U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who declared a Gulf of Mexico oil spill an event of "national significance" nine days after a deadly oil-rig explosion, on Monday said that the Obama administration had showed an "all hands on deck" response "since day one."
Napolitano also said that the response to the disaster could be far from winding down. "Worst-case scenario is we'll be at this for quite a while," Napolitano told the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. "We're not at the beginning--we've been at it a month almost--but we're not near the end as well."
Early on, the Obama administration came under criticism for the amount of time it took to respond to the April 20 explosion. The Homeland Security chief waited until April 29 to declare the spill of "national significance," which allowed the federal government to funnel more people and resources into the effort.
To date, more than 17,000 people at the federal, state and local level have been deployed, Napolitano said. The Defense Department has approved the activation of up to 17,500 National Guard troops, with more than 1,300 of those deployed, Napolitano said. The responders appear to be growing strained; the government will have to "start rotating people in and out," she said.
Lawmakers reserved their toughest criticism for officials from the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, who declined to testify. The Senators questioned why the agency had approved BP PLC's spill-response plans in the first place. The criticism came as the top federal official who led regulation of offshore oil drilling at MMS circulated an email to colleagues saying that he would retire at the end of the month, according to an email that was distributed by one of the agency's top officials and viewed by The Wall Street Journal.
Asked why MMS officials elected not to testify, Interior spokeswoman Julie Rodriguez said that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar "will be the first DOI official to testify on this topic."
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I., Conn.) said that MMS had to answer questions. "They'e got all sorts of authority here; they just didn't use it," he said to reporters after the hearing. He said that "I don't see how our government can allow any new deepwater wells to be permitted and drilled," until questions about the regulation of deepwater drilling are answered. Deepwater drilling involves drilling 1,000 feet or more below the sea.
With BP still working out how to contain the spill, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last week approved the use of chemical dispersants underwater in order to break up the oil before the fluid reaches shorelines. Most of the oil has remained offshore, though soft "tar balls" have washed ashore at the South Pass entry to the Mississippi River in Louisiana and on Alabama's Dauphin Island, Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mary Landry said at a press conference last week. Oil has washed ashore on Louisiana's Chandeleur Islands as well.
Some people worried that underwater chemical dispersant could be responsible for large oil plumes that have formed beneath the sea's surface, warning that the plumes could deplete the sea of oxygen.
"We have to be careful right now about what is being assumed relative to the undersea plume and not," Napolitano said, backing up National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration chief Jane Lubchenco. The NOAA administrator has called reports about the effects of underwater dispersants "misleading, premature, and in some cases, inaccurate."
Coast Guard Rear Admiral Peter Neffenger, who is helping oversee response efforts, told the committee that the response was complicated because a fail-safe device called a blowout preventer didn't work, thousands of feet of pipeline lay on the sea floor "like spaghetti," and measuring the pressure inside the pipe was difficult.
The response would have been "much more rapid" had the accident occurred closer to the sea's surface, he said. "It's the distance below the surface that was challenging."
BP said it has had a breakthrough in an effort to stop the leaks, using robots to insert one end of a mile-long tube into a broken oil pipe on the sea floor. The intent is to siphon off the crude oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico. But the success of the operation isn't assured and BP is still focused on drilling so-called relief wells to stanch the flow of oil.
"No one seems to know really what to do," said Sen. Susan Collins (R. Maine), the top Republican on the panel. "The impression that you get is that there's no plan." sports
here and where
The way to the dream
I lover chinese
friendsinmyhearthttp://forums.sounddevices.com
http://mnaabr.com/vb
http://forum.skodovka.pl
http://www.esensja.pl/forum
http://djforo.es
Monday, May 17, 2010
US to continue push for sanctions
The United States will move ahead with its press for sanctions against Iran, despite Teheran’s announcement that it will ship some of its low-enriched uranium abroad, American officials said on Monday.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the US would continue to work with its international partners through the UN Security Council “to make it clear to the Iranian government that it must demonstrate through deeds – and not simply words – its willingness to live up to international obligations, or face consequences, including sanctions.”
The US has been pushing the Security Council to issue a fourth round of sanctions against Teheran for continuing to defy the international community by enriching uranium. It has been slow going, but the US has picked up some momentum, especially with holdouts Russia and China, in recent weeks as it aims for a new resolution by the end of next month.
By agreeing to ship low-enriched uranium abroad, Iran appeared to be trying to scuttle the push for a fourth round of Security Council sanctions. Countries less supportive of sanctions could see the deal as providing more time for a diplomatic solution and as a sign of Iranian cooperation.
