Archive for the Israeli Nukes Category

“The accessories to war crimes are those paid to keep the record straight” – on media suppression of US-UK int’l aggression []

Posted in Corporate Media Critique, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Israeli Nukes, Media cover-up, Media smear campaign, Sanctions as weapon of war, Saudi Arabia, Syria, U.K., US foreign occupation, US Government Cover-up, US imperialism, USA, War crimes on February 15, 2014 by Zuo Shou / 左手

8 February 2014

by John Pilger

…The Faustian pacts that contrived a world war a century ago resonate today across the Middle East, and Asia: from Syria to Japan. Then, as now, cover-up was the principal weapon. In 1917, Prime Minister David Lloyd George declared: “If people knew the truth, the war would be stopped tomorrow. But of course they don’t know and can’t know…”

…The truth about the criminal bloodbath in Iraq cannot be “countered” indefinitely. Neither can “our” support for the medievalists in Saudi Arabia, the nuclear-armed predators in Israel, the new military fascists in Egypt and the jihadist “liberators” of Syria, whose propaganda is now BBC news. There will be a reckoning – not just for the Blairs, Straws and Campbells, but for those paid to keep the record straight.

Excerpted; full article link:


The truth about Israel’s secret nuclear arsenal [Guardian]

Posted in Iran, Israel, Israeli Nukes, Nukes, U.K., USA on February 4, 2014 by Zuo Shou / 左手

– Israel has been stealing nuclear secrets and covertly making bombs since the 1950s. And western governments, including Britain and the US, turn a blind eye. But how can we expect Iran to curb its nuclear ambitions if the Israelis won’t come clean? –

15 January 2014

Julian Borger

Deep beneath desert sands, [Israel] has built a covert nuclear bomb, using technology and materials provided by friendly powers or stolen by a clandestine network of agents…

Full article link:

(c) Guardian News & Media Ltd

“Who authorized preparations for war with China?” – The Two Faux Democracies Threaten Life On Earth []

Posted in Afghanistan, China, China-US relations, George W. Bush, Georgia, Germany, Hiroshima, Israel, Israeli Nukes, Japan, Media cover-up, Nukes, Russia, Taiwan, US imperialism, USA, USA 21st Century Cold War, USSR on August 13, 2013 by Zuo Shou / 左手

July 24, 2013

Paul Craig Roberts

Amitai Etzioni has raised an important question: “Who authorized preparations for war with China?” [] Etzioni says that the war plan is not the sort of contingency plan that might be on hand for an improbable event. Etzioni also reports that the Pentagon’s war plan was not ordered by, and has not been reviewed by, US civilian authorities. We are confronted with a neoconized US military out of control endangering Americans and the rest of the world.

Etzioni is correct that this is a momentous decision made by a neocon[-]ized military. China is obviously aware that Washington is preparing for war with China. If the Yale Journal knows it, China knows it. If the Chinese government is realistic, the government is aware that Washington is planning a pre-emptive nuclear attack against China. No other kind of war makes any sense from Washington’s standpoint. The “superpower” was never able to occupy Baghdad, and after 11 years of war has been defeated in Afghanistan by a few thousand lightly armed Taliban. It would be curtains for Washington to get into a conventional war with China.

When China was a primitive [sic] third world country, it fought the US military to a stalemate in Korea. Today China has the world’s second largest economy and is rapidly overtaking the failing US economy destroyed by jobs offshoring, bankster fraud, and corporate and congressional treason.

The Pentagon’s war plan for China is called “AirSea Battle.” The plan describes itself as “interoperable air and naval forces that can execute networked, integrated attacks-in-depth to disrupt, destroy, and defeat enemy anti-access area denial capabilities.”

Yes, what does that mean? It means many billions of dollars of more profits for the military/security complex while the 99 percent are ground under the boot. It is also clear that this nonsensical jargon cannot defeat a Chinese army. But this kind of saber-rattling can lead to war, and if the Washington morons get a war going, the only way Washington can prevail is with nuclear weapons. The radiation, of course, will kill Americans as well.

