»» NWO Radio ««     »» NWO A/V ««     »» NWO Books ««     »» NWO Quotes ««     »» Awakening CD ««  





Eaglemountain's: New World Order - Virtual (Multimedia) Library
Your guide to the New World Order

 

IRAN Next: - War against Iran has been planned for some time, the proof is as follows:


Index

NWO News: Breaking, General, Special Reports, Select Issues ...


 

 

Thomas P.M. Barnett: "The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century"

Professor Thomas P.M. Barnett is a Senior Strategic Researcher and Professor in the Warfare Analysis & Research Department, Center for Naval Warfare Studies, U.S. Naval War College.

Thomas P.M. Barnett: The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

Book/ Video

Extensive evidence is in the video, (which I've seen); The book presumably has similar content. This three hour video is a startlingly blunt revelation of America's globalist plans for Full Spectrum Dominance. This will help remove any doubt whatsoever about their desires and it provides considerable detail, coming as it does straight from the horse's mouth in a PowerPoint Presentation/ lecture presented to a large number of military top brass.

NB(1) This Presentation has also been delivered both to the Pentagon and the British House of Commons, (as well as Wall Street)!

NB(2) If you can get hold of a copy, watch the second hour from approx' 20mins on, Iran is mentioned, a few minutes later and he indicates his enthusiasm for war with China within ten years. 

NB(3) See Link below to watch Online Video or to even purchase it (at bottom of this section).


'Testimony Submitted to the Overseas Basing Commission' (by Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett Professor, Naval War College) - [Nov 9th, 2004]

Download Download it Here: www.thomaspmbarnett.com/published/OBCTestimony.pdf   [107 KB]
The twat revels in his war book

'The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century'  [Book]

(Buy) The Pentagon's New Map: Book   [Amazon, 17 USD]
(Buy) The Pentagon's New Map: Book   [Barnes & Noble, 21.5 USD]

Search Inside (Amazon)
"WHEN THE COLD WAR ENDED, we thought the world had changed..."

This bold and important book strives to be a practical "strategy for a Second American Century." In this brilliantly argued work, Thomas Barnett calls globalization "this country's gift to history" and explains why its wide dissemination is critical to the security of not only America but the entire world. As a senior military analyst for the U.S. Naval War College, Barnett is intimately familiar with the culture of the Pentagon and the State Department (both of which he believes are due for significant overhauls).


The Pentagon's New Map: By Thomas P.M. Barnett  (esquire) [Mar, 2003]
Article in Esquire Magazine (with maps(?))

It explains why we're going to war. And why we'll keep going to war.

 

The Pentagon's New Map: By Thomas P.M. Barnett  (thomaspmbarnett) [Mar, 2003]
Same article on Barnett's Web Site (with downloadable maps)

It explains why we're going to war. And why we'll keep going to war.

 

The Pentagon's New Map: Download it Here

Download the Pentagon’s New Map
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/pnm/map_index.htm

Download Download it Here: Eastern Hemisphere Map [PDF]   [869 KB]
Download Download it Here: Western Hemisphere Map [PDF]   [1077 KB]
Download Download it Here: Image of (Combined) Global Map [JPEG]   [1019 KB]
Download Download it Here: PNM Map - High Res [PDF]   [17.25 MB]
Download Download it Here: PNM Map - Low Res [PDF]   [309 KB]


New Pentagon plans to conquer nations, secure oil, advance globalization, militarize space  (indymedia) [Mar 17th, 2005]

According to Bruce Gagnon, Coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, "The U.S. military is increasingly being converted into a global oil protection service." Plans are being laid to wage war "to preemptively take control" of "a 'non-integrating gap' in the world that is resisting corporate globalization" so "the U.S. can 'manage' the global distribution of resources, people, energy and money." The "gap" nations happen to be in the world's key oil-producing regions.


New Pentagon Vision Transforms War Agenda: By Bruce Gagnon  (cambridge-news.co.uk) [Jan/ Feb, 2005]

Pentagon transformation is well underway. The U.S. military is increasingly being converted into a global oil protection service. Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld has a "strategy guy" whose job is to teach this new way of warfare to high-level military officers from all branches of services and to top level CIA operatives. Thomas Barnett is a professor at the Navy War College in Rhode Island. He is author of the controversial book The Pentagon's New Map that identifies a "non-integrating gap" in the world that is resisting corporate globalization. Barnett defines the gap as parts of Latin America, Africa, Middle East and Central Asia all of which are key oil-producing regions of the world.


The Pentagon's New Map: Our Government's Hellish Vision of Endless War Against Hapless Third-Worlders: By Alex Jones  (prisonplanet) [Sep 20th, 2005]

The Pentagon's New Map: The Gap

So, incredibly, they're pitching the hapless, near defenseless third world, which they've styled "the Gap" (the shaded region in the map above), as the latest "mortal enemy" of we who dwell in "the Core," their shorthand for the first world (US, Canada, Western Europe, Israel, Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa) and all those who toil in the already-globalized (and, therefore, economically subservient) second world (Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Eastern Europe, Russia, China, and India).


 

WATCH THE COMPLETE VIDEO ONLINE HERE!
The Pentagon's New Map: The full presentation by Thomas Barnett of the Naval War College: By Alex Jones  (prisonplanet) [September 20th, 2004]
Online Video

"The full presentation by Thomas Barnett of the Naval War College. This details the plan for total world domination by the elite."

If you have trouble viewing the above video, try one of these alternative links (or paste the URLs into your browser).

Full Presentation: Alternative Links
Download rtsp://video.c-span.org/60days/ap090404.rm
Download rtsp://cspanrm.fplive.net/cspan/project/ter/ter122004_barnett.rm

NB These are not the 3hr video I originally saw which was filmed by cspan in front of a larger audience of top military brass however Barnett has been endlessly giving the same lecture to anyone who will listen and he appears to do so verbatim, right down to the same jokes: - I'll post a more accurate description after watching this particular (2hr, 34min) version.


The Pentagon's New Map: PowerPoint Presentation  (c-spanstore)
  - If you must, you can buy the DVD (or VHS) here.


C-SPAN Store, C-SPAN Videos, Public Affairs Event - 25 USD

In a PowerPoint presentation (Washington DC, June 2nd, 2004, 2 hours 42 minutes), Professor Barnett talked about developing a global perspective that integrates political, economic and military elements in a model for the post-September 11 world. He argued that terrorism and globalization had combined to end the great-power model of war that has developed over 400 years, since the Thirty Years War. Instead, he divided the world into an increasingly expanding "functioning core" of economically developed, politically stable states integrated into global systems and a "non-integrating gap," the most likely source of threats to U.S. and international security. Professor Barnett used this map to call for a new system for deployment of the U.S. armed forces.

