The following article from the NYT clearly demonstrates the duplicity of the
United States Gov't regarding its policy concerning nuclear proliferation.

While India and Pakistan -- which are considered rogue nuclear states
because they refuse to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, just like
Israel -- have a free hand to do as they please, and are presently engaged
in increasing the amount of high-grade nuclear fuel that they possess, for
the purpose of using it in additional nuclear weapons, at the same time, the
USA strongly condemns Iran and North Korea for having similar ambitions.

Why this blatant duplicity on the part of the US Government? When it comes
to nuclear nonproliferation, shouldn't there be one standard which applies
equally to ALL nations without bias, prejudice or favoritism?

My own feelings are this: No nation should possess nukes. Nuclear weapons
are demonic, and come from the very bowels of hell. The knowledge and
ability to create such horrid, destructive weapons could only have come from
the Destroyer himself; that is, Apollyon/Abaddon, who even now is imprisoned
in the Bottomless Pit, according to the Book of Revelation.


Agenda of Nuclear Talks Leaves Out a New Threat

By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD - NYT

April 11, 2010


WASHINGTON -- Three months ago, American intelligence officials examining
satellite photographs of Pakistani nuclear facilities saw the first wisps of
steam from the cooling towers of a new nuclear reactor. It was one of three
plants being constructed to make fuel for a second generation of nuclear
arms.

The message of those photos was clear: While Pakistan struggles to make sure
its weapons and nuclear labs are not vulnerable to attack by Al Qaeda, the
country is getting ready to greatly expand its production of weapons-grade
fuel.

The Pakistanis insist that they have no choice. A nuclear deal that India
signed with the United States during the Bush administration ended a long
moratorium on providing India with the fuel and technology for desperately
needed nuclear power plants.

Now, as critics of the arrangement point out, the agreement frees up older
facilities that India can devote to making its own new generation of
weapons, escalating one arms race even as President Obama and President
Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia sign accords to shrink arsenals built during
the cold war.

Mr. Obama met with the leaders of India and Pakistan on Sunday, a day ahead
of a two-day Washington gathering with 47 nations devoted to the question of
how to keep nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists. In remarks to
reporters about the summit meeting, Mr. Obama called the possibility of a
terrorist organization obtaining a nuclear weapon represented "the single
biggest threat to U.S. security, both short-term, medium-term and
long-term."

The summit meeting is the largest gathering of world leaders called by an
American president since Franklin D. Roosevelt organized the 1945 meeting in
San Francisco that created the United Nations. (He died two weeks before the
session opened.) But for all its symbolism and ceremony, this meeting has
quite limited goals: seeking ways to better secure existing supplies of
bomb-usable plutonium and highly enriched uranium. The problem that India
and Pakistan represent, though, is deliberately not on the agenda.

"President Obama is focusing high-level attention on the threat that already
exists out there, and that's tremendously important," said Sam Nunn, the
former Democratic senator from Georgia who has devoted himself to
safeguarding global stockpiles of weapons material -- enough, by some
estimates, to build more than 100,000 atom bombs. "But the fact is that new
production adds greatly to the problem."

Nowhere is that truer than Pakistan, where two Taliban insurgencies and Al
Qaeda coexist with the world's fastest-growing nuclear arsenal. According to
a senior American official, Mr. Obama used his private meeting Sunday
afternoon with Yousaf Raza Gilani, Pakistan's newly empowered prime
minister, to "express disappointment" that Pakistan is blocking the opening
of negotiations on a treaty that would halt production of new nuclear
material around the world.

Experts say accelerated production in Pakistan translates into much
increased risk.

"The challenges are getting greater -- the increasing extremism, the
increasing instability, the increasing material," said Rolf Mowatt-Larssen
of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, who as a C.I.A. officer and
then head of the Energy Department's intelligence unit ran much of the
effort to understand Al Qaeda's nuclear ambitions.

"That's going to complicate efforts to make sure nothing leaks," he said.
"The trends mean the Pakistani authorities have a greater challenge."

Few subjects are more delicate in Washington. In an interview last Monday,
Mr. Obama avoided a question about his progress in building on a five-year,
$100 million Bush administration program to safeguard Pakistan's arms and
materials.