Nuclear war is on Washington’s agenda. The rise of the Neocon Nazis has negated the nuclear disarmament agreements that Reagan and Gorbachev made. The extraordinary, mainly truthful 2012 book, The Untold History of the United States by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick, describes the post-Reagan breakout of preemptive nuclear attack as Washington’s first option.

During the Cold War nuclear weapons had a defensive purpose. The purpose was to prevent nuclear war by the US and USSR each having sufficient retaliatory power to ensure “mutually assured destruction.” MAD, as it was known, meant that nuclear weapons had no offensive advantage for either side.

The Soviet collapse and China’s focus on its economy instead of its military have resulted in Washington’s advantage in nuclear weaponry that, according to two US Dr. Strangeglove characters, Keir Lieber and Daryl Press, gives Washington first-strike capability. Lieber and Press write that the “precipitous decline of Russia’s arsenal, and the glacial pace of modernization of China’s nuclear forces,” have created a situation in which neither Russia nor China could retaliate to Washington’s first strike.

The Pentagon’s “AirSea Battle” and Lieber and Press’ article in Foreign Affairs have informed China and Russia that Washington is contemplating pre-emptive nuclear attack on both countries. To ensure Russia’s inability to retaliate, Washington is placing anti-ballistic missiles on Russia’s borders in violation of the US-USSR agreement.

Because the American press is a corrupt government propaganda ministry, the American people have no idea that neoconized Washington is planning nuclear war. Americans are no more aware of this than they are of former President Jimmy Carter’s recent statement, reported only in Germany, that the United States no longer has a functioning democracy.

The possibility that the United States would initiate nuclear war was given reality eleven years ago when President George W. Bush, at the urging of Dick Cheney and the neocons that dominated his regime, signed off on the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review.

This neocon document, signed off on by America’s most moronic president, resulted in consternation and condemnation from the rest of the world and launched a new arms race. Russian President Putin immediately announced that Russia would spend all necessary sums to maintain Russia’s retaliatory nuclear capability. The Chinese displayed their prowess by knocking a satellite out of space with a missile. The mayor of Hiroshima, recipient city of a vast American war crime, stated: “The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the central international agreement guiding the elimination of nuclear weapons, is on the verge of collapse. The chief cause is US nuclear policy that, by openly declaring the possibility of a pre-emptive nuclear first strike and calling for resumed research into mini-nukes and other so-called ‘useable nuclear weapons,’ appears to worship nuclear weapons as God.”

Polls from all over the world consistently show that Israel and the US are regarded as the two greatest threats to peace and to life on earth. Yet, these two utterly lawless governments prance around pretending to be the “world’s greatest democracies.” Neither government accepts any accountability whatsoever to international law, to human rights, to the Geneva Conventions, or to their own statutory law. The US and Israel are rogue governments, throwbacks to the Hitler…era.

The post World War II wars originate in Washington and Israel. No other country has imperial expansionary ambitions. The Chinese government has not seized Taiwan, which China could do at will. The Russian government has not seized former constituent parts of Russia, such as Georgia, which, provoked by Washington to launch an attack, was instantly overwhelmed by the Russian Army. Putin could have hung Washington’s Georgian puppet and reincorporated Georgia into Russia, where it resided for several centuries and where many believe it belongs.

For the past 68 years, most military aggression can be sourced to the US and Israel. Yet, these two originators of wars pretend to be the victims of aggression. It is Israel that has a nuclear arsenal that is illegal, unacknowledged, and unaccountable. It is Washington that has drafted a war plan based on nuclear first strike. The rest of the world is correct to view these two rogue unaccountable governments as direct threats to life on earth.

Edited by Zuo Shou

Article link:

Good Rockets, Bad Rockets – BBC Bias On India And North Korea [Media Lens]

Posted in BBC bias, distortions and lies, China, Corporate Media Critique, DPR Korea, George W. Bush, India, Iran, Israel, Israeli Nukes, Obama, Pakistan, Pyongyang, south Korea, US imperialism, USA on May 30, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

May 16, 2012

In the space of one week last month, the BBC offered an opportunity to compare its reporting on two nuclear powers: India, an ally of the British government; and North [sic] Korea, an official enemy.

