IAEA's El-Baradei Gives Rice & US Advice on How to Handle Dear Leader, Ahmadodojihad

Of the three cretinous faineant airheads awarded the Nobel Peace Prize since 2001 [Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, Mohammed El-Baradei, perhaps El-Baradei is the most dangerous. Read the link for this fatuous freak of nature's imbecilic partiality toward dictators and religious madmen.

The retention of El-Baradei in 2005 may be the fault of the ingenuous Rice/Bush tandem, the same pair who persuaded Israel not to veto Hamas's participation in last January's elections.

But this moronic idiot exceeds the last Arab, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, in his crimes against common sense and general human intelligence. Perhaps many observers are correct that first-cousin in-breeding among Arabs has produced an Ozarks/Kentucky brand of generalized dumbed-downedness. Here is what the WSJ has on the IAEA chief:

"I don't think sanctions work as a penalty," Mr. ElBaradei opined after meeting with Condoleezza Rice on Monday. The director general was talking about North Korea, of whose leaders he took the forgiving view that they are testing nuclear weapons because "they feel isolated, they feel they are not getting the security they need." As for Iran, "the jury is still out on whether they are developing a nuclear weapon." However, he was quite certain that "at the end of the day, we have to bite the bullet and talk to North Korea and Iran." No doubt Condi was grateful for this free public chiding.

And this ectomorph stick-insect also has advice to the US after Cong. Pete Hoekstra chided the IAEA for firing an Iranian inspector for actually doing his job:
the IAEA decided to leak to the press an ostensibly private letter to Mr. Hoekstra detailing its objections to a report on Iran, which the agency variously labeled "outrageous," "dishonest," "erroneous" and "misleading."

And what was so dreadful about the report, which had bipartisan blessing? Aside from huffing over two committee "errors"--one of them trivial, the other semantic--the IAEA took furious exception over the committee's statement that the IAEA had decided to remove Chris Charlier, its chief weapons' inspector for Iran, after Mr. Charlier said publicly that he thought the Iranians were intent on building a nuclear weapon.

The IAEA insists that it was Iran, not the IAEA, that demanded Mr. Charlier's removal, and that Iran is within its legal rights to do so. That's true. But it is also true that Iran has repeatedly--and illegally--denied IAEA inspectors the multiple-entry visas they need to do their job.

"Iran has consistently been in non-compliance with its safeguards agreement on this point," a former IAEA official recently told the Platts news agency. "And until now the IAEA has been unwilling to draw international attention to that fact." Our sources tell us that, in addition to Mr. Charlier, Iran denied entry to two other IAEA weapons inspectors in August alone.

I guess El-Baradei's membership in the "religion of tolerance" may have provoked a bias in favor of Iran's building a weapon because "they feel isolated, they feel they are not getting the security they need" and not because "the jury is still out on whether [Iran is] developing a nuclear weapon." The WSJ ends up its piece:

...Under Mr. ElBaradei's leadership the IAEA has presented itself as the ultimate arbiter on questions of nuclear proliferation, despite its failures to detect Iraq's nuclear-weapons programs in the 1980s and Libya's in the early part of this decade. Yet if the IAEA cannot get its personnel unimpeded into Iran--and especially if Iran can bar the toughest, most skeptical inspectors--the quality of the IAEA's information and the reliability of its judgments are bound to deteriorate.
Had Mr. ElBaradei been doing his real job, he might have made a more strenuous effort at pointing out publicly Iran's failures to comply with its obligations, rather than offer grand pronouncements on diplomacy and making partisan intrusions into American politics by critiquing Congressional white papers and Administration policy. As it is, we have Mr. Hoekstra to thank for bringing to light yet another instance of Iran's bad faith, and of the U.N.'s unreliability.

El-Baradei has demonstrated such widespread blockheadedness that perhaps he is running for SecGen of the UN, as it appears from Boutros-Ghali and Annan that stupidity is the chief requirement for getting that job.