[ Index ]

 

Articles of Foreboding

IRAN War already planned: PNAC's propaganda to sell the war, prepared February 24th, 2004 (or some time before):

The Project for the New American Century
February 24, 2004
MEMORANDUM TO: OPINION LEADERS
FROM: GARY SCHMITT
SUBJECT: Regime Change for Iran
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iran-20040224.htm

Scott Ritter Says US Plans June Attack on Iran  (ufppc) [Feb 19th, 2005]

Ritter made two shocking claims: George W. Bush has "signed off" on plans to bomb Iran in June 2005, and the U.S. manipulated the results of the Jan. 30 elections in Iraq.


Sleepwalking to disaster in Iran: By Scott Ritter  (aljazeera) [Apr 5th, 2005]

The Bush administration was keen on achieving some semblance of stability in Iraq before June 2005, I was told. When I asked why that date, the source dropped the bombshell: because that was when the Pentagon was told to be prepared to launch a massive aerial attack against Iran, Iraq's neighbour to the east, in order to destroy the Iranian nuclear programme.


US war with Iran has already begun: By Scott Ritter  (aljazeera) [June 23rd, 2005]

It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.


Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran: By Michel Chossudovsky  (globalresearch) [May 1st, 2005]

At the outset of Bush's second term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell. He hinted, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was "right at the top of the list" of the rogue enemies of America, and that Israel would, so to speak, "be doing the bombing for us", without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them "to do it":

"One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked... Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards," (quoted from an MSNBC Interview Jan 2005)


Bush Announces Iraq Exit Strategy: 'We'll Go Through Iran'  (TheOnion - HUMOUR) [March 9th, 2006]

"I'm pleased to announce that the Department of Defense and I have formulated a plan for a speedy withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq," Bush announced Monday morning. "We'll just go through Iran."

[ Index ]

 

EU-3 / Iran: Last Ditch Talks 23rd May, 2005 - Guaranteed to Fail?

Following on in the tradition of Rambouillet Agreements etc, Iran has been made an offer (to avoid war? that) it can't accept.

US media and Iran's nuclear threat  (Asia Times) [May 11th, 2005]

In a sign of both historical de ja vu and Chomskyian "manufacturing consensus", the US media is nowadays filled with news on Iran's nuclear threat, thus preparing the American public for yet another Middle East conflict without, however, maintaining a modicum of balance by reflecting the Iranian point of view.


Iran nuclear talks: It's time to shut up  (Asia Times) [May 18th, 2005]

The nuclear talks between Iran and the so-called European three (EU-3 - Britain, France, and Germany) are due to resume May 23rd in a crisis atmosphere filled with accusations and counter-accusations, with each side blaming the other for not sticking to the terms of their agreement signed in Paris last November.


Iran Says 50-50 Chance of Success in Nuke Talks With EU  (globalsecurity) [May 24th, 2005]

With Iran threatening to resume some of the nuclear activities it froze last November as part of a deal with the Europeans, the European Union is warning that, if Tehran does so, it may have to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for punitive sanctions.


NB  UN Security Council action expected to follow close on the heels of failed talks, due largely to pressure and demands made by the USofA and Israel. Any sanctions on oil (Iran's main export,) are likely to be ignored by Russia & China - things could get messy.

[ Index ]

 

Progress of EU-3/ IRAN Talks, as at May 25th, 2005

Nuclear Review Conference Struggles To Conclusion With Few Results  (payvand) [May 24th, 2005]

Algeria's UN ambassador, Abdallah Baali, speaking to RFE/RL, summed up the frustrations of many diplomats: "It's not good. It's not good for the NPT regime; it's not good for the nuclear powers; it's not good for the non-nuclear powers. It's not in the interest of anybody that a conference like this one, especially after achieving what it achieved in 2000, gets stuck in the mud."


Iran's elections cast a shadow on nuclear talks  (csmonitor) [May 25th, 2005]

... "a last chance" of compromise to defuse a mounting crisis with the West.


Europe, Iran Officials in Last-Ditch Talks  (wjla) [May 25th, 2005]

Following months of fruitless talks, the European Union has begun warning that it is moving toward the U.S. position that Tehran should be hauled before the U.N. Security Council for suspect nuclear activities in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.


West fears nuclear talks with Iran are doomed to failure  (telegraph.co.uk) [May 25th, 2005]

Make-or-break talks between Europe and Iran are doomed to failure and US military action will only delay, not halt, Teheran's suspected nuclear weapons programme, a leading think-tank predicted yesterday.



Iran renews nuclear pledge  (guardian.co.uk) [May 25th, 2005]

Iran has renewed its promise to refrain from developing nuclear weapons, the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, said tonight.

Tensions increased last week after Iran said it was considering restarting its uranium-enrichment programme, which it insists is only aimed at generating electricity as permitted under a non-proliferation treaty.


Iran, EU take more time for nuclear deal  (gulf-times) [May 26th, 2005]

The European Union and Iran yesterday gave themselves another two months for a deal on the Iranian nuclear programme, deferring any immediate referral of Tehran to the United Nations Security Council by the West.



Short Summary

It looks initially as if 'we' won, according to the media but there is nothing new about that, that's the beauty of propaganda however on closer inspection, the EU didn't get anything significant they didn't already have, nor did they get what they initially claimed they/ US/ Israel wanted and they all have to go back in two months and do it again, it appears to have been a stalemate. If I had to call it, I would say Iran came out a little ahead (someone's bluff has been called?) admittedly, there were some minor concessions won and this is possibly the best outcome that can be had - a delay of the inevitable / buying some time.

War is still penciled in for June by some, or put more correctly: A state of 'readiness' to war shall exist by this date. An indication of the latest possible date for war is in the fact that Iran is likely to be advanced significantly in its nuclear electricity projects by the end of this year such that the (Russian supplied) fuel rods are built into place. Any attack after this point could likely lead to a Chernobyl/ wormwood type scenario.

Iran will have a very different government come the June 17th, 2006 elections, where Former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani may well win.

[ Index ]

 

Editor's (almost unbiased) Opinion Piece - May, 2005

The facts appear as follows unless I am mistaken (quite possible):

America accuses Iran of conspiring to produce nuclear weapons. Despite this accusation however America offers absolutely no evidence to back up this conspiracy theory (not to mention America's atrocious track record of lies, deceit, trickery, forged evidence, propaganda, psyops, P2OG, torture, war crimes, declaration of intent for world domination and it's conversion to a fascist/ totalitarian dictatorship). America says Iran is 'guilty' until it can prove its innocence. Iran, (ignoring whatever the situation was a few years ago for the sake of brevity,) has allowed UN Weapons Inspectors full access for some time and these Inspectors have been unable to discover any evidence to confirm these accusations (hey - but the same trick worked for America in Iraq!).