The Federation of American Scientists estimates that India has a stockpile of 80-100 nuclear weapons while North Korea has less than ten. North Korea originally signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty on nuclear weapons (NPT) but withdrew in 2003.

Like Israel and Pakistan, also nuclear powers, India has never signed the NPT. Despite this, the US has supported the development of nuclear weapons in all three countries – India receiving particular support from George W. Bush and Obama. The 2008 India Civilian Nuclear Agreement — an agreement of cooperation between India, the US, and other providers of nuclear technology — is linked with plans to build dozens of nuclear plants in India, a country that exploded five nuclear devices at its Pokhran test site in 1998. Environmental journalist Gar Smith writes:

‘While this scheme will generate a lot of global cash-flow for the nuclear marketers and their government boosters, it could deal a death blow to nonproliferation hopes by allowing India to become the first country to buy nuclear materials without being a party to the NPT. In April 2010, Washington signed off on a deal that permits India to reprocess its own nuclear fuel. The arrangement, however, has raised fears in neighboring Pakistan, which is now expected to embark on a “significant nuclear military buildup.”’

Meanwhile, the US government regularly lambasts North Korea for its nuclear weapons programme and, of course, Iran for an alleged nuclear weapons programme that, according to the 16 US intelligence agencies, does not exist.

As Noam Chomsky comments:

‘Small wonder that outside the West few can take the US charges against Iran very seriously…’ (Chomsky, Hopes and Prospects, Hamish Hamilton, 2010, p.220)

The headline for the BBC article on India was neutral enough:

‘India test launches Agni-V long-range missile’

The headline for the article on North Korea struck a different tone:

‘UN “deplores” North Korea botched rocket launch’

The introduction to the Korean piece continued with the same emphasis:

‘The UN Security Council has deplored the launch by North Korea of a rocket which broke up shortly after take-off.

‘A statement issued after closed-door talks said the launch was in breach of two Security Council resolutions…’

The introduction to the India piece was positive, even celebratory:

‘India has successfully launched a long-range intercontinental ballistic missile able to carry a nuclear warhead, officials say…

‘India said the launch was “flawless” and the missile had reached its target…

‘With this, India joins an elite nuclear club of China, Russia, France, the US and UK which already have long-range missiles, although with a much greater range. Israel is also thought to possess them.

‘”It was a perfect launch . It met all the test parameters and hit its pre-determined target,” SP Das, director of the test range, told the BBC. He confirmed the missile had flown more than 5,000km before reaching the target.

‘Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh congratulated the scientists for the “successful launch” of the missile.’

If anyone on Planet Earth had anything negative to say about the launch, the BBC was unable to find them.

The primary source for views on the Indian launch were Indian. By contrast, North Korean opinion was buried in the last of five sections in the article. Perhaps no humanising comments from named North Korean officials or experts were available – the BBC provided only two bland, anonymous sentences from ‘North Korea’s state news agency KCN.’

* Ask A World Policeman *

The article on North Korea presented the missile [sic] launch as a threat eliciting punishment:

‘Earlier, Washington accused the communist state of threatening regional security. It said North Korea had isolated itself still further from the outside world.

‘The US has also cancelled a proposed food aid deal with Pyongyang.

‘A US National Security Council spokesman said they would look at additional sanctions if Pyongyang continued its “provocations”.’

As for the Indian launch:

‘The BBC’s Andrew North in Delhi says Indian officials deny it, but everyone believes the missile is mainly aimed at deterring China…’

The North Korean [rocket], then, was portrayed as a threat; the Indian missile as a deterrent. Additionally, the BBC commented: ‘Many outside the country saw the launch as an illegal test of long-range missile technology.’ The sentence could apply to either launch – we will leave readers to guess in which article it appeared.

