LagosShia, confess your lies. You keep getting exposed. You are lucky that Vedaxcool is not here to finish the job.

There is serious religious persecution of minorities in Iran.

brentkruge:
The United States was the only country to oppose ElBaradei's reappointment and eventually failed to win enough support from other countries to oust ElBaradei. . . . Among countries that supported Elbaradei were China, Russia, Germany, and France. China praised his leadership and objectivity,[17] and supported him for doing "substantial fruitful work, which has maintained the agency's role and credit in international non-proliferation and promoted the development of peaceful use of nuclear energy. His work has been universally recognized in the international community. China appreciates Mr. El Baradei's work and supports his reelection as the agency's director general."[20] F[b]rance, Germany, and some developing countries, have made clear their support for ElBaradei as well[/b].[18] Russia issued a strong statement in favor of re-electing him as soon as possible.
ElBaradei was unanimously re-appointed by the IAEA board on June 13, 2005.[21]

In 2008, ElBaradei said that he would not be seeking a fourth term as director general.[22] Moreover, he said, in an IAEA document,that he was "not available for a further term" in office.[23]

On October 7, 2005, ElBaradei and the IAEA were announced as joint recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_ElBaradei

[size=18pt]US, Australia schemed against IAEA chief: cable[/size]

(AFP) – Aug 30, 2011

WASHINGTON — The United States and Australia schemed unsuccessfully in 2005 to block Mohamed ElBaradei's election to a third term as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, a newly leaked US diplomatic cable shows.

Both countries were unhappy with ElBaradei's "unhelpful" response to Iran's nuclear program, but the bid to prevent his re-election to the nuclear regulatory agency's leadership ultimately failed for lack of international support.

The February 18, 2005 State Department cable released by WikiLeaks Tuesday opens a window into the effort, describing a lunch conversation between Australian officials and a US special envoy for nuclear non-proliferation, Jackie Sanders.

The cable spotlights US and Australian concerns over the Egyptian diplomat's interpretation that Iran had a "right" to civilian nuclear power, and his reluctance to declare Iran in non-compliance with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Australian officials said there weren't the 12 votes on the IAEA board of governors needed to deny ElBaradei reelection, "but that did not stop them from speculating on ways to try to prevent his re-election," said the cable.

John Carlson, then head of Australia's nuclear safeguards agency and one of the officials at the lunch, said Canberra strongly supported limiting IAEA chiefs to two terms, according to the cable.

"Carlson commented that ElBaradei was a very bad manager and morale throughout the IAEA staff was 'appalling,'" the cable said.

The problem, however, was that no other candidate would step forward to challenge ElBaradei as long as the Egyptian diplomat was in the running, and not enough members of the board of governors would vote against him, Carlson said.

[size=14]A US official at the lunch asked whether an Australian candidate could be put up against ElBaradei, but Carlson said that could work only if ElBaradei first withdrew from the running.

"Sanders responded that there had been a time in the past when the numbers of ElBaradei non-supporters were there, and the issue was not over yet," the cable said.

"Carlson observed that in a secret ballot, anything could happen. It might be useful to put the word out in Vienna that ElBaradei could fail," it said.[/size]

The cable also included an informal document forwarded by Carlson, who had not yet cleared it with his government, entitled "The case against ElBaradei."

The brief argues that ElBaradei's reports to the IAEA's board of governor appeared to have been made with the object of stalling a finding that Iran's nuclear program was in non-compliance with the NPT.

"Iran's success in avoiding a non-compliance finding has emboldened it to press on with the nuclear program," it said.

"Meanwhile, the handling of the non-compliance issue has seriously damaged the integrity and credibility of the IAEA's processes. A change is needed in the IAEA leadership, to return the Agency to its technical function," the document said.

But ElBaradei survived the challenge, and went on to serve until 2009.