Iran is fully entitled to follow the dream of "electricity so cheap, it won't need to be metered!": Peaceful production of electricity is permitted under the Nuclear Proliferations Treaty (NPT): Article IV. Further to this, should Iran decide it needed to protect its Sovereign State with nuclear 'peace-keepers' from very serious, current and overt threats of an attack/ invasion from both America and Israel, then I would contend that, despite the legality, they have little choice, having been forced into a corner.

UN Docs: NPT  NB Old United Nations Site - Dead Links abound!

UN Docs: NPT  NB New United Nations Site (with interesting URL change/ emphasis), check here also for details on 2005 NPT Convention or whatever.

[ Index ]

 

IranAtom.Ru

IranAtom.Ru - Voice of Nuclear Iran. Nuclear Energy in Iran.

IranAtom.Ru
Iranian nuclear program. Hot News, Database, Library, FAQ, Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant (NPP), Iran and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Nuclear-free Middle East.


[ Index ]

 

News Articles: May, 2005 (and prior)

Revealed: Israel plans strike on Iranian nuclear plant  (independent.co.uk) [Mar 13th, 2005]

ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans for a combined air and ground attack on targets in Iran if diplomacy fails to halt the Iranian nuclear programme.

The inner cabinet of Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister, gave 'initial authorisation' for an attack at a private meeting last month on his ranch in the Negev desert.

US officials warned last week that a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities by Israeli or American forces had not been ruled out should the issue become deadlocked at the United Nations.



U.S. withdraws veto on Iran quest to join WTO  (washtimes) [May 27th, 2005]

The United States yesterday dropped a four-year veto on Iran's bid to join the World Trade Organization, in what U.S. officials called a sign of support for European-led diplomacy to stop Tehran's drive to develop nuclear bombs.


Iran certain to restart work on nuclear fuel cycle  (iranian.ws) [May 28th, 2005]

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said here Monday night that Iran will definitely resume its peaceful nuclear activities.


Iran will continue suspension, if accepts EU proposal  (iranian.ws) [May 29th, 2005]

"Should the authorities accept the EU proposal, we will continue suspension of the enrichment program, otherwise, the Uranium Conversion Facility of Isfahan will resume its activities,"


Iran resolved to resume peaceful nuclear activities  (irna.ir) [May 31st, 2005]

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said here Monday night that Iran will definitely resume its peaceful nuclear activities.


[ Index ]

 

News Articles: June, 2005

US war with Iran has already begun: By Scott Ritter  (aljazeera) [June 23rd, 2005]

The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.


[ Index ]

 

News Articles: July 2005

Now America accuses Iran of complicity in World Trade Center attack  (telegraph.co.uk) [July 18th, 2005]

Iran gave free passage to up to 10 of the September 11 hijackers just months before the 2001 attacks and offered to co-operate with al-Qa'eda against the US, an American report will say this week.

The all-party report by the 911 Commission, set up by Congress in 2002, will state that Iran, not Iraq, fostered relations with the al-Qa'eda network in the years leading up to the world's most devastating terrorist attack.


CHENEY PLAN CALLS FOR U.S. TO NUKE IRAN  (americanfreepress) [July 31st, 2005]

A number of political observers and activists today sounded "a red alert" after allegations surfaced this week that Vice President Dick Cheney has ordered Strategic Command (STRATCOM) to make contingency plans for a nuclear strike against Iran in the aftermath of another '9-11 type attack' on the United States.
However, that's "not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States," notes Geraldi's article.

See also:

What Is the Plan If There's Another 911?  (justinlogan) [July 22nd, 2005]

The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites.


Cheney's Plan: Nuke Iran  (antiwar) [July 25th, 2005]

"The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 911-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons." "... the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States."


[ Index ]

 

News Articles: August, 2005


Petrodollar Warfare: Dollars, Euros and the Upcoming Iranian Oil Bourse  (energybulletin) [August 3rd, 2005]

It is now obvious the invasion of Iraq had less to do with any threat from Saddam's long-gone WMD program and certainly less to do to do with fighting International terrorism than it has to do with gaining strategic control over Iraq's hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintain the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market.

Concerning Iran, recent articles have revealed active Pentagon planning for operations against its suspected nuclear facilities. While the publicly stated reasons for any such overt action will be premised as a consequence of Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are again unspoken macroeconomic drivers underlying the second stage of petrodollar warfare - Iran's upcoming oil bourse. (The word 'bourse' refers to a stock exchange for securities trading, and is derived from the French stock exchange in Paris, the Federation Internationale des Bourses de Valeurs.)

In essence, Iran is about to commit a far greater "offense" than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro for Iraq's oil exports in the fall of 2000. Beginning in March 2006, the Tehran government has plans to begin competing with New York's NYMEX and London's IPE with respect to international oil trades - using a euro-based international oil-trading mechanism.

See also:

The Iranian Threat: The Bomb or the Euro?  (informationclearinghouse) [March 24th, 2005]

Iran does not pose a threat to the United State because of its nuclear projects, its WMD, or its support to "terrorists organizations" as the American administration is claiming, but in its attempt to re-shape the global economical system by converting it from a petrodollar to a petroeuro system. Such conversion is looked upon as a flagrant declaration of economical war against the US that would flatten the revenues of the American corporations and eventually might cause an economic collapse.

We could witness this crisis at the end of 2005 and beginning of 2006 when oil investors would have the choice to pay $57 a barrel of oil at the American (NYMEX) and at London's (IPE), or pay 37 Euros a barrel at the Iranian oil bourse.

The Proposed Iranian Oil Bourse  (informationclearinghouse) [January 19th, 2006]

A nation-state taxes its own citizens, while an empire taxes other nation-states. The history of empires, from Greek and Roman, to Ottoman and British, teaches that the economic foundation of every single empire is the taxation of other nations. The imperial ability to tax has always rested on a better and stronger economy, and as a consequence, a better and stronger military. One part of the subject taxes went to improve the living standards of the empire; the other part went to strengthen the military dominance necessary to enforce the collection of those taxes.


Who's Behind the Coming War With Iran?  (antiwar) [Aug 5th, 2005]

It is difficult to think of an appropriate response to this insane thinking. I shall add however that there are also serious rumours/ concerns that the precursor to this assault is already in the making, namely - an attack on the U.S.A. Although I cannot confirm this and would rather avoid speculation, I feel the scale and urgency of this matter warrants a mention. In brief, there may well be a nuclear attack on America within 90 days, the best evidence I have seen for this I'm afraid to say is biblical ... if you are still reading then this event coincides with a certain prophecy where the 'beast' receives a potentially fatal head wound (possibly a nuclear strike) but then recovers.