The article on North Korea repeatedly referenced US sources: ‘US ambassador Susan Rice,’ ‘Washington,’ ‘A US National Security Council spokesman,’ ‘Washington’ (again), and finally ‘White House spokesman Jay Carney’. When media discussion centres on global ‘Bad Guys’ it is US opinion that matters. This not so subtly portrays the US as the actual and rightful World Policeman. One might reasonably wonder what on earth events on the Korean peninsula ever had to do with the United States.

The North Korea piece lined up the denunciations, here White House spokesman Jay Carney:

‘North Korea is only further isolating itself by engaging in provocative acts, and is wasting its money on weapons and propaganda displays while the North Korean people go hungry.’

Nothing along these lines appeared in the article on India, a country with 57 billionaires and one-third of the world’s poor. In January, India’s Premier Manmohan Singh called malnutrition in the country ‘a national shame’ as he released a major survey that found 42 per cent of children under five were underweight. One of the NGOs that produced the report commented that, measured by the prevalence of malnutrition, India is ‘doing worse than sub-Saharan Africa’.

To round off the criticism, the BBC article on North Korea cited South Korea, the North’s main enemy:

‘South Korean Foreign Minister Kim Sung-Hwan accused the North of a “clear breach of the UN resolution that prohibits any launch using ballistic missile technology”.’

No mention was made of the Pakistani view of India’s launch. There was also no word at all on the view from ‘Washington’ or the US more generally.

The silence is understandable. As discussed, while preaching against nuclear proliferation to countries like North Korea and Iran, the US and Britain have been working hard to arm both India and Pakistan.

In September 2003, Britain’s BAE Systems announced the sale of 66 Hawk jets to India in a £1 billion package. This constituted 10 times the value of annual UK development aid to India. In July 2010, a further 57 aircraft were sold in a deal worth £700,000,000 described by The Times of India as ‘a quantum jump for Indo-British military ties’.

The Hawks, which can also be used as ground-attack aircraft, are used to train Indian pilots to fly more powerful jets, including 139 BAE Systems Jaguar bombers built under licence. The Ministry of Defence accepts that Jaguars could deliver India’s nuclear weapons. The Indian government receiving these jets has fought three wars with Pakistan in the last 70 years.

In 2003, the Guardian provided the sensible emphasis in a piece entitled: ‘5,000 jobs safe as India buys Hawks.’

Similarly, in March 2005, the press reported that the United States had agreed to sell two dozen F-16 nuclear-capable jet fighters to Pakistan. US Senator Larry Pressler commented in The New York Times:

‘Pakistan… is a corrupt, absolute dictatorship. It has a horrendous record on human rights and religious tolerance.’ (Pressler, ‘Dissing democracy in Asia,’ The New York Times, March 21, 2005)

It could be coincidence that, with important arms contracts and strategic alliances at stake, the BBC should fail to muster a single criticism of Indian nuclear missile technology. It could also be coincidence that the BBC demonises and lambasts an enemy of the same state-corporate interests. But in truth the pattern is so obvious, so consistent, over years and decades. We can debate the precise mechanisms corrupting BBC performance – the fact that senior managers and trustees are Establishment grandees selected by the government of the day. Or we can focus on the role of the entire corporate media system in furthering state-corporate power – system-wide corruption that generates industrial[-]strength pressure to conform on the less overtly corporate BBC. Whatever the reasons, there is no question that the BBC heavily promotes the interests of power at the expense of honesty, critical thought and compassion…

Edited by Zuo Shou

Article link:

U.S. promotes assassination threats against Iranian scientists [Workers World]

Posted in Assassination, Capitalism crisis early 21st century, CIA, Corporate Media Critique, Iran, Israel, Israeli Nukes, Media smear campaign, Mossad, Nukes, Pentagon, Sanctions as weapon of war, US imperialism, USA on December 3, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Sara Flounders
Published Nov 23, 2011

The International Atomic Energy Agency made public the names of Iranian nuclear scientists in a new report released this week. Publishing their names makes these scientists targets for assassination.

This unprecedented violation of international guidelines, and of the IAEA’s own Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, is the most menacing proof to date that the agency is not even superficially a neutral U.N. body that monitors nuclear weapons. Showing the agency’s bias, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano met with the White House before meeting with U.N. officials on this latest report.