But Gibbs stressed on Monday that “given Iran’s repeated failure to live up to its own commitments, and the need to address fundamental issues related to Iran’s nuclear program, the United States and international community continue to have serious concerns.”
The deal – signed with Turkey and Brazil earlier on Monday – is similar to one struck in October between Teheran and the P5+1 (the US, France, UK, Russia and China plus Germany), which have been working with Teheran to resolve the nuclear issue.
In that case, Iran’s enriched uranium was due to be shipped to Russia and returned as fuel rods that could not be used for a nuclear weapons program without first being reprocessed. But Iran never went through with the arrangement, prompting the US to go to Security Council for another round of sanctions.
While the new arrangement would see a similar amount of uranium shipped abroad as in October’s deal, Iran has since produced sufficient additional low-enriched material to leave it with enough to make such a weapon even if it sends the originally agreed on amount abroad. In addition Iran has signaled it intends to keep enriching uranium to a higher level in the meantime.
'Declaration vague about Iran's promise to meet with Western leaders'
“While it would be a positive step for Ian to transfer low-enriched uranium off of its soil, as it agreed to do last October, Iran said today that it would continue its 20-percent enrichment, which is a direct violation of UN Security Council resolutions,” Gibbs said, adding that the new arrangement is “vague” about meeting with the P5+1, as Teheran previously committed to doing.
Following Monday’s signing, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for new diplomatic talks, ones that presumably would not focus on sanctions. “Following the signing of the nuclear fuel swap deal, it is time for 5+1 countries to enter talks with Iran based on honesty, justice and mutual respect,” he said.
'Israel will respond in due course'
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu directed his ministers on Monday night not to respond to the deal, saying that Israel’s response would come in due course.
This wait-and-see approach was at odds with Israel’s generally favorable response seven months ago to the first attempt to get the Iranians to ship most of its low-enriched uranium abroad.
Another official said Israel did not yet have enough details on the deal to determine what it meant, particularly since the amount of fuel in Iran’s possession had increased since the original plan was inked.
Israel, the official added, had no need to come out with a response to the agreement, since this was an international issue and one being led by the P5+1.
International reaction: tepid
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev welcomed the agreement but advised caution. During a trip to Ukraine, Medvedev said that Iran’s plans to continue uranium enrichment could continue to engender international concern over the regime’s nuclear program. In particular, he cited Iran’s intention to continue enriching its own uranium.
Germany and Britain expressed serious caution following reports of the deal, and British officials – like their American counterparts – said they were still committed to sanctions. “Our position on Iran is unchanged at the present time,” Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokesman told reporters.
Alistair Burt, a parliamentary undersecretary of state at the Foreign Office, said “Iran has an obligation to assure the international community of its peaceful intentions. The IAEA has said it is unable to verify this.”
That is why, he added, Britain “has been working with our P5+1 partners on a sanctions resolution in the Security Council. Until Iran takes concrete actions to meet those obligations, that work must continue.”
Iran avoids brinksmanship, keeps testing world powers' limits
Iran’s agreement to the new arrangement fit well into its pattern of behavior, according to Emily Landau, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University and director of its arms control and regional security program. Iran is not North Korea and is not interested in brinksmanship with the world, she said; rather, the Iranians gauge very carefully the world’s reactions to their actions, and plan their next steps accordingly.
“When they take an action that might get a strong reaction, they move back a bit. And when they see no harsh horizon, they push forward stronger,” she said.
“They might have come to the conclusion that some sanctions were likely to be agreed upon, and that even the watered-down sanctions being discussed were too much at this point,” Landau said. “So it was very convenient for them to go forward with Turkey and Brazil.”
Landau said that while delaying Iran’s nuclear progress was a positive, it would only be effective if the international community used the time gained to put a halt to Teheran’s nuclear march.
“Delaying their progress is good news if there are good ideas about how to use the gained time,” she said. The problem, she added, is that she still didn’t see a strategy from the Obama administration for stopping – not merely delaying for a few months – the Iranian program.
She also noted that very little was yet known about the deal, and American officials pointed out that Iran had yet to present it to the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, which would be an important sign of seriousness. Teheran has indicated it would present it to the IAEA in the coming week.
“The only thing we know is that 1,200 kilos of low-grade enriched uranium will be shipped to Turkey, and somehow transformed into fuel rods for Iran’s small reactor. We don’t know who will do this,” she said, adding that she didn’t think Turkey had that capability.
