Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says

Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says

There are 38090 comments on the Worcester Telegram & Gazette story from Jun 4, 2007, titled Israel's end is near, Ahmadinejad says. In it, Worcester Telegram & Gazette reports that:

TEHRAN, Iran- Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad yesterday said the world would witness the destruction of Israel soon, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Worcester Telegram & Gazette.

MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40433 Dec 8, 2013
USA wrote:
01. I think you need more knowledge of Islam. Islam nor the Quran existed prior to Mohammed which only began approx. 620 AD. You want to tell me I don’t know the scripture then tell me lies of what they say? I will always study the scripture and will always have more to learn.

02. I do know according to the scriptures, Moses did not lead just the tribe of Judah (Jews) out of Egypt, he led the nation of Israel. All twelve tribes established through Jacob who God named Israel. Moses called the Israelites his people. Moses himself was a Levite. Another thing you should know already if you truly have read the O.T.

03. The scriptures also tell us when the term “Christian” was used and what that word means. It was used after the crucifixion of Jesus (NOT JUDAS) and way before mo.

Please show me scripture from the Bible that tells about your prophet.
Ans.

There are many good and true things written in your post. The views you hold are the "traditional views" that come from listening to same thing from the same source over and over again.

But they are more to do with "pre-programming" and "brain washing" than individual thinking and analysis.

Just look at the way, Most Jews do not find any "evidence" about Jesus in their books, while according to Christians the "OT books are flooded" with prophesies about Jesus.

How come two extreme views found by two different sets of people reading the same scriptures?

So the defect and problem is not in the scriptures, but the WAY PEOPLE INTERPRET those Scriptures.

When we say that our prophet is prophesized in both books of OT and NT, we face the same situation from Jews and Christians as what Jews hold towards Jesus.

If you want to have a discussion about "What Bible says about our prophet"…. We can have the same on this thread….

But perhaps you would like to go thru a small monograph I have written on the same subject.

I would give you the link and I can also post it page by page here, if you like it.

Based on that, we can have a discussion on this subject.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/51091963/
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40434 Dec 8, 2013
RF wrote:
the messianic idea has always been a part of Judaism. The mashiach is not mentioned explicitly in the Torah, because the Torah was written in terms that all people could understand,..

The term "mashiach" literally means "the anointed one," and refers to the ancient practice of anointing kings with oil when they took the throne. The mashiach is the one who will be anointed as king in the End of Days.

The word "mashiach" does not mean "savior." ..

“He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshipped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed”(Dan. 7:13-14, NIV).

Keep in mind that Jesus himself claimed he was fulfilling prophecy. In the Sermon on the Mount, he said he has not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets, a designation for the Old Testament Scriptures, but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). After his resurrection Jesus expounded to the disciples that ,“This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms (Luke 24:44)!”
Ans.

Thanks for your info on Messiah. Which literally means "The anointed one" or "the won who is charged with a specific mission".

There are many Messiahs mentioned in OT books as well as One who will restore Jews their lost nations.

Jesus also came with a mission, he was certainly a Messiah, but not "The Messiah" who would restore Jews their lost kingdom.

That is where the whole problem comes, Christians "in their zeal" trying to fix every prophesey of Messiah and The Messiah on personality of Jesus, in which they err and do every trick to put them on the personality of Jesus.

Jesus' statement that I have come to fulfill laws and prophets, does not mean that he was "The Messiah" or that he was the last and Final prophet.

Jesus himself said "I have many things to say to you but you cannot bear them now, however when the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth come into the world, he shall guide you into all the truth".

Any one reading this passage without any bias, would "think" that Jesus was talking about some one to come after Jesus to "guide humanity into all truth".

That shows that Jesus was not the Last and Final Prophet.

PS:

I find it strange, you getting engaged in "theological discussions" while in the back of your mind, you pose as Atheist on Christian threads.

Are you here just to kill your time and have idle discussion?
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40435 Dec 8, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Isaiah 9:6
New King James Version (NKJV)
6 For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
but no mention of mo, an arab gangster that stole and raped and killed and did little girls.
If you want any proper discussion with me, you will have to speak in a civil language.