The reason this should not be ignored is that the bible has proven a most accurate indicator of past and present events: Some may call it prophetic, others may say the criminals are using the bible as their 'play book'. The biblical (and numerological) aspect of current events is a huge area and I would suggest the following excellent Radio Shows which should amply deal with this - 'Spaceman (a.k.a. Gary Bell)' and 'Christian Media Network', both linked on my  »» NWO Radio ««  page. I shall leave you with the relevant biblical passage from Revelation. If you research this subject you will find there are a great many indicators (other than biblical) too numerous to mention here, one such example is the recent firing of four star general Kevin P. Byrnes where it appears he feared a nuclear 'exercise' would 'go live'. See Alex Jones and other Radio/ Web/ Google for details. e.g. Four Star General Fired For Organizing Coup Against Neo-Cons?: Reporter suggests Byrnes discovered plan to turn nuke exercise into staged terror attack


Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

Rev 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

Rev 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?


Unanimous IAEA call astonishes Iran's Rafsanjani  (rednova) [Aug 12th, 2005]

Former Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said yesterday he was astonished at the unanimity of a call by the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog for Iran to halt enrichment activities, calling it a cruel decision. ... "We didn't think that an international organization, before the eyes of the whole world, would sanction that Iran should stop everything," he added in a sermon broadcast live on state radio. "The decision was a cruel one."


UN nuclear watchdog rebuts claims that Iran is trying to make A-bomb  (independent.co.uk) [Aug 14th, 2005]

The UN nuclear watchdog is preparing to publish evidence that Iran is not engaged in a nuclear weapons programme, undermining a warning of possible military action from President George Bush.


Iran warns Bush against attack - 'Our capabilities are much greater than those of U.S.'  (worldnetdaily) [Aug 15th, 2005]

Iran has warned President Bush that he would be making a mistake to use force against the Islamic republic over its nuclear program.

"Bush should know that our capabilities are much greater than those of the United States," foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters. "We don't think that the United States will make such a mistake."


US dismisses Iran nuclear report  (bbc) [Aug 24th, 2005]

The US has criticised an independent investigation which found no evidence that Iran was working on a secret nuclear weapons programme.

Talks scrapped: France, Britain and Germany have called off talks with Iran that had been scheduled for 31 August after Tehran resumed uranium conversion. ... If the stand-off continues, the US and the EU might bring the case before the UN Security Council to seek sanctions.


[ Index ]

 

News Articles: September ~ December, 2005


Iran brands UN resolution illegal  (bbc) [Sep 25th, 2005]

Iran has branded a resolution passed by the UN nuclear watchdog which paves the way for the country to be referred to the UN Security Council illegal. Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki rejected the vote, branding it, "political, illegal and illogical".

Mr ElBaradei has said the question of referring Iran to the UN Security Council should not come up before November, when the 35-member IAEA board meets again.

(the resolution says) Tehran's "many failures and breaches" over international nuclear safeguards "constitute non-compliance" with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Failure to comply with the NPT is automatic grounds for a report to the Security Council, under IAEA rules.


Blair links Iraq bombings to row over Iran's nuclear programme  (guardian) [Oct 7th, 2005]

Tony Blair warned yesterday he will not be diverted from the debate over Iran's nuclear programme by Tehran's suspected involvement in a series of deadly bomb attacks on British soldiers this year.

... "There is no justification for Iran or any other country interfering in Iraq," Mr Blair said.

So what are you doing interfering in Iraq Mr. Blair? How quickly Blair ignores the fact that the British were caught red-handed, about to terror bomb Iraq (under Tony's direct orders?) and how easily he overlooks the facts which include Iran's nuclear programme being perfectly legal as verified by most recent IAEA (United Nations') Inspections.

What we see here is a smoke screen being created to drum up support from the masses for an 'unavoidable' war against Iran, this guardian article itself (as with many others) while refraining from actual lies, is intensely and intentionally misleading (pure propaganda), this is clear from the 'deliberate' obscuring/ avoidance of the most relevant facts. It is (in my opinion) aimed at the gullible and ill informed public who will fall for every misdirection - hook line and sinker, being as they are, totally ignorant of world affairs or international law. Nobody in the know (including those who have read thus far) can be in any doubt as to what is really going on here.


Israel readies forces for strike on nuclear Iran  (Times) [Dec 11th, 2005]

ISRAEL’S armed forces have been ordered by Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, to be ready by the end of March for possible strikes on secret uranium enrichment sites in Iran, military sources have revealed.

The crisis is set to come to a head in early March, when Mohamed El-Baradei, the head of the IAEA, will present his next report on Iran. El-Baradei, who received the Nobel peace prize yesterday, warned that the world was "losing patience" with Iran.

Defence sources in Israel believe the end of March to be the "point of no return" after which Iran will have the technical expertise to enrich uranium in sufficient quantities to build a nuclear warhead in two to four years.


Goss Tells Turks to Prepare for Iran Attack  (kurtnimmo) [December 20th, 2005]

You'd think the fact Porter Goss, head broom sweeper at the CIA, recently told the Turkish government the United States plans to attack Iran and Syria would be headline splashing news in the New York Times and the Washington Post. But although the news was carried in the Turkish press, it elicited hardly a murmur here in America, with the exception of United Press International and Reuters.

"... the Turkish press reported last week that CIA Director Porter Goss went to Ankara recently and informed the Turkish government that Iran already has nuclear weapons and they should be ready for 'a possible US air operation against Iran and Syria.'"


Speculations over US attack against Iran  (informationclearinghouse) [December 23rd, 2005]

Are the USA planing a rocket attack against targets in Iran? In secret discussions Washington was preparing the Allies for appropriate air strikes in 2006, agencies disclosed to day. Especially in the NATO country Turkey, speculations about an attack against Iranian nuclear facilities are taking place.

Porter Goss in the Turkish Capital Ankara asked M.P. Recep Tayyip Erdogan to support the air strikes against Iranian Nuclear and Military Installations especially with uninhibited exchange of secret information. At the present plan the attacks were planned for 2006.


[ Index ]

 

News Articles: January, 2006

More Lies about Iran  (informationclearinghouse) [January 15th, 2006]

There's been a lot of rubbish written about Iran's "removing the seals" from its uranium enrichment equipment.

The fear-engendering description provided in the news would have the reader believe that "diabolical" Iranians are ripping off the seals with crowbars so they can quickly assemble their secret nuclear stockpile to bomb Tel Aviv.

The fuel that is produced from these uranium enrichment reactors DOES NOT PRODUCE WEAPONS-GRADE MATERIAL. That requires thousands of centrifuges which Iran does not have.

