12th Imam - Muhammad al-Mahdi

[Underzog]

I fear Condi's fingerprints in this nonsense. She is captured by the State Department and is seems to be of the so-called "Realist" school; part of which has the doctrine that the way to the Arab's friendship is pressure on Israel (I know the Iraninians are Persian, but I feel the same bad principle applies).

"There's no need to fear; UnderZog is here!"

[BritinUSA]

Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Koran. The phrase is the 'furthest mosque' I think. I may be wrong but I don't think there was a mosque in Jerusalem at the time that the flight allegedly took place.

[clyde]

I read the Koran recently out of curiosity, and through the fog of boredom, incitement and repetition I was able to discern several things, one of the most interesting being the fact that originally Muslims were supposed to face East when they prayed, towards Jerusalem. Apparently Allah could see the future, and at one point had Muslims turn and face Mecca instead. Maybe to keep them from watching their brethren being blown up by the as-then non-existant Israeli Army tank corps.

[Terror-Free Oil]

The West Does Not Have the Balls to Take on Iran or other Islamic Fascists, FNC video, 8/22/6 http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/MW082206.php

Iran Will Use Nukes When It Gets Them, FNC video, 8/22/6
http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/MR082206.php

Iran Attacks and Seizes Romanian Oil Rig, FNC video, 8/22/6
http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/MR082206.php

Free Patriotic Corner Banners: http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/cb/