Otherwise I will have no discussion with you.

take it or leave it.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#40436 Dec 9, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
Thanks for your info on Messiah. Which literally means "The anointed one" or "the won who is charged with a specific mission".
There are many Messiahs mentioned in OT books as well as One who will restore Jews their lost nations.
Jesus also came with a mission, he was certainly a Messiah, but not "The Messiah" who would restore Jews their lost kingdom.
That is where the whole problem comes, Christians "in their zeal" trying to fix every prophesey of Messiah and The Messiah on personality of Jesus, in which they err and do every trick to put them on the personality of Jesus.
Jesus' statement that I have come to fulfill laws and prophets, does not mean that he was "The Messiah" or that he was the last and Final prophet.
Jesus himself said "I have many things to say to you but you cannot bear them now, however when the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth come into the world, he shall guide you into all the truth".
Any one reading this passage without any bias, would "think" that Jesus was talking about some one to come after Jesus to "guide humanity into all truth".
That shows that Jesus was not the Last and Final Prophet.
PS:
I find it strange, you getting engaged in "theological discussions" while in the back of your mind, you pose as Atheist on Christian threads.
Are you here just to kill your time and have idle discussion?
Matthew 21:33-39

33"Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey. 34When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit.
35"The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. 36Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way. 37Last of all, he sent his son to them.'They will respect my son,' he said.

38"But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other,'This is the heir. Come, let's kill him and take his inheritance.' 39So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.

and thus Mohammad is a false prophet, who came after Jesus.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#40437 Dec 9, 2013
But YES, Jesus did speak of Muhammad. Jesus did speak of folks coming after Him: "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves" (Matthew 7:15).

Jesus warned us about Muhammad.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#40438 Dec 9, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want any proper discussion with me, you will have to speak in a civil language.
Otherwise I will have no discussion with you.
take it or leave it.
You take the truth or leave it. Is it true Mo had a little girl for a wife? Is it true he had many women? Is it true he stole and killed? Y E S !!!!!!!!!!
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40440 Dec 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>You take the truth or leave it. Is it true Mo had a little girl for a wife? Is it true he had many women? Is it true he stole and killed? Y E S !!!!!!!!!!
You have to use civil language, when talking about religious heads of major world religion.

This is an established practice. If you cannot comply with it, there could be no discussion between us.

take it or leave it.
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40441 Dec 9, 2013
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

America’s Lead Iran Negotiator Misrepresents U.S. Policy (and International Law) to Congress

By Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett

November 04, 2013 "Information Clearing House - Last month, while testifying to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Wendy Sherman—Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs and the senior U.S. representative in the P5+1 nuclear talks with Iran—said, with reference to Iranians,“We know that deception is part of the DNA.” This statement goes beyond orientalist stereotyping; it is, in the most literal sense, racist. And it evidently was not a mere “slip of the tongue”: a former Obama administration senior official told us that Sherman has used such language before about Iranians.

–If a senior U.S. government official made public statements about “deception” or some other negative character trait being “part of the DNA” of Jews, people of African origin, or most other ethnic groups, that official would—rightly—be fired or forced to resign, and would probably not be allowed back into “polite society” until after multiple groveling apologies and a long period of penance.

–But a senior U.S. official can make such a statement about Iranians—or almost certainly about any other ethnic group a majority of whose members are Muslim—and that’s just fine.

Of course, it’s not fine. But that’s the America we live in.
Putting aside Sherman’s glaring display of anti-Iranian racism, there was another egregious manifestation of prejudice-cum-lie in her testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that we want to explore more fully. It came in a response to a question from Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) about whether states have a right to enrich under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Here is the relevant passage in Sherman’s reply:

“It has always been the U.S. position that Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty does not speak about the right of enrichment at all [and] doesn’t speak to enrichment, period. It simply says that you have the right to research and development.”
Sherman goes on to acknowledge that “many countries such as Japan and Germany have taken that [uranium enrichment] to be a right.” But, she says,“the United States does not take that position. We take the position that we look at each one of these [cases].” Or, as she put it at the beginning of her response to Sen. Rubio,“It has always been the U.S. position that Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty does not speak about the right of enrichment at all”(emphasis added).

rio

London, UK

#40442 Dec 9, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>You take the truth or leave it. Is it true Mo had a little girl for a wife? Is it true he had many women? Is it true he stole and killed? Y E S !!!!!!!!!!
Do you think all the characters in the Bible were angels?

Before making accusations against Islam and its prophet Mohamed, maybe you could imagine Judaism and Christianity and the ways of life and customs in ancient times too.
You will find tales of rapes and murders in the Bible, incest and infanticide, etc...

As for the accusation of paedophilia leveled on Mohamed because he alledgedly had a pre-pubescent wife, there are many explanations. Many girls were married in young age then (Jews were doing it too), but that doesn't mean that the marriage was consumed immediatly. Marrying women and girls from defeated enemies was one way to spare them death or a life of slavery; those were the customs then, and not only among Arabs. There are conflicting views about the age of Mohamed's wife. Some say she was 6, others 9 and some even say 16. There is no indication as to when the marriage was consumed, but certainly not before the girl was menstruating; that custom was almost respected anywhere in the Middle east.

