No matter what the religious prejudices, looks like the world is being split in two
by opposing mind-sets:  One mind-set is willing to admit and cope with change
(scientific discovery and democratic social experiment) and the other mind-set
wants to keep everything pretty much as it was several hundred years ago.
At base, it’s a struggle to keep power in the hands of a relative few “authorities”
versus spreading power more fairly among majorities.

The more young people with skills in intercultural knowledge and reconciliation,
the better the hopes for human survival.  Without them we old stick-in-the-muds
are pretty helpless, it appears.

No matter what the religious prejudices, looks like the world is being split in two
by opposing mind-sets:  One mind-set is willing to admit and cope with change
(scientific discovery and democratic social experiment) and the other mind-set
wants to keep everything pretty much as it was several hundred years ago.
At base, it’s a struggle to keep power in the hands of a relative few “authorities”
versus spreading power more fairly among majorities.

The more young people with skills in intercultural knowledge and reconciliation,
the better the hopes for human survival.  Without them we old stick-in-the-muds
are pretty helpless, it appears.

“if there is no mention of el Baradei’s assessments of the more recent reports
it’s
because no one respects his opinions in the matter as his bias was not unclear.

it was fairly understandable given that the crazies of the Bush admin were in
office, but the guy cooked the books all the same.”

No one respects Elbaradei’s opinions?  Then what happened after he
won the Nobel Prize in 2005 for his work in limiting the spread of atomic
weapons?  Perhaps I’m missing something that damaged his credibility 7 years
later. 

I don’t see how he was showing bias by his discernment between the Farsi and
Arabic languages along with their word processing when he dismissed the
allegations of a document from 2009.  It was supposed to have been thrown
out, but ended published by a British newspaper and then in the 2011 IAEA
report.  Just who is cooking the books?

That sort of disinformation reminds me of the fraudulence of the Bush
administration, too! And once again, Elbaradei challenges counterfeit
documentation like he did in the run-up to the Iraq invasion of 2003. Here are
some concerns about the document in dispute from a Bloomberg source:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-11/iran-nuclear-weapons-
charge-is-no-slam-dunk-commentary-by-robert-kel

Do you have anything to substantiate that Elbaradei has shown bias in his work and
committed fraud?  It’s very hard for me to imagine that, especially after he
received the Nobel.  Specifically, what has he been accused of in “cooking the
books”? 

Incidentally and to segue into Ozark Michael’s concern about the Muslim
Brotherhood, Elbaradie also recently made it public that the Egyptian military
and the US were in secret talks because of concern that they would break the
Camp David Accords with Israel.  I question the legitimacy of Egyptian support
for the brotherhood, and think Israel has valid concerns about their increasing
domination of the military and political arenas. 

Unfortunately, we live in times where honesty and integrity are attacked or
undermined by the media.  I believe the Guardian conclusion with the link was
deliberately incomplete about the outlook for his presidency.

I never knew what to make of ElBaradei. He wanted to gradually improve the Egyptian government instead of overthrow it. In other words, he was cautious. Was he cautious because he loved Mubarak? Or was he cautious because he had the wisdom to realize that the Muslim Brotherhood was coming after the revolution?(just like I cautioned while the cicadas here buzzed glee over the revolt)

I still dont know if he is a genius or a coward. Or both. Either way, the guy seems to be a conservative, the sort of person many Truthdiggers would boo and hiss at. He certainly isnt the friend of you radicals, so dont weep over him as if he was your guiding star through the Arab Spring.

Here is ElBaradei before the revolution:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/18/mohamed-elbaradei-tunisia-egypt?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Bad news!  Sad news!

if there is no mention of el Baradei’s assessments of the more recent reports it’s
because no one respects his opinions in the matter as his bias was not unclear.

it was fairly understandable given that the crazies of the Bush admin were in
office, but the guy cooked the books all the same.

Of course, Elbaradei wouldn’t be elected in a largely Islamist military dictatorship.

It’s also obvious that his presidency wouldn’t be supportive of US policies
throughout the region.
 
Incidentally, there was next to nothing on media coverage of his assessment this
week regarding the inauthenticity of the recent IAEA report.

It looks like the Islamist Brotherhood is gaining momentum, thanks to engineered
outcomes of the Libyan and Egyptian “revolutions.”

if he dropped out, it’s primarily because he couldn’t
win.