Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (756369)	12/26/2006 11:39:33 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Nuclear industry: Reactors should be terror-proof Associated Press, THE JERUSALEM POST Dec. 26, 2006 jpost.com The nuclear power industry wants the government to require companies to design new nuclear reactors that would better withstand large fires and explosions, such as those that could be caused by a terrorist attack using hijacked aircraft. "If you need to change the design to accommodate greater security, particularly for large fires and explosions, you want to do that up front in the design process, not after you build the plant" as the government requires, said Scott Peterson, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute. The industry's position, set out in a December 8 letter, runs counter to the government's. More than a month ago, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission decided to keep the current design rules - now more than a decade old - for new plants and make those facilities fulfill security requirements later. At question is the Design Basis Threat, or DBT, the largely secret requirements for threats for which nuclear plant operators must be prepared. A hijacked airliner is not on that list of threats, Peterson said, because defending against that kind of attack requires assistance from other government agencies and the military.

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (756369)	12/26/2006 11:42:14 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Iraqi leader upset by arrest of Iranians by U.S. forces By Alexandra Zavis and Peter Spiegel Times Staff Writers December 26, 2006 latimes.com BAGHDAD — Iraqi President Jalal Talabani on Monday protested the arrest by U.S. forces of two Iranian envoys who were in Iraq at his invitation, a spokesman said. Officials in Washington confirmed the detentions, first reported in the New York Times, saying the two officials were among an unspecified number of Iranians apprehended in raids last week aimed at groups suspected of plotting attacks against U.S. and Iraqi targets. The incident underscored divergent approaches toward Iran's attempts to expand its role in Iraq and the containment of militant Shiite Muslim groups allegedly funded by Tehran. President Bush has resisted pressure to open talks with Iran, which the United States accuses of arming and funding Shiite militiamen in Iraq. American officials have also accused Tehran of supplying technology used to make roadside bombs. Iran denies the U.S. charges, saying its ties to Iraq are political and religious. "We suspect this event validates our claims about Iranian meddling, but we want to finish our investigation of the detained Iranians before characterizing their activities," White House spokesman Alex Conant said. Iraqi officials have forged ahead with diplomatic contacts with Iran, and are distressed about a possible setback. Last month, Talabani flew to Tehran to enlist the support of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in quelling the violence in Iraq and rebuilding its shattered economy. The two signed agreements aimed at boosting ties. It was during the Tehran visit that Talabani extended the invitation to the two envoys who were detained last week, said Hiwa Osman, his spokesman. Talabani "is unhappy about the arrests" and has raised the issue with U.S. officials, Osman said. He refused further comment. But a Kurdish political insider said the incident suggested a lack of communication between the United States and Iraq over security matters and relations with Iran. "It seems that each side has their own plans and they are not coordinating with each other," said Mahmoud Othman, a lawmaker and Osman's father. "Of course it is of concern." A U.S. military official said American troops were not targeting Iranians, and that they happened upon the two envoys during a routine counterinsurgency operation. "We conducted a raid, we switched on the lights, and there they were," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Conant said the two officials were handed over to the Iraqi government because they had diplomatic immunity, and that Iraqi officials had released them to Iranian authorities. "We continue to work with the [Iraqi government] on the status of the remaining detainees," Conant said. "That investigation is going well." Osman said he was not aware of any other arrests. None of the U.S. officials interviewed Monday would specify how many Iranians had been detained or provide details about the raids. Iraqi officials also refused to give details. In Tehran, the Foreign Ministry called the arrest a "contravention of the code of conduct with diplomats," the official Iranian news agency reported. It quoted a ministry official as saying the arrests could have "unpleasant consequences." Washington and Tehran broke formal diplomatic ties after Iranian radicals stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which brought to power the world's first Shiite Muslim theocracy. The New York Times reported Sunday that the U.S. military was holding at least four Iranians, including senior military officials detained in two raids. It said the diplomats were apprehended Thursday while traveling in an Iranian Embassy vehicle. Embassy officials refused to comment Monday. Hadi Amiri, a leading figure in the political party of Shiite power broker Abdelaziz Hakim, denied the newspaper's report that some of the arrests were made at his home. Iran has forged close ties to senior members of the Shiite political alliance that leads Iraq's government, including Hakim, who spent years in exile in Iran during the rule of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. zavis@latimes.com peter.spiegel@latimes.com Zavis reported from Baghdad and Spiegel from Washington. Times staff writers Raheem Salman and Molly Hennessy- Fiske contributed to this report from Baghdad.

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (756369)	12/26/2006 11:43:55 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Iran's oil exports are declining, study says Instability called a likely outcome BY BARRY SCHWEID ASSOCIATED PRESS December 26, 2006 freep.com WASHINGTON -- Iran is suffering a staggering decline in revenue from oil exports, and if the trend continues, income could virtually disappear by 2015, according to an analysis released Monday by the National Academy of Sciences. Iran's economic woes could make the country unstable and vulnerable, with its oil industry crippled, Roger Stern, an economic geographer at Johns Hopkins University, said in the report and in an interview. Iran gets about $50 billion a year from oil exports. The decline is estimated at 10% to 12% annually. In less than five years, exports could be halved and then disappear by 2015, Stern predicted. The report said the nation could be destabilized by declining oil exports, hostility to foreign investment to develop new oil resources and poor planning, Stern said. The analysis supports U.S. and European suspicions that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. But, Stern said, there could be merit to Iran's claim that it needs civilian nuclear power "as badly as it claims." He said oil production is declining and both gas and oil are being sold domestically at highly subsidized rates. At the same time, Iran is neglecting to reinvest in oil production. "With an explosive demand at home and poor management, the appeal of nuclear power, financed by Russia, could fill a real need for production of more electricity." Iran produces about 3.7 million barrels of oil a day, about 300,000 barrels below the quota set for Iran by the oil cartel, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. The shortfall represents a loss of about $5.5 billion a year, Stern said. In 2004, Iran's oil profits were 65% of the government's revenues. "If we look at that shortfall, and failure to rectify leaks in their refineries, that adds up to a loss of about $10 billion to $11 billion a year," he said. If the United States can wait for a few years, it may find Iran a much more conciliatory country, Stern said. "What they are doing to themselves is much worse than anything we could do." Copyright © 2006 Detroit Free Press Inc.