I am not expecting to convince you either...
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40444 Dec 9, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think all the characters in the Bible were angels?
Before making accusations against Islam and its prophet Mohamed, maybe you could imagine Judaism and Christianity and the ways of life and customs in ancient times too.
You will find tales of rapes and murders in the Bible, incest and infanticide, etc...
As for the accusation of paedophilia leveled on Mohamed because he alledgedly had a pre-pubescent wife, there are many explanations. Many girls were married in young age then (Jews were doing it too), but that doesn't mean that the marriage was consumed immediatly. Marrying women and girls from defeated enemies was one way to spare them death or a life of slavery; those were the customs then, and not only among Arabs. There are conflicting views about the age of Mohamed's wife. Some say she was 6, others 9 and some even say 16. There is no indication as to when the marriage was consumed, but certainly not before the girl was menstruating; that custom was almost respected anywhere in the Middle east.
I am not expecting to convince you either...
Thank you for a very reasonable post.

Let me add a few points regarding our prophet's marriage to Lady Aiyesha.

a. She was the daughter of Abu Bakr, the closest friend of prophet and the First Muslim.

b. The marriage was proposed by the parents of Lady Aiyesha.

c. There was a three years gap between marriage and its consummation. This was done so that she can reach the age of puberty.

d. There was no opposition or bad comments from the contemporary people of Arabia and no one objected to it, not even Jews and hypocrites of Madina who were always looking for stories to scandalize the prophet and his household.

e. And the real beneficiary of this alliance was not prophet, but Lady Aiyesha really. Under the patronage and guidance of prophet, she became the "Most learned women" about Islamic jurisprudence. She is one of the most respected of women in Islam.

f. Are these people "friends" of Lady Aiyesha, who bandy her name so openly? They are not helping her at all, what they are looking is to malign only the character of our prophet.

You are right, people like him are always interested in spreading hate and hatred, it is not in their veins to think and discuss logically and civilly.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#40445 Dec 10, 2013
MUQ wrote:
http://www.informationclearing house.info/article36747.htm
America’s Lead Iran Negotiator Misrepresents U.S. Policy (and International Law) to Congress
By Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
November 04, 2013 "Information Clearing House - Last month, while testifying to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Wendy Sherman—Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs and the senior U.S. representative in the P5+1 nuclear talks with Iran—said, with reference to Iranians,“We know that deception is part of the DNA.” This statement goes beyond orientalist stereotyping; it is, in the most literal sense, racist. And it evidently was not a mere “slip of the tongue”: a former Obama administration senior official told us that Sherman has used such language before about Iranians.
–If a senior U.S. government official made public statements about “deception” or some other negative character trait being “part of the DNA” of Jews, people of African origin, or most other ethnic groups, that official would—rightly—be fired or forced to resign, and would probably not be allowed back into “polite society” until after multiple groveling apologies and a long period of penance.
–But a senior U.S. official can make such a statement about Iranians—or almost certainly about any other ethnic group a majority of whose members are Muslim—and that’s just fine.
Of course, it’s not fine. But that’s the America we live in.
Putting aside Sherman’s glaring display of anti-Iranian racism, there was another egregious manifestation of prejudice-cum-lie in her testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that we want to explore more fully. It came in a response to a question from Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) about whether states have a right to enrich under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Here is the relevant passage in Sherman’s reply:
“It has always been the U.S. position that Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty does not speak about the right of enrichment at all [and] doesn’t speak to enrichment, period. It simply says that you have the right to research and development.”
Sherman goes on to acknowledge that “many countries such as Japan and Germany have taken that [uranium enrichment] to be a right.” But, she says,“the United States does not take that position. We take the position that we look at each one of these [cases].” Or, as she put it at the beginning of her response to Sen. Rubio,“It has always been the U.S. position that Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty does not speak about the right of enrichment at all”(emphasis added).
I agree, Iran needs to be stopped.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#40446 Dec 10, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think all the characters in the Bible were angels?
Before making accusations against Islam and its prophet Mohamed, maybe you could imagine Judaism and Christianity and the ways of life and customs in ancient times too.
You will find tales of rapes and murders in the Bible, incest and infanticide, etc...
As for the accusation of paedophilia leveled on Mohamed because he alledgedly had a pre-pubescent wife, there are many explanations. Many girls were married in young age then (Jews were doing it too), but that doesn't mean that the marriage was consumed immediatly. Marrying women and girls from defeated enemies was one way to spare them death or a life of slavery; those were the customs then, and not only among Arabs. There are conflicting views about the age of Mohamed's wife. Some say she was 6, others 9 and some even say 16. There is no indication as to when the marriage was consumed, but certainly not before the girl was menstruating; that custom was almost respected anywhere in the Middle east.
I am not expecting to convince you either...
The difference is Muhammad was not just a character in a bible or koran, he was the founder of a religion. He claimed to have been visited by the angel Gabriel. And posed as a true prophet of God. This self-proclaimed prophet insisted that God had declared him to be the 'perfect example' for mankind and that others were therefore to accord him with special privilege, unwavering obedience, wealth and earthly desires, including all of the slaves and women that his lust could handle. Sounds like a modern day Jim Jones to me. Yes there are stores of rape and incest in the Bible, but I don't follow those people, I follow Jesus.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#40447 Dec 10, 2013
Children were often given a specific reprieve from the mandate to "kill those who disbelieve in Allah":