"I feel confident that Pakistan has secured its nuclear weapons," Mr. Obama
said. "I am concerned about nuclear security all around the world, not just
in Pakistan but everywhere." He added, "One of my biggest
concerns has to do
with the loose nuclear materials that are still floating out there."

Taking up the Pakistan-India arms race at the summit meeting, administration
officials say, would be "too politically divisive."

"We're focusing on protecting existing nuclear material, because we think
that's what everyone can agree on," one senior administration official said
in an interview on Friday. To press countries to cut off production of new
weapons-grade material, he said, "would take us into questions of
proliferation, nuclear-free zones and nuclear disarmament on which there is
no agreement."

Mr. Obama said he expected "some very specific commitments" from world
leaders.

"Our expectation is not that there's just some vague, gauzy statement about
us not wanting to see loose nuclear materials," he said. "We anticipate a
communique that spells out very clearly, here's how we're going to achieve
locking down all the nuclear materials over the next four years, with very
specific steps in order to assure that."

Those efforts began at the end of the cold war, 20 years ago. Today
officials are more sanguine about the former Soviet stockpiles and the focus
is now wider. Last month, American experts removed weapons-grade material
from earthquake-damaged Chile.

The summit meeting will aim to generate the political will so that other
nations and Mr. Obama's own administration can create a surge of financial
and technical support that will bring his four-year plan to fruition.

"It's doable but hard," said Matthew Bunn, a nuclear expert at Harvard.
"It's not easy to overcome secrecy, complacency, sovereignty and
bureaucracy."

Mr. Obama plans to open the summit meeting with a discussion of the scope of
the terrorist threat. The big challenge, Mr. Mowatt-Larssen said, is to get
world leaders to understand "that it's a low-probability, but not a
no-probability, event that requires urgent action."

For instance, in late 2007, four gunmen attacked a South African site that
held enough highly enriched uranium for a dozen atomic bombs. The attackers
breached a 10,000-volt security fence, knocked out detection systems and
broke into the emergency control room before coming under assault. They
escaped.

During the presidential campaign, Mr. Obama promised to "increase funding by
$1 billion a year to ensure that within four years, the essential
ingredients of nuclear weapons are removed from all the world's most
vulnerable sites and effective, lasting security measures are instituted for
all remaining sites."

In Mr. Obama's first year, though, financing for better nuclear controls
fell by $25 million, about 2 percent.

"The Obama administration got off to an unimpressive start," Mr. Bunn wrote
in his most recent update of "Securing the Bomb," a survey to be published
Monday by the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a nonprofit advocacy group that Mr.
Nunn helped found in Washington. But he added that its proposed budget for
the 2011 fiscal year calls for a 31 percent increase.

The next phase in Mr. Obama's arms-control plan is to get countries to agree
to a treaty that would end the production of new bomb fuel. Pakistan has led
the opposition, and it is building two new reactors for making weapons-grade
plutonium, and one plant for salvaging plutonium from old reactor fuel.

Last month, the Institute for Science and International Security, a private
group in Washington, reported that the first reactor was emitting steam.
That suggests, said Paul Brannan, a senior institute analyst, that the
"reactor is at least at some state of initial operation."

Asked about the production, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States,
Husain Haqqani, said, "Pakistan looks forward to working with the
international community to find the balance between our national security
and our contributions to international nonproliferation efforts."

In private, Pakistani officials insist that the new plants are needed
because India has the power to mount a lightning invasion with conventional
forces.

India, too, is making new weapons-grade plutonium, in plants exempted under
the agreement with the Bush administration from inspection by the
International Atomic Energy Agency. (Neither Pakistan nor India has signed
the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.)

The Obama administration has endorsed the Bush-era agreement. Last month,
the White House took the next step, approving an accord that allows India to
build two new reprocessing plants. While that fuel is for civilian use,
critics say it frees older plants to make weapons fuel.

"The Indian relationship is a very important one," said Mr. Nunn, who
influenced Mr. Obama's decision to endorse a goal of ridding the world of
nuclear weapons. But he said that during the Bush years, "I would have
insisted that we negotiate to stop their production of weapons fuel.
Sometimes in Washington, we have a hard time distinguishing between the
important and the vital."


Jeff Snyder, SysOp - Armageddon BBS  Visit us at endtimeprophecy.org port 23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Download Center 4 Mac BBS Software & Christian Files.  We Use Hermes II


--- Hermes Web Tosser 1.1