Additionally, as nuclear weapons physicist, Gordon Prather states, "After almost three years of go-anywhere see-anything interview-anyone inspections, IAEA inspectors have yet to find any indication that Iran has 'or ever had' a nuclear weapons program".

[ Index ]

 

News Articles: March, 2006

NB Whereas other articles on this page are typically filed in date order, this 'update' section contains articles that have only recently come to my attention and are therefore (temporarily) filed here in their order of discovery.


Gulf factor key to PM’s Iran vote decision  (Telegraph-India) [September 26th, 2005]

Top-ranking Americans have told equally top-ranking Indians in recent weeks that the US has plans to invade Iran before Bush’s term ends. In 2002, a year before the US invaded Iraq, high-ranking Americans had similarly shared their definitive vision of a post-Saddam Iraq, making it clear that they would change the regime in Baghdad.


Iran president paves the way for arabs' imam return  (iranian) [November 17th, 2005]

it is President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's devotion to a mystical religious figure that is arousing greater interest inside Iran.

In a keynote speech on Wednesday to senior clerics, Ahmadinejad spoke of his strong belief in the second coming of Shi'ite Muslims' "hidden" 12th Imam.

According to Shi'ite Muslim teaching, Abul-Qassem Mohammad, the 12th leader whom Shi'ites consider descended from the Prophet Mohammed, disappeared in 941 but will return at the end of time to lead an era of Islamic justice.

'Divine mission' driving Iran's new leader  (telegraph.co.uk) [January 14th, 2006]

As Iran rushes towards confrontation with the world over its nuclear programme, the question uppermost in the mind of western leaders is "What is moving its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to such recklessness?"

... there is another dimension, a religious messianism that, some suspect, is giving the Iranian leader a dangerous sense of divine mission.

All streams of Islam believe in a divine saviour, known as the Mahdi, who will appear at the End of Days. A common rumour - denied by the government but widely believed - is that Mr Ahmadinejad and his cabinet have signed a "contract" pledging themselves to work for the return of the Mahdi and sent it to Jamkaran.


France defends right to nuclear reply to terrorism  (Infowars) [January 19th, 2006]

France said on Thursday it would be ready to use nuclear weapons against any state that carried out a terrorist attack against it, reaffirming the need for its nuclear deterrent.

... President Jacques Chirac said security came at a price and France must be able to hit back hard at a hostile state’s centres of power and its "capacity to act".


Yaalon: There's a military option for Iran  (ynetnews) [March 9th, 2006]

Former Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon said during a speech to the Hudson Institute in Washington that Israel definitely has a military option against Iran, which must not be ruled out. He added that the use of such an option could significantly damage Iran's nuclear program and set it back by a number of years.


British Foreign Secretary Admits plans to build NUKES!  (BBC Radio 4) [March 13th, 2006]

Jack Straw heard on BBC Radio 4 today, discussed the successor to Trident NUKES! After it looked like the Host had successfully swept the matter under the carpet for Mr. Straw with careful wordplay, Jack Straw dug the hole deeper for himself by blurting out (again) that they are indeed 'considering' replacing Trident with bigger and better NUKES! - Despite the legality and hypocrisy of this and indeed, much to the astonishment of the host.

New deterrent 'being considered'  (bbc) [March 13th, 2006]

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has failed to confirm or deny a report that a new UK nuclear weapons system is already being secretly developed.

Plans to replace Trident, which some estimate will cost £20bn, are expected to be drawn up by the next election.

The Sunday Times reported that an anonymous senior British source has said that work on the weapon has been underway since Mr Blair was re-elected last May.


Israel readies forces for strike on nuclear Iran  (timesonline UK) [December 11th, 2005]

Defence sources in Israel believe the end of March to be the "point of no return" after which Iran will have the technical expertise to enrich uranium in sufficient quantities to build a nuclear warhead in two to four years.

The order to prepare for a possible attack went through the Israeli defence ministry to the chief of staff. Sources inside special forces command confirmed that "G" readiness - the highest stage - for an operation was announced last week.

"If we opt for the military strike," said a source, "it must be not less than 100% successful. It will resemble the destruction of the Egyptian air force in three hours in June 1967."


George Bush insists that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. So why, six years ago, did the CIA give the Iranians blueprints to build a bomb?  (guardian UK) [January 5th, 2006]

In an extract from his explosive new book, New York Times reporter James Risen reveals the bungles and miscalculations that led to a spectacular intelligence fiasco.

The Russian, who had defected to the US years earlier, still couldn't believe the orders he had received from CIA headquarters. The CIA had given him the nuclear blueprints and then sent him to Vienna to sell them - or simply give them - to the Iranian representatives to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The Russian's assignment from the CIA was to pose as an unemployed and greedy scientist who was willing to sell his soul - and the secrets of the atomic bomb - to the highest bidder. By hook or by crook, the CIA told him, he was to get the nuclear blueprints to the Iranians.

[ Index ]

 

News Articles: April, 2006

NB Whereas other articles on this page are typically filed in date order, this 'update' section contains articles that have only recently come to my attention and are therefore (temporarily) filed here in their order of discovery.


Is Another 9/11 in the Works? - by Paul Craig Roberts  (antiwar) [March 16th, 2006]

If you were President George W. Bush with all available US troops tied down by the Iraqi resistance, and you were unable to control Iraq or political developments in the country, would you also start a war with Iran? - Yes, you would.

If you were being whipped in one fight, would you start a second fight with a bigger and stronger person? - That's what Bush is doing.

It is obvious that Bush intends to attack Iran and that he will use every means to bring war about.

One of the more extraordinary suggestions is that a low yield, perhaps tactical, nuclear weapon will be exploded some distance out from a US port. Death and destruction will be minimized, but fear and hysteria will be maximized. Americans will be told that the ship bearing the weapon was discovered and intercepted just in time, thanks to Bush's illegal spying program, and that Iran is to blame. A more powerful wave of fear and outrage will again bind the American people to Bush, and the US media will not report the rest of the world's doubts of the explanation.


Iran says arrested British agent for twin bombings  (iranfocus) [Oct 17th, 2005]

An individual arrested in connection with Saturday's twin bombings in the south-western city of Ahwaz has confessed to have received British training in Iraq to carry out the attacks, the Iranian Majlis (Parliament) deputy for the oil-rich city announced on Monday.

British officials have said that the pair were MI5 agents working to uncover Iranian support for the insurgent attacks against British troops in southern Iraq.


Strong Leads and Dead Ends in Nuclear Case Against Iran  (washingtonpost) [February 8th, 2006]

Iranian engineers have completed sophisticated drawings of a deep subterranean shaft, according to officials who have examined classified documents in the hands of U.S. intelligence for more than 20 months. - Complete with remote-controlled sensors to measure pressure and heat, the plans for the 400-meter tunnel appear designed for an underground atomic test that might one day announce Tehran's arrival as a nuclear power, the officials said.