[Muhammad said]“Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah. Do not be deceitful with the spoils; do not be treacherous, nor mutilate nor kill children.”(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992)

But Muhammad’s definition of a child was not the same as our modern understanding. Following the surrender of the Qurayza stronghold, he ordered the execution of every male child who had reached puberty. His men had the boys drop their pants so that they could chop the head off of anyone with pubic hair (Sahih Muslim 4390).

Keep in mind that many Muslims often insist that Aisha reached puberty at age nine, since that is the age that Muhammad began having sex with her. If so, then the age for “manhood” among boys might have been considered around twelve.

Why would a True God chose such a man?
USA Born

Claremont, CA

#40448 Dec 10, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Ans.
There are many good and true things written in your post. The views you hold are the "traditional views" that come from listening to same thing from the same source over and over again.
But they are more to do with "pre-programming" and "brain washing" than individual thinking and analysis.
Just look at the way, Most Jews do not find any "evidence" about Jesus in their books, while according to Christians the "OT books are flooded" with prophesies about Jesus.
How come two extreme views found by two different sets of people reading the same scriptures?
So the defect and problem is not in the scriptures, but the WAY PEOPLE INTERPRET those Scriptures.
When we say that our prophet is prophesized in both books of OT and NT, we face the same situation from Jews and Christians as what Jews hold towards Jesus.
If you want to have a discussion about "What Bible says about our prophet"…. We can have the same on this thread….
But perhaps you would like to go thru a small monograph I have written on the same subject.
I would give you the link and I can also post it page by page here, if you like it.
Based on that, we can have a discussion on this subject.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/51091963/
One of the major misconceptions about the scriptures is that it is a Jewish book. Beginning with Adam, we can see that God had/has a plan. We can also see the adversary working diligently to thwart God’s plan. Those basics have not changed. We can see the continuation of God’s plan throughout the Old and New Testaments.

Another misconception is that God’s Words only applies to the Jewish people. God did not choose Israel with the intent of excluding everyone else living or yet to be born. We should not view God’s plan using our fleshly concept of time or reason.
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

I agree with you that the Christians and the Jews do not agree on many things. The most important issue being whether Jesus was the Messiah promised to them and us, in scripture. Basically, Christians believe Jesus is the Messiah and the Jews believe the Messiah is yet to come.

I believe there are many scriptures in the Old Testament that describe the Messiah. Jesus fit those descriptions. The New Testament is a continuation of the Old.

You wrote:
“When we Ask Jews and Christians what their books have to say about the advent of our prophet? Both of them become silent and pretend as if they have not even heard the question, when we repeat this question, they say “Our books have nothing to say about your prophet at all, one way or other”.

I’ve asked you a couple of times to show me scripture that speaks of your prophet. I’ll ask again, please show me what the scriptures say about the advent of your prophet.
Ratloder

Naugatuck, CT

#40449 Dec 10, 2013
rio wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think all the characters in the Bible were angels?
Before making accusations against Islam and its prophet Mohamed, maybe you could imagine Judaism and Christianity and the ways of life and customs in ancient times too.
You will find tales of rapes and murders in the Bible, incest and infanticide, etc...
As for the accusation of pedophilia leveled on Mohamed because he alledgedly had a pre-pubescent wife, there are many explanations. Many girls were married in young age then (Jews were doing it too), but that doesn't mean that the marriage was consumed immediatly. Marrying women and girls from defeated enemies was one way to spare them death or a life of slavery; those were the customs then, and not only among Arabs. There are conflicting views about the age of Mohamed's wife. Some say she was 6, others 9 and some even say 16. There is no indication as to when the marriage was consumed, but certainly not before the girl was menstruating; that custom was almost respected anywhere in the Middle east.
I am not expecting to convince you either...
Just because you lured your old lady when she was 6 and raised her in your chubby image until she was ready for deflowering, doesn't make it right. No surprise you defend pedophilia. You disgust me, Fat Boy.
Uzi