Copyright © 2012 AFP. All rights reserved.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hkiMaUJ3RNgZfH5FUV3paXt99GFg?docId=CNG.8c1679d03ff42431ed3c880cf121d5ae.201

^^^^^
ol boy, do you read at all?

This is what you wrote

when the Egyptian Muhammad al baradei refused to finger Iran,the US replaced him as head of IAEA.

I debunked your assertion by showing that the US didn't and indeed COULDN'T have replaced him as you allerged because the appointment is by consensus of countries. They (US) didn't want him there (as I showed), but couldn't do anything about it as he had solid support from France, Germany, Russia etc

Then, without reading my side of the story or you tripped on yourself, you bring up this article that says that the US didn't want him there AND FAILED to remove him

But El-Baradei survived the challenge, and went on to serve until 2009

Have you abandoned your position and are you supporting me now?

brentkruge: ^^^^^
ol boy, do you read at all?

This is what you wrote



I debunked your assertion by showing that the US didn't and indeed COULDN'T have replaced him as you allerged because the appointment is by consensus of countries. They (US) didn't want him there (as I showed), but couldn't do anything about it as he had solid support from France, Germany, Russia etc

Then, without reading my side of the story or you tripped on yourself, you bring up this article that says that the US didn't want him there AND FAILED to remove him



Have you abandoned your position and are you supporting me now?

Five Candidates Vie for Top IAEA Post


The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) announced April 29 that the field of candidates for director-general has expanded from two to five.

The agency had reopened the nominating process following an inconclusive vote in March to replace the agency's current head, Mohamed ElBaradei,who is scheduled to end his third four-year term in November. He has indicated that he will not be available for a fourth term. ElBaradei could remain in his position provisionally if a candidate is not elected by the end of his term, diplomatic sources familiar with the election process told Arms Control Today in recent weeks.

The search for new leadership comes as the agency is investigating suspicions that Iran and Syria have pursued nuclear weapons programs. The IAEA also is concluding a complex facility-specific safeguards arrangement for nuclear-armed India and is considering multilateral efforts to address the sensitive aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle.

The 35-nation IAEA Board of Governors carried out a series of votes March 26-27 to try to choose between two nominees, Yukiya Amano and Abdul Samad Minty. Amano is Japan's governor on the board, while Minty is South Africa's. In the final ballot, Amano secured 22 votes, just one short of the two-thirds vote necessary to win the election.

According to former U.S. and IAEA officials, the March voting results largely reflected a split between Western states and the developing world. Amano is widely seen by the developing world, as well as China and Russia, as too close to the United States to serve as an independent director of the agency, the sources said. Meanwhile, those sources said, Western governments are concerned that the outspoken Minty may politicize the organization.

The United States has criticized ElBaradei in recent years for speaking out on political decisions rather than focusing solely on the nuclear energy and safeguards tasks of the agency. (See [b]ACT, October 2008)

Following the failed vote, board chairperson Taous Feroukhi of Algeria told reporters March 27 that the agency would reopen the nominating process. A diplomatic source in Vienna said April 22 that the "general guidance" is that the board should come to a decision by its June 15-19 meeting, but no date has been scheduled for additional voting.

According to election procedures, a candidate must secure approval from two-thirds of the board in order to be appointed director-general. The diplomatic source said that the specific process by which the board might narrow the candidates and arrive at the two-thirds majority is largely subject to its consultations before the voting. In addition, the candidates may opt out of the running as part of the overall political jockeying among the board members.

After securing the board's endorsement, a candidate must be approved by the agency's 146 member states during its general conference, which takes place in September.

Since the nominating process was reopened, three new official nominees have emerged: Luis Echávarri of Spain, Ernest Petrič of Slovenia, and Jean-Pol Poncelet of Belgium. Amano and Minty have also been renominated.

In the last contested director-general election, in 1997, the board decided on ElBaradei as a compromise candidate from within the agency's secretariat, rather than choosing a political figure. Prior to becoming head of the agency, ElBaradei served as assistant director-general for external relations. A similar approach is possible in this year's election, but it is unclear who might play such a role, the former officials said.

There has been some speculation about two senior agency officials, but they appear to be unlikely candidates. Olli Heinonen of Finland, IAEA deputy director-general for safeguards, told Arms Control Today last September that he did not intend to run for the post. The former officials indicated that Vilmos Cserveny of Hungary, director of the IAEA Office of External Relations and Policy Coordination, would face difficulties in securing political support because another Hungarian, Tibor Tóth, is currently heading the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization.

http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2009_5/IAEA_candidates

^^^^

PLEASE, WHERE IN YOUR WRITEUP DID THE AMERICANS REMOVE EL BARADEI? Are you allergic to the facts?


This is what you wrote

when the egyptian Muhammad al baradei refused to finger iran,the US replaced him as head of IAEA.

and I challenged you that this is not true. The Americans hated him, schemed against him but couldnt do NADA cos other countries admired his fairness and independence and supported him. He himself declined a 4th term. He got applauded for his work and a Nobel prize as extra.

Please where is it shown that the "US replaced him"

Even your own article shows that El Baradei himself choose not to re-contest but pursue politics in Egypt. So how did the US "replace him"

The agency had reopened the nominating process following an inconclusive vote in March to replace the agency's current head, Mohamed ElBaradei,who is scheduled to end his third four-year term in November. He has indicated that he will not be available for a fourth term. ElBaradei could remain in his position provisionally if a candidate is not elected by the end of his term, diplomatic sources familiar with the election process told Arms Control Today in recent weeks.

Quit throwing words around. And, please, spare us the propaganda.

brentkruge: ^^^^

PLEASE, WHERE IN YOUR WRITEUP DID THE AMERICANS REMOVE EL BARADEI? Are you allergic to the facts?


This is what you wrote




and I challenged you that this is not true. The Americans hated him, schemed against him but couldnt do NADA cos other countries admired his fairness and independence and supported him. He himself declined a 4th term. He got applauded for his work and a Nobel prize as extra.

Please where is it shown that the "US replaced him"

Even your own article shows that El Baradei himself choose not to re-contest but pursue politics in Egypt. So how did the US "replace him"




Quit throwing words around. And, please, spare us the propaganda.

so you've finaly admitted they schemed.that is all needed to hear my words because i have learnt not to waste my valuable time degrading myself and arguing with your likes.so your cockroach brain wants El Baradei (after all the scheming to have someone else in his position by the US and australia) to stubbornly and blindly continue to confront the US and its allies by contesting for a fourth term (and possibly be shamed by losing) instead of resigning respectably and saving his record? which would you choose to do? it clearly shows the man was way wiser than his foes.

LagosShia:

so you've finaly admitted they schemed.that is all needed to hear my words because i have learnt not to waste my valuable time degrading myself and arguing with your likes.so your cockroach brain wants El Baradei (after all the scheming to have someone else in his position by the US and australia) to stubbornly and blindly continue to confront the US and its allies by contesting for a fourth term (and possibly be shamed by losing) instead of resigning respectably and saving his record? which would you choose to do? it clearly shows the man was way wiser than his foes.

Buahahaha! Did I ever say they didn't? Or did I show support for their actions? No. Did I support El Baradei? Yes. The only difference between me and you is that I didn't LIE and slander, which is what you did.

But Mr. man, the argument was not about admitting scheming. Since you have forgotten, let me remind you. You were the one who said the Americans replaced El Baradei, and I said NO, they couldn't even they wanted to. The man got his 3rd term and declined the fourth. He left to enter Egyptian politics. And quess what? He even got a Nobel. Then you go quoting things that had nothing to do with the issue at hand.

You are one dull dude. Just go through the thread again carefully and see your folly; dodging questions, skirting issues and shadow boxing.

Religious freedom in Iran indeed! Tell that to the marines!-literally.