By the estimates of U.S. and allied intelligence analysts, that day remains as much as a decade away -- assuming that Iran applies the full measure of its scientific and industrial resources to the project and encounters no major technical hurdles. But whether Iran's leaders have reached that decision and what concrete progress the effort has made remain divisive questions among government analysts and U.N. inspectors.

U.S. intelligence experts who helped craft an assessment of Iran's program last year have based their judgments on just that. Until Iran is able to operate an industrial-scale centrifuge cascade for the production of bomb-grade uranium, the country will remain as much as 10 years away from a weapon.


(UK) Government in secret talks about strike against Iran  (telegraph UK) [April 2nd, 2006]

The Government is to hold secret talks with defence chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran.

A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran.

It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran's ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is "inevitable" if Teheran's leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment programme.

See also: How the US Could Criminally Destroy Iran's Legal Atomic Electricity Programme  [167KB jpeg image]


International laws hinder UK troops - Defence secretary (Reid) calls for Geneva conventions to be redrawn  (guardian UK) [April 4th, 2006]

John Reid demanded sweeping changes to international law yesterday to free British soldiers from the restraints of the Geneva conventions and make it easier for the west to mount military actions against other states.

In his speech, the defence secretary addressed three key issues: the treatment of prisoners, when to mount a pre-emptive strikes, and when to intervene to stop a humanitarian crisis. In all these areas, he indicated that the UK and west was being hamstrung by existing inadequate law.

[ Index ]

 

News Articles: February, 2007


A political bombshell from Zbigniew Brzezinski  (wsws) [February 2nd, 2007]
Ex-national security adviser warns that Bush is seeking a pretext to attack Iran

Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday, Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser in the Carter administration, delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and warned that the Bush administration's policy was leading inevitably to a war with Iran, with incalculable consequences for US imperialism in the Middle East and internationally.

Brzezinski, who opposed the March 2003 invasion and has publicly denounced the war as a colossal foreign policy blunder, began his remarks on what he called the "war of choice" in Iraq by characterizing it as "a historic, strategic and moral calamity."

Most stunning and disturbing was his description of a "plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran." It would, he suggested, involve "Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in a ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan." [Emphasis added].

That a man such as Brzezinski, with decades of experience in the top echelons of the US foreign policy establishment, a man who has the closest links to the military and to intelligence agencies, should issue such a warning at an open hearing of the US Senate has immense and grave significance.


Criminals Control the Executive Branch [by Paul Craig Roberts]  (antiwar.com) [February 10th, 2007]

Gentle reader, you are probably unaware of former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski's damning indictment of the Bush Regime in his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 1, 2007, as the United States no longer has a media – only a government propaganda ministry.

Brzezinski told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that "the final destination on this downhill track is likely to be a head-on conflict with Iran and with much of the world of Islam." Brzezinski predicts "some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a 'defensive' U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan."


Jeff Rense interviews Ralph Schoenman on Brzezinski's bombshell testimony and the meaning of the dispute within the ruling class over a U.S. attack on Iran; plus many other topics  [2007, February 5th]

http://takingaimradio.com/mp3/takingaim070205-1.mp3
audio http://takingaimradio.com/m3u/takingaim070205-1.m3u

http://takingaimradio.com/mp3/takingaim070205-2.mp3
audio http://takingaimradio.com/m3u/takingaim070205-2.m3u

Taking Aim Radio - http://takingaimradio.com/


Brzezinski Breaks Rank Over The Pending Nuclear Attack On Iran  [2007, February 13th]

http://takingaimradio.com/mp3/takingaim070213.mp3
audio http://takingaimradio.com/m3u/takingaim070213.m3u

Taking Aim Radio - http://takingaimradio.com/


Putin's Prepared Remarks at 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy  (washingtonpost) [Feb 10th, 2007]

Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. Mr Teltschik mentioned this very gently. And no less people perish in these conflicts - even more are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!

Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force - military force - in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible.

We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state's legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?

 

Speech and the Following Discussion at the Munich Conference on Security Policy
http://www.kremlin.ru/eng/speeches/2007/...

(Read the Full Text of the Speech)


OPINION: One Man's Unpopular World  (sptimes.ru) [Feb 16th, 2007]

On the eve of his visit to Saudi Arabia, President Vladimir Putin told Arab news channel Al-Jazeera that Russia "no longer had any disagreements with Arab countries"; during last Saturday's security conference in Munich, Putin criticized what he referred to as today's "unipolar world," which "bears nothing in common with democracy." In short: With Iran and Syria we haven't any disagreement, but with the United States - we have.


What the Russian papers say  (rian.ru) [Feb 12th, 2007]

Russian President Vladimir Putin was calm and composed during his address to the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy.

Those to whom his speech was addressed, mainly U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, were also composed, although they viewed Putin's speech as further proof that Russia is becoming more active in its resistance to the establishment of a unipolar world, increasing Russia's military capabilities and setting up military-political road-blocs.

---

Sergei Rogov, director of the U.S. and Canada Institute: "It is too soon to speak of a Cold War, but if the trend continues, such an outcome cannot be avoided. The differences between Russia and the West have become too wide. The world is heading back to multi-polarity and may deteriorate into universal chaos, because unless Russia and the United States cooperate, it is impossible to establish institutions of international security that ensure equal rules of the game for everyone."


Hell-Bent on War
Putin's right: the US is 'plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts'
 (antiwar) [Feb 14th, 2007]

The United States government is hell-bent on a wider war in the Middle East, and there doesn't seem to be anyone - not Congress, not any of our allies, not Divine Providence itself - capable of stopping them. Threats against the Iranians come on an almost daily basis: only yesterday U.S. officials convened a press conference where anonymous officials made baseless assertions about Tehran arming anti-American Shi'ite militias in Iraq.


Like it or not, the US will have to accept a multipolar world  (guardian UK) [Feb 16th, 2007]

Around the three poles of Europe, India and South America, we could create a more balanced and democratic world order.

The problem with US hegemony is that it's hegemonic, not that it's American. As Vladimir Putin pointed out in a speech at the weekend (an extract of which was published on these pages), the unipolar model is inherently flawed because it concentrates power in ways that are unhealthy and undemocratic.

[ Index ]

 

Planned Nuclear Attack on Iran

The first 'Key Document' by Michel Chossudovsky describes the very real and imminent danger that 'A Planned for Nuclear Attack on Iran' would bring. Chossudovsky has done some incredible, groundbreaking research here with staggering implications - an all out nuclear attack that would devastate Iran and its peoples on a most permanent basis.