Herzliya, Israel

#40451 Dec 10, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want any proper discussion with me, you will have to speak in a civil language.
Otherwise I will have no discussion with you.
take it or leave it.
hahhaha hahahah islam and civilisation is like oil and water, never mix. in the cult of islam there is only killings and non stop bloodshed thruout the centuries. Its sure a "piss" loving cult. Disgusting creatures.
Uzi

Herzliya, Israel

#40452 Dec 10, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
But YES, Jesus did speak of Muhammad. Jesus did speak of folks coming after Him: "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves" (Matthew 7:15).
Jesus warned us about Muhammad.
Thats right.
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40456 Dec 12, 2013
Uzi wrote:
<quoted text>
hahhaha hahahah islam and civilisation is like oil and water, never mix. in the cult of islam there is only killings and non stop bloodshed thruout the centuries. Its sure a "piss" loving cult. Disgusting creatures.
Thank for your bigoted post. There is nothing to answer.
MUQ

Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

#40457 Dec 12, 2013
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...

America’s Lead Iran Negotiator Misrepresents U.S. Policy (and International Law) to Congress

By Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett

Two points should be made here. First, the claim that the NPT’s Article IV does not affirm the right of non-nuclear-weapons states to pursue indigenous development of fuel-cycle capabilities, including uranium enrichment, under international safeguards is flat-out false.

Article IV makes a blanket statement that “nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination.” And it’s not just “countries such as Japan and Germany”—both close U.S. allies—which affirm that this includes the right of non-weapons states to enrich uranium under safeguards.

The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) countries and the Non-Aligned Movement (whose 120 countries represent a large majority of UN members) have all clearly affirmed the right of non-nuclear-weapons states, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, to pursue indigenous safeguarded enrichment.

In fact, just four countries in the world hold that there is no right to safeguarded enrichment under the NPT: the United States, Britain, France, and Israel (which isn’t even a NPT signatory). That’s it.
Moreover, the right to indigenous technological development—including nuclear fuel-cycle capabilities, should a state choose to pursue them—is a sovereign right.

It is not conferred by the NPT; the NPT’s Article IV recognizes states’“inalienable right” in this regard, while other provisions bind non-weapons states that join the Treaty to exercise this right under international safeguards.

There have been many first-rate analyses demonstrating that the right to safeguarded enrichment under the NPT is crystal clear—from the Treaty itself, from its negotiating history, and from subsequent practice, with at least a dozen non-weapons states building fuel-cycle infrastructures potentially capable of supporting weapons programs. Bill Beeman published a nice Op Ed in the Huffington Post on this question in response to Sherman’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee testimony, see here and, for a text including references, here. For truly definitive legal analyses, see the work of Daniel Joyner, for example here and here. The issue will also be dealt with in articles by Flynt Leverett and Dan Joyner in a forthcoming special issue of the Penn State Journal of Law and International Affairs, which should appear within the next few days.
From any objectively informed legal perspective, denying non-weapons states’ right of safeguarded enrichment amounts to nothing more than a shameless effort to rewrite the NPT unilaterally. And this brings us to our second point about Sherman’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee testimony.
Sherman claims that “It has always been the U.S. position that Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty does not speak about the right of enrichment at all [and] doesn’t speak to enrichment, period.”

But, in fact, the United States originally held that the right to peaceful use recognized in the NPT’s Article IV includes the indigenous development of safeguarded fuel-cycle capabilities.

Since: Nov 12

Sacramento, CA

#40458 Dec 13, 2013
MUQ wrote:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...
America’s Lead Iran Negotiator Misrepresents U.S. Policy (and International Law) to Congress
Muk

I agree, Iran needs to be stopped, with that said, why does Saudi support International Terrorism?

Riccardo

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 min Catcher1 55,964
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min Michael 649,804
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 7 min Flower-Child 53,840
how long after taking the Vivitrol shot can i f... (Nov '12) 18 min Danielle 171
Black gay brothers drop your BBM pins 19 min from uk 2
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 40 min Toby 972,384
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 53 min Toby 106,052
Moms having sex with their sons (Aug '12) Fri Noname 69
More from around the web