Landau pointed out that both Turkey and Brazil had very strong economic ties with Iran and were opposed to sanctions because of the harm they would cause their economic interests. Both countries are currently non-permanent members of the Security Council.
Both countries, she said, also felt that the role of mediator could significantly enhance their diplomatic standing on the world stage.
“Brazil wants to be a permanent member of the Security Council, and it would be important for it to pull off this kind of deal,” she said. And Turkey, she pointed out, had sought to be a mediator between Israel and Syria, the US and Iran, and even Hamas and Fatah.
It was clear that neither Turkey nor Brazil was motivated in putting together this deal by a “non-proliferation agenda,” Landau said.your best friend
here we go now
where am i?
help me, help you
Let us go go go
http://www.powerracing.ru
http://www.forumstrikeout.net
http://forum.chinaorbit.com
http://www.kayakmagazine.com/board
http://www.mazameer.com/vb
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the US would continue to work with its international partners through the UN Security Council “to make it clear to the Iranian government that it must demonstrate through deeds – and not simply words – its willingness to live up to international obligations, or face consequences, including sanctions.”
The US has been pushing the Security Council to issue a fourth round of sanctions against Teheran for continuing to defy the international community by enriching uranium. It has been slow going, but the US has picked up some momentum, especially with holdouts Russia and China, in recent weeks as it aims for a new resolution by the end of next month.
By agreeing to ship low-enriched uranium abroad, Iran appeared to be trying to scuttle the push for a fourth round of Security Council sanctions. Countries less supportive of sanctions could see the deal as providing more time for a diplomatic solution and as a sign of Iranian cooperation.
But Gibbs stressed on Monday that “given Iran’s repeated failure to live up to its own commitments, and the need to address fundamental issues related to Iran’s nuclear program, the United States and international community continue to have serious concerns.”
The deal – signed with Turkey and Brazil earlier on Monday – is similar to one struck in October between Teheran and the P5+1 (the US, France, UK, Russia and China plus Germany), which have been working with Teheran to resolve the nuclear issue.
In that case, Iran’s enriched uranium was due to be shipped to Russia and returned as fuel rods that could not be used for a nuclear weapons program without first being reprocessed. But Iran never went through with the arrangement, prompting the US to go to Security Council for another round of sanctions.
While the new arrangement would see a similar amount of uranium shipped abroad as in October’s deal, Iran has since produced sufficient additional low-enriched material to leave it with enough to make such a weapon even if it sends the originally agreed on amount abroad. In addition Iran has signaled it intends to keep enriching uranium to a higher level in the meantime.
'Declaration vague about Iran's promise to meet with Western leaders'
“While it would be a positive step for Ian to transfer low-enriched uranium off of its soil, as it agreed to do last October, Iran said today that it would continue its 20-percent enrichment, which is a direct violation of UN Security Council resolutions,” Gibbs said, adding that the new arrangement is “vague” about meeting with the P5+1, as Teheran previously committed to doing.
Following Monday’s signing, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for new diplomatic talks, ones that presumably would not focus on sanctions. “Following the signing of the nuclear fuel swap deal, it is time for 5+1 countries to enter talks with Iran based on honesty, justice and mutual respect,” he said.
'Israel will respond in due course'
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu directed his ministers on Monday night not to respond to the deal, saying that Israel’s response would come in due course.
This wait-and-see approach was at odds with Israel’s generally favorable response seven months ago to the first attempt to get the Iranians to ship most of its low-enriched uranium abroad.
Another official said Israel did not yet have enough details on the deal to determine what it meant, particularly since the amount of fuel in Iran’s possession had increased since the original plan was inked.
Israel, the official added, had no need to come out with a response to the agreement, since this was an international issue and one being led by the P5+1.
International reaction: tepid
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev welcomed the agreement but advised caution. During a trip to Ukraine, Medvedev said that Iran’s plans to continue uranium enrichment could continue to engender international concern over the regime’s nuclear program. In particular, he cited Iran’s intention to continue enriching its own uranium.
Germany and Britain expressed serious caution following reports of the deal, and British officials – like their American counterparts – said they were still committed to sanctions. “Our position on Iran is unchanged at the present time,” Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokesman told reporters.
Alistair Burt, a parliamentary undersecretary of state at the Foreign Office, said “Iran has an obligation to assure the international community of its peaceful intentions. The IAEA has said it is unable to verify this.”