There are so many potential repercussions from even a conventional (non-nuclear) war with Iran, depending on the scale, that they would take some time to contemplate. These include a doubling or so of oil prices, a major shortage of oil (with Iran effectively denying access to the Strait of Hormuz), crashed economies and other countries getting in on the act and taking sides, including potentially China & Russia. When you factor in (an illegal) nuclear war, the stakes are raised considerably and the problems multiplied beyond ordinary comprehension.

I myself need to take some time to digest this, before commenting further. For now I urge you to read the words of Michel Chossudovsky and to do what you can to sound the alarm, this barbaric and suicidal act must be halted.

For further evidence of the planned use of NUKES, refer to »» PNAC ««


KEY DOCUMENT: Nuclear War against Iran - by Michel Chossudovsky  (globalresearch) [January 3rd, 2005]

The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran is now in the final planning stages.

Coalition partners, which include the US, Israel and Turkey are in "an advanced stage of readiness".

Various military exercises have been conducted, starting in early 2005. In turn, the Iranian Armed Forces have also conducted large scale military maneuvers in the Persian Gulf in December in anticipation of a US sponsored attack.


Includes Downloadable Video webcast: [37.6MB]
Michel Chossudovsky's Presentation on The Dangers of a US Sponsored Nuclear War at the Perdana Peace Forum, Kuala Lumpur, December 2005


Is the Bush Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust? - by Michel Chossudovsky  (globalresearch) [February 22nd, 2005]

Will the US launch "Mini-nukes" against Iran in Retaliation for Tehran's "Non-compliance"?

All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as "a weapon of last resort" have been scrapped. "Offensive" military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of "self-defense".

The distinction between tactical nuclear weapons and the conventional battlefield arsenal has been blurred. America's new nuclear doctrine is based on "a mix of strike capabilities". The latter, which specifically applies to the Pentagon's planned aerial bombing of Iran, envisages the use of nukes in combination with conventional weapons.

As in the case of the first atomic bomb, which in the words of President Harry Truman "was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base", today's "mini-nukes" are heralded as "safe for the surrounding civilian population".


BUSH’S WAR PLAN INCLUDES USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS  (indymedia.org.uk) [February 2nd, 2006]

The Bush Administration is preparing for an eventual nuclear war with an expressed preemptive first strike option against even non-nuclear countries.


A Global Strike Plan, With a Nuclear Option  (washingtonpost) [May 15th, 2005]


The following documents CONPLAN 8022 & JFCC-SGS below are referenced in the above documents and have been included here for your convenience. Please help get the word out as a matter of urgency.

CONPLAN 8022  (wikipedia)

Joint Functional Component Command for Space and Global Strike [JFCC-SGS]  (wikipedia)

Joint Functional Component Command for Space and Global Strike [JFCC-SGS]  (www.stratcom.mil)


Nuclear Bunker Buster Bombs againt Iran: This Way Lies Madness - by Stephen M. Osborn  (globalresearch) [March 14th, 2006]

An eye-witness speaks out

The latest information I have had from the followers of Bush is that he has demanded and received permission to use nuclear "bunker busters" in Iran in a preemptive strike. As a nuclear veteran (Operation Redwing, Bikini, 1956) I can affirm that this is absolute madness. The "bunker buster" is a cute sounding name for a nuclear horror. Air bursts are horrible enough, doing incredible destruction through heat, shock and high initial radiation. The fallout from an air burst is registered around the world. A surface or subsurface burst is even deadlier and more long lasting.

The Castle-Bravo blast at Bikini in 1954 was a fifteen megaton surface blast. It blew a hole over a mile wide and four hundred feet deep in the atoll, completely obliterating the island and vaporizing over thirteen billion cubic feet of coral, rock and water, sending it in a radioactive cloud extending into the stratosphere. The fallout over the atolls downwind was devastating to the people and ecology there. All of that material is rendered extremely radioactive and as it cools it condenses to fall as rain or radioactive "snow" which contaminates everything it touches. The effects are felt worldwide.


US considers use of nuclear weapons against Iran  (commondreams) [April 10th, 2006]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The administration of President George W. Bush is planning a massive bombing campaign against Iran, including use of bunker-buster nuclear bombs to destroy a key Iranian suspected nuclear weapons facility, The New Yorker magazine has reported in its April 17 issue.

The article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said that Bush and others in the White House have come to view Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a potential Adolf Hitler.

A senior unnamed Pentagon adviser is quoted in the article as saying that "this White House believes that the only way to solve the problem is to change the power structure in Iran, and that means war."


America and Iran: At the Brink of the Abyss - We can stop a "preemptive" nuclear strike  (antiwar) [April 8th, 2006]

NB This is yet another quality article from www.antiwar.com It provides a great deal of the background including history and legal situation, backed up by quite a few links that researchers may wish to check out.

Whether the U.S. will use nuclear weapons against Iran if a military confrontation erupts is in the hands of a single person, President Bush, as stated in NSC 30 from 1948: "the decision as to the employment of atomic weapons in the event of war is to be made by the Chief Executive when he considers such decision to be required." Bush will certainly not ask Congress nor the public permission once hostilities start. Whether or not tactical nuclear weapons should be deployed and used against Iran is a matter that needs to be faced by America right now!


THE IRAN PLANS: Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb?  (newyorker) [April 8th, 2006]

Some operations, apparently aimed in part at intimidating Iran, are already under way. American Naval tactical aircraft, operating from carriers in the Arabian Sea, have been flying simulated nuclear-weapons delivery missions - rapid ascending maneuvers known as "over the shoulder" bombing - since last summer, the former official said, within range of Iranian coastal radars.

Last month, in a paper given at a conference on Middle East security in Berlin, Colonel Sam Gardiner, a military analyst who taught at the National War College before retiring from the Air Force, in 1987, provided an estimate of what would be needed to destroy Iran's nuclear program. Working from satellite photographs of the known facilities, Gardiner estimated that at least four hundred targets would have to be hit.

One of the military's initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites.


Bush 'is planning nuclear strikes on Iran's secret sites'  (telegraph UK) [April 9th, 2006]

The Bush administration is planning to use nuclear weapons against Iran, to prevent it acquiring its own atomic warheads, claims an investigative writer with high-level Pentagon and intelligence contacts.

[ Index ]

 

Depleted Uranium (DU) - Used (so far) in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan & Iraq



"Many children are born with no eyes, no limbs, or tumours protruding from their mouths and eyes," Miraki told Aljazeera.net. Some newborns are barely recognisable as human, he says. Many do not survive.


