Head of Iranian Power Plants Department reveals details about Iranian Nuclear Program; 3 more

The video clips may not play correctly through the Free Republic system. You may need to click on the master page URL hyperlink (here again) and open up the "Latest Clips" page in a new browser window, where the clips should play just fine.

MEMRI TV

If you open the page and don't see the clip that you're looking for, search the MEMRI TV site using the clip number.

Sometimes the "Latest Clips" page is changed rapidly when new, breaking items arrive.

3/8/2005	Clip No. 593

Head of Iranian Power Plants Department, Asadollah Saburi, reveals details about Iranian Nuclear Program

The following are excerpts from an interview with Asadollah Saburi who heads the power plants department in the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization. Jam-e Jam2 TV aired this interview on March 8, 2005: Asadollah Saburi: We have technical knowhow for all the aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle, ranging from the discovery, the mining, the production of Uranium and turning it into UF6, and its enrichment to the degree necessary for a power plant. The only thing that we lack is turning this technical knowhow into industrial plants for continuous production. Even after enrichment there are two additional aspects. After we attain enrichment to a degree of three to four percent, the fuel system should be established. There are two more factories, and the Atomic Energy organization has begun to act on this issue. Only when we reach industrial production we will be able to supply the fuel for the plant. This alone may take four to five years. In four or five years we will be expecting the second Bushehr unit to be activated. Then you will be asking when we will activate it. The second unit should also be built. The cost of the initial fuel for the Bushehr power plant is 56 million dollars for 90 tons. We can carry out the entire construction of a nuclear power plant, due to the experience we gained building the first unit in Bushehr. Voice of Rozita, a caller from the US: If instead of nuclear technology and energy you were to build some public toilets alongside the highways, there would be no problem for the Iranians and for me and others coming to Iran from the US and other countries. There should at least be some public toilets on the highways. Interviewer: Thank you. In all fairness, I will leave the answer to your question to the viewers. What kind of a comparison it this? This isn't fair. No one denies there are problems. There are problems everywhere, and this is a long-lasting problem. But your comparing this problem to nuclear energy – I'll leave the answer to your family and friends and to the viewers.

3/2/2005	Clip No. 592

Libyan Leader Mu'ammar Qadhafi on Western Democracy vis-a-vis Libyan "Republic of the Masses"

The following are excerpts from an address by Libyan leader Mu'ammar Qadhafi.* Libyan TV aired this speech on March 2, 2005:* Mu'ammar Al-Qadhafi: They ask us why we don't use ballots. Did these ballots solve the problems of the world? Have we not heard that elections are forged throughout the world? From the largest country to the smallest – ultimately, there are allegations that the elections were forged. These elections are conducted with ballots. Therefore, ballots have not solved the problem of election forgeries. On the contrary, perhaps the easiest way to forge an election is through ballots. The world laughs and makes jokes about ballots, voting, elections, and their forgery. In the elections you are silent. You throw a piece of paper into the ballot box, just like in a trash can. You are only allowed a "yes" or "no." You don't even say it with your mouth - you use a piece of paper. Is this democracy?! If they want democracy in any country, they should learn from Libya. Hitler had a parliament, Mussolini had a Parliament, Stalin had a parliament, Franco had a parliament, Ceausescu had a parliament… All these tyrants established dictatorships through parliaments. Therefore parliaments… Elections and parliaments have not solved the problem of dictatorships - otherwise they would have to admit that Hitler was democratic, Mussolini was democratic, Stalin was democratic, Franco was democratic, and Ceausescu was democratic. How can they historically condemn Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Ceausescu, etc. and claim they were dictators, while saying democracy means the existence of parliaments?! These people had parliaments. They must either admit the parliamentary system is a failure and does not achieve democracy, or else admit that Hitler was democratic. The first civil society to be fully established is the Republic of the masses in Libya. A civil society. Some may say (cynically), "This Qadhafi, who has a country of five million backward Bedouin - let's listen to him and he will teach us." No, no. We tell them that Jesus, in whose religion they now believe, came from the East and was barefoot. He wore tattered clothes and they mocked him and wanted to kill him and, according to their belief, they crucified him – (According to Islam) they didn't crucify him. They didn't kill of crucify him, but according to their belief they killed the Messiah. Why did they kill the Messiah? They asked, "Who is this Messiah to be saying such things to us? We are the Roman Empire, we are the sons of Israel. This son of Miriam comes to us and wants to teach us about Allah and His religion!" So why do you believe in his religion now? How come there are churches and bells ring everywhere for Jesus? Muhammad, in whose religion a quarter of humanity believe, had no intercontinental missiles or nuclear bombs. He came from a backward Bedouin society - a poor and miserable society. So how come a quarter of humanity now believe in Muhammad's religion? Show me any imperialistic religion that people believe in. There are none. Show me an emperor who changed the world or brought any belief. He may have changed the world with his army for a while, but did any of them bring us a religion or ideology that the world believes in? We ask: "With what country does Libya have problems?" With none. Some may say "the Israelis." Ah, the Israelis – that is not a Libyan problem. It is an Arab problem. If you define yourself as Arab, you may say the Arabs have a problem with the Israelis. You may say, "I have a problem with the US." What problem with the US? There are no problems between Libya and the US. They may say, "The US is occupying Iraq." In this case you are speaking as and Arab.

3/6/2005	Clip No. 591

Saudi Professor of Law Saleh bin Muhammad Al-Sultan Explain His Support of Anti-American Jihad in Iraq

The following are excerpts from an interview with Saudi professor of law, Saleh bin Muhammad Al-Sultan.* Al-Majd TV aired this interview on March 6, 2005:* Saleh bin Muhammad Al-Sultan: How should we view the events in Iraq from the perspective of Islamic law? As you know, a group of (Saudi) clerics issued a communiqué what became known as "the communiqué of the 26." This communiqué was good and comprehensive, from the perspective of Islamic law. It called upon the Iraqi people to wage Jihad against the occupier. The US itself admits it is occupying Iraq. If it is an occupier, the people of Iraq have an individual duty to fend off this occupier. Interviewer: This may this may lead to killings… Saleh bin Muhammad Al-Sultan: There is no choice but to kill. But it may better not to fight the party that is stronger. This decision should be left to the concerned parties. it is clear that there is an obligation to fight, but whether it is obligatory now or not right now – the (religious) authorities should decide whether they are capable (of fighting) or not. perhaps we cannot know from here, but if you ask Iraqis, or members of the Islamic Cleric Association, or those waging Jihad - they will say that they are capable. the evidence of this is the attacks (against the Americans) that you see now, and the effort of the American forces to leave Iraq any possible way. Just a second… We must still talk about the attacks that occur now. the operations must target the plundering and oppressive occupier. As for targeting Muslims in Iraq – this is forbidden. You probably remember that I talked about the sanctity of Muslim blood and quoted the relevant hadiths on the previous show. Therefore, the Jihad of the Iraqi people must target this occupier. Some may say, for instance, "I am killing a person a collaborater or a spy." This is well known. Anyone who collaborates with an infidel - is subject to the same ruling as the occupier, Jihad must be waged against him.

ping

Pong. Good articles.

Saudi Professor of Law Saleh bin Muhammad Al-Sultan Explain His Support of Anti-American Jihad in Iraq

Explain it to the hangman, a-hole.