That is why, he added, Britain “has been working with our P5+1 partners on a sanctions resolution in the Security Council. Until Iran takes concrete actions to meet those obligations, that work must continue.”
Iran avoids brinksmanship, keeps testing world powers' limits
Iran’s agreement to the new arrangement fit well into its pattern of behavior, according to Emily Landau, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University and director of its arms control and regional security program. Iran is not North Korea and is not interested in brinksmanship with the world, she said; rather, the Iranians gauge very carefully the world’s reactions to their actions, and plan their next steps accordingly.
“When they take an action that might get a strong reaction, they move back a bit. And when they see no harsh horizon, they push forward stronger,” she said.
“They might have come to the conclusion that some sanctions were likely to be agreed upon, and that even the watered-down sanctions being discussed were too much at this point,” Landau said. “So it was very convenient for them to go forward with Turkey and Brazil.”
Landau said that while delaying Iran’s nuclear progress was a positive, it would only be effective if the international community used the time gained to put a halt to Teheran’s nuclear march.
“Delaying their progress is good news if there are good ideas about how to use the gained time,” she said. The problem, she added, is that she still didn’t see a strategy from the Obama administration for stopping – not merely delaying for a few months – the Iranian program.
She also noted that very little was yet known about the deal, and American officials pointed out that Iran had yet to present it to the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, which would be an important sign of seriousness. Teheran has indicated it would present it to the IAEA in the coming week.
“The only thing we know is that 1,200 kilos of low-grade enriched uranium will be shipped to Turkey, and somehow transformed into fuel rods for Iran’s small reactor. We don’t know who will do this,” she said, adding that she didn’t think Turkey had that capability.
Landau pointed out that both Turkey and Brazil had very strong economic ties with Iran and were opposed to sanctions because of the harm they would cause their economic interests. Both countries are currently non-permanent members of the Security Council.
Both countries, she said, also felt that the role of mediator could significantly enhance their diplomatic standing on the world stage.
“Brazil wants to be a permanent member of the Security Council, and it would be important for it to pull off this kind of deal,” she said. And Turkey, she pointed out, had sought to be a mediator between Israel and Syria, the US and Iran, and even Hamas and Fatah.
It was clear that neither Turkey nor Brazil was motivated in putting together this deal by a “non-proliferation agenda,” Landau said.your best friend
here we go now
where am i?
help me, help you
Let us go go go
http://www.powerracing.ru
http://www.forumstrikeout.net
http://forum.chinaorbit.com
http://www.kayakmagazine.com/board
http://www.mazameer.com/vb
and never idled time away
Thanks to years experiences of hard study and those business lives before hot women's dresses I attended Shanghai International Studies University,online shoes storeonline shoes store I was aware that a man can not be defeated as long as you stand firmly for your convictions in the face of personal and outer pressure,shop 4u blog for shirtsshop 4u blog for shirts some days later you will find it is this kind of people can stand in the top of your dream.hot women's dresses
I am a kind of people who can work hardly and wholeheartedly, and never idled time away.http://radrounds.net
http://www.forumtlumaczy.pl
http://wap.laneros.com
http://aarising.com/forums
http://www.joomlaportal.ch/forum
I am a kind of people who can work hardly and wholeheartedly, and never idled time away.http://radrounds.net
http://www.forumtlumaczy.pl
http://wap.laneros.com
http://aarising.com/forums
http://www.joomlaportal.ch/forum
and fuses in which
I am a open and bright,wedding dresses 2nd wedding dresses 2ndsteadily man, have the vigor.I treat people warmly and Sincere. I like to work responsiblely and Positive initiative.dresses 1std
I can bear hardships and stand hard work,wedding dresses form china
dresses 1std
likes challenging myself.I Have the strong organizing facultywedding dresses form china
, actual beginning ability and the association team spirit.I can rapid adaptation each kind of environment, and fuses in which.
http://www.clubarduetto.it/forum
http://www.webmastershelp.com
http://www.cyberangler.com/forum
http://forum.rsu.edu.ru
http://wiki.blastwave.org/forum
I can bear hardships and stand hard work,wedding dresses form china
dresses 1std
likes challenging myself.I Have the strong organizing facultywedding dresses form china
, actual beginning ability and the association team spirit.I can rapid adaptation each kind of environment, and fuses in which.
http://www.clubarduetto.it/forum
http://www.webmastershelp.com
http://www.cyberangler.com/forum
http://forum.rsu.edu.ru
http://wiki.blastwave.org/forum
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)