Several Iranian scientists have already been killed by bombs and drive-by shootings. The secretary general of Iran’s High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani, says the U.S. and Israel were behind the murders.

Exposing that these targeted killings are considered acceptable practice, U.S. presidential candidate Newt Gingrich declared that Washington is seeking to stop Iran’s nuclear program through maximum covert operations, including the assassination of scientists.

U.S. CIA or Israeli Mossad agents have also carried out virus attacks on the computers of legal Iranian centrifuges, explosions at Iranian industrial sites and continuing acts of sabotage. All this is part of an ongoing U.S. war that attempts to set back Iran’s development as a modern, self-sufficient country.

A new round of demands that other countries join in sanctions against Iran comes at a time of increasing crisis and upheaval in the region. The impact of an intractable capitalist economic crisis turns Pentagon war planners in an increasingly threatening direction.

The IAEA report was leaked to the press before its official release. Rather than presenting information from the agency’s countless inspections in Iran, it repeated discredited allegations originally made four years ago regarding a laptop computer “found” by U.S. authorities. The laptop supposedly showed Iran’s “intention” to construct atomic warheads.

The leak of the report follows a bourgeois media frenzy over a wild claim that Iran was planning to execute a Saudi ­ambassador in Washington, D.C.

Most ominous are the media reports of a possible Israeli military attack on Iran. Israel is totally dependent on U.S. financial, diplomatic and military aid to survive. Any attack on Iran could occur only with U.S. authorization and overflight clearance of regions where the Pentagon has controlled the sky for decades.

* The right to develop nuclear energy *

Like every other country, Iran is guaranteed the right to develop and acquire nuclear technology. Iran is also a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Today, at least 30 countries have nuclear power plants. According to the IAEA’s most recent “International Status and Prospects of Nuclear Power” report, another 65 countries “are expressing interest in, considering, or actively planning for nuclear power.” (, March 2011)

But only Iran has faced every form of attack to block development of a nuclear energy program.

Every Iranian nuclear facility is under 24-hour-a-day surveillance by IAEA cameras, and Iran has not one nuclear weapon. Yet the U.S. continues to demand that Iran stop the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, because it could potentially lead to a nuclear weapon sometime in the future.

The IAEA does not criticize, attack or demand inspections of the more than 10,000 nuclear weapons that the U.S. holds, nor of the hundreds of nuclear weapons developed by Israel.

The bogus charges of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction to justify the U.S. invasion of Iraq — despite years of total monitoring of every industrial plant in Iraq — confirms that no inspection can satisfy Washington’s demands.

* Sanctions on Iran’s oil refineries *

The most recent U.S. sanctions are not focused on nuclear research. Instead, they are an attempt to hamper Iran’s petrochemical industry.

Iran nationalized its production of oil after a revolutionary upheaval drove U.S. and British imperialism out of Iran in 1979. Since then, every effort has been made to destabilize Iran and regain the vast wealth that once flowed into Western banks and corporations.

Due to its past unequal relation with imperialism and the years of sanctions since, Iran has had to import large amounts of refined oil and petroleum products, from gasoline to jet fuel, cooking gas and more. In 2008, Iran still had to import nearly 40 percent of its market needs.

However, after completion of seven new refineries and improvements to existing refineries, Iran is now almost self-sufficient in oil refining needs. This is why the U.S. is so determined to again block Iran’s refining capacity by hampering all forms of international investment.

As this entire resource-rich region continues to slip from U.S. imperialism’s control and domination, the danger of a Pentagon-inspired provocation against Iran escalates. All those who oppose imperialist war should be on heightened alert.

Articles copyright 1995-2011 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Article link:

International talks over Iran’s nuclear program collapse – US’ unilateral sanctions on Iran also aimed at strangling China [World Socialist Web Site]

Posted in China, France, George W. Bush, Germany, Hillary Clinton, Hong Kong, Iran, Israel, Israeli Nukes, Mossad, Sanctions as weapon of war, U.K., USA on February 1, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Peter Symonds

24 January 2011

Negotiations in Istanbul over Iran’s nuclear program broke up on Saturday with no agreement between Tehran and the UN Security Council permanent members—the US, China, Russia, Britain and France—plus Germany (P5+1).  Such was the gulf between the parties that no further meeting was scheduled.