The Queen's Death Star
Depleted Uranium Measured in British Atmosphere from Battlefields in the Middle East: By Leuren Moret  (rense) [February 26th, 2006]

The Sunday Times Online, February 19, 2006, reported on a shocking scientific study authored by British scientists Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan: "Did the use of Uranium weapons in Gulf War 2 result in contamination of Europe? Evidence from the measurements of the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), Aldermaston, Berkshire, UK". The highest levels of depleted uranium ever measured in the atmosphere in Britain, were transported on air currents from the Middle East and Central Asia.

The British government facility (AWE) was taken over 3 years ago by Halliburton, which refused at first to release air monitoring data, as required by law ...

Depleted uranium weaponry meets the definition of a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) in two out of three categories under US Code TITLE 50, CHAPTER 40 Sec. 2302. After action mandates have also been violated such as US Army Regulation AR 700-48 and TB 9-1300-278 which requires treatment of radiation poisoning for all casualties, including enemy soldiers and civilians, and remediation.

Who is profiting from this global uranium nightmare? Dr. Jay Gould revealed in his book THE ENEMY WITHIN, that the British Royal family privately owns investments in uranium holdings worth over $6 billion through Rio Tinto Mines.


DU: Washington's Secret Nuclear War
The US has dropped tonnes of depleted uranium on Iraq  (mindfully.org) [September 14th, 2004]

Illegal weapons of mass destruction have not only been found in Iraq but have been used against Iraqis and have even killed US troops but Washington and its allies have tried to cover up this outrage because the chief culprit is the US itself...

The WMD in question is depleted uranium (DU). A radioactive by-product of uranium enrichment, DU is used to coat ammunition such as tank shells and "bunker busting" missiles because its density makes it ideal for piercing armour. Thousands of DU shells and bombs have been used in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and - both during the 1990-91 Gulf war and the ongoing conflict - in Iraq.

"They're using it in Falluja, Baghdad is chock-a-block with DU - it's all over the place" - Major Doug Rokke, ex-head of US army DU project in 1994-95.

Only 467 US soldiers were officially wounded during the 1990-91 Gulf war but according to Terry Jemison at the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), of the more than 592,560 discharged personnel who served there, at least 179,310 - one third - are receiving disability compensation and over 24,760 cases were pending by in September 2004. This does not include personnel still active and receiving care from the military, or those who have died and among 168,528 veterans of the current conflict in Iraq who have left active duty, 16% (27,571) had already sought treatment from the VA by July 2004.

A prominent US international human-rights lawyer, Karen Parker, says there are four rules derived from humanitarian laws and conventions regarding weapons:

Weapons may only be used against legal enemy military targets and must not have an adverse effect elsewhere (the territorial rule) weapons can only be used for the duration of an armed conflict and must not be used or continue to act afterwards (the temporal rule) weapons may not be unduly inhumane (the "humaneness" rule). The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 speak of "unnecessary suffering" and "superfluous injury" in this regard weapons may not have an unduly negative effect on the natural environment (the "environmental" rule).

"DU weaponry fails all four tests," Parker told Aljazeera.net. First, DU cannot be limited to legal military targets. Second, it cannot be "turned off" when the war is over but keeps killing. Third, DU can kill through painful conditions such as cancers and organ damage and can also cause birth defects such as facial deformities and missing limbs. Lastly, DU cannot be used without unduly damaging the natural environment.

"In my view, use of DU weaponry violates the grave breach provisions of the Geneva Conventions," says Parker. "And so its use constitutes a war crime, or crime against humanity." Parker and others took the DU issue before the UN in 1995, and in 1996, the UN Human Rights Commission described DU munitions as weapons of mass destruction that should be banned.


Order 'Beyond Treason' DVD - http://www.beyondtreason.com/

The recently released definitive documentary 'BEYOND TREASON' details the horrific effects of depleted uranium (DU) exposure on American troops and Iraqi civilians in the Gulf region in 1991

[ Index ]

 

Related Stories and Events/ Global Movements

Media Darling Terror Expert Admits Government Sponsored Terror  (uruknet - information from occupied iraq) [March 3rd, 2005]

... Loftus then went on to explain and corroborate that Kermit Roosevelt admitted on NPR radio that in 1953 the CIA and British intelligence carried out a wave of bombings and shootings in Iran. Roosevelt then went on to brag about how they subsequently blamed the bombings on Iran's President, Mossadegh. We have covered this extensively in the past yet the mainstream media won't touch the story. Loftus asserted that this is one reason why US ground forces cannot go into Iran again. He also stated.


Iran: Helmut Kohl agrees with Ahmadinejad on Holocaust  (iranfocus) [March 6th, 2006]

Former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl reportedly told Iranian businessmen in Germany that he agreed with statements by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the Holocaust was a "myth", the semi-official Jomhouri Islami reported on Monday.

"What Ahmadinejad said about the Holocaust was in our bosoms", the former German chancellor was quoted as saying. "For years we wanted to say this, but we did not have the courage to speak out".

Protest at Columbia  (nydailynews) [March 9th, 2006]

Norman Finkelstein, a DePaul University professor and author whose writings on the Holocaust and comments about Jewish conspiracies have drawn wide condemnation, spoke about what he called the contrived controversy around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Israel's use of the Holocaust as a political tool.


Exclusive Photos Of Huge New US Base In Israel  (rense) [July 6th, 2005]

U.S. building HUGE Base in Israel, to be later handed over to the UN at the appropriate time.

This huge multi-billion dollar base is reportedly half the size of Tel Aviv. Currently being built, this base will include multi lane highway, buildings and fixtures carved from the rock, multiple underground tunnels/ complex and major electronics along with phenomenal storage areas (sizeable warehouse after warehouse). Missile launch bunker(s). There is limited or no facilities for troops to live in here so all buildings serve another purpose.

If you can, listen to the Jeff Rense broadcast from Tue July 6th, 2005.


See »» NWO News «« for related stories, eg 'Moscow and Beijing Sign Declaration on New World Order', 'UK perpetuating war in Iraq with fake, staged terror attacks', Military Manoeuvres and serious threats to the USA from China & Russia.

[ Index ]

 

Alternative 'Iran War' Web Sites

Coming War With Iran?
http://www.newworldordermustbestopped.com/Links.html2.html  NO IRAN WAR - New World Order Must Be Stopped

[ Index ]


 

"Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac."
-George Orwell  [1903~1950]  [More George Orwell (Eric Blair) Quotes]
"The general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose."
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
"If you know the enemy and you know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself, but not the enemy, for every victory gained, you'll also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will lose every battle."
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War

[ TOP ]

Join the Black Ribbon 'Free Speech Online!

Join the Blue Ribbon 'Free Speech Online!' Campaign

E-mail welcome: kemet@911kemet.co.uk





  »» NWO Radio ««     »» NWO A/V ««     »» NWO Books ««     »» NWO Quotes ««     »» Awakening CD ««