The US and its European allies sought to use the forum to pressure Iran into giving up most of its stockpile of enriched uranium in return for badly-needed fuel rods for the small Tehran research reactor that manufactures medical isotopes.  After a similar deal in 2009 fell through, the Iranian regime insisted that it would enrich uranium to 20 percent and manufacture its own fuel rods.

Tehran, which is a signatory to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty and allows its nuclear facilities to be inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has repeatedly declared that it has no intention of building nuclear weapons and is enriching uranium to provide fuel for its planned power reactors.

The Istanbul talks effectively collapsed when the P5+1 countries flatly rejected Iranian demands that they recognise Tehran’s right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty and ease sanctions imposed on Iran.  The purpose of the US-led sanctions is to force Tehran to comply with Washington’s demands for the dismantlement of Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities and several other nuclear programs.

The aim of the so-called confidence-building deal was to reduce Iran’s store of enriched uranium to below that needed to potentially build nuclear weapons.  Most of Iran’s stockpile has been enriched to just 3.5 percent—the level needed to fuel nuclear power plants—with a further amount enriched to 20 percent—the level required for the Tehran research reactor.  Highly-enriched uranium of around 90 percent is needed to build a weapon.

Following the breakdown of the talks, Iran’s chief negotiator Saeed Jalali told the media that the P5+1 had pushed “dictation, not dialogue”.  While Iran was open to negotiation in many areas, he said, “it’s no longer a dialogue but just a set of special orders and specifications”.  US intransigence ensured that the talks never went beyond the repetition of previously stated stances on both sides.

The reaction of the US and its allies to the collapse of the talks, along with the US and international media coverage, has been low key. European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who formally led the P5+1 delegation, expressed her disappointment at the outcome, but declared that the door remained open to further discussions.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has threatened to extend unilateral American sanctions and to press for other countries to do the same and tighten existing sanctions. But the Istanbul meeting has not been accompanied by the strident threats, including of military strikes against Iran, and lurid stories of Iran’s imminent production of nuclear weapons, that were a central feature of the Bush administration.  Far from diminishing the danger of conflict, however, the approach simply indicates that the Obama administration has put Iran on hold, for the time being at least, while its focus is turned elsewhere.

Continue reading

British secret file confirms Israeli nukes [PressTV]

Posted in Israel, Israeli Nukes, Palestine, South Africa, U.K., West Bank on January 13, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

~ A newly released British document confirms that Israel has possessed nuclear weapons for more than three decades. ~

December 29, 2010

Secret files released by Britain’s National Archives said on Wednesday that British officials feared Tel Aviv would use its nuclear weapons in case of another war with Arab countries in the region.

Israel, which is considered as the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, has never confirmed or denied that it has produced nuclear warheads. It has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and also adamantly rejected international inspection of its nuclear facilities.

Former US President Jimmy Carter acknowledged for the first time in May 2008 that Tel Aviv has 150 nuclear warheads in its arsenals.

In 1986, Israeli nuclear technician, Mordechai Vanunu, leaked the news that Israel had between 100 and 200 nuclear weapons.

Vanunu was a former worker at Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor in the Negev desert.

In May 2010, the UK’s Guardian newspaper said secret South African documents reveal that in 1975, Israel offered to sell nuclear warheads to the then-apartheid regime in South Africa.

According to documents obtained by the newspaper, a secret meeting between the then-Israeli defense minister, Shimon Peres, and his South African counterpart, P.W. Botha, ended with an offer for the sale of warheads “in three sizes.”

The Guardian claimed that those “sizes” referred to conventional, chemical and nuclear weapons.

Israel has initiated several wars in the region in its 60-year-old history of occupation of Palestinian territories in the West Bank and East al-Quds (Jerusalem).

Article link: