Mind Deprogramming Jukebox

Friday 10 February 2006

Cartoon drama still playing out. Muslims have largest protest yet.

Asian Muslims Hold Biggest Rallies Yet

By MUNIR AHMAD, Associated Press Writer

Tens of thousands of Muslims demonstrated against drawings of the Prophet Muhammed after Friday prayers around the world and Iranian youths rioted outside the French Embassy in Tehran despite calls for calm by governments and religious leaders.

Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, meanwhile, warned of a "huge chasm that has emerged between the West and Islam," particularly because of Muslim frustrations at Western policies toward Iraq, Afghanistan and the Palestinians.

While many of the demonstrations were peaceful, up to 60 young men and women hurled stones, firecrackers and firebombs at the French Embassy in the Iranian capital, smashing almost every window on its street facade and starting a small fire near the gate.

"Down! Down with France! Down! Down with Israel," the crowd chanted. More than 100 policemen deployed around the embassy and officers used loudspeakers to urge the protesters to disperse.

Police in Kenya shot and injured one person while trying to keep hundreds of protesters from marching to the residence of Denmark's ambassador. Demonstrators also clashed with police in Pakistan and Egypt.

Rallies in Asia were the largest on the continent since protests erupted throughout the Muslim world over the drawings first published in a Danish newspaper in September and recently reprinted in other European publications. One depicted the prophet with a turban shaped like a bomb with a burning fuse.

Some Muslim leaders in the Middle East, including Kuwait's parliament and Iraq's top Shiite politician, have appealed for calm, saying violence is unhelpful and unnecessary. No major demonstrations were held in Mideast and North African cities Thursday.

But rallies erupted again on Friday. In Pakistan, protesters burned Danish cheese while others clashed with police. The largest gathering was in the capital, Islamabad, where 5,000 supporters of radical Islamic groups demonstrated peacefully in the center of the capital.

Thousands also demonstrated in Malaysia, Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka, while smaller rallies were held in Indonesia and the Philippines. Some protested outside mosques while others marched on Danish diplomatic missions.

In Egypt, some protesters clashed with police who tried to disperse them with water canons and tear gas. Thousands of Palestinians in Gaza rallied, some firing rifles in the air and others burning Danish flags. About 2,000 Muslim worshippers marched in Jordan under tight security.

The editor of a small Christian newspaper in Norway — the second to publish the drawings, on Jan. 10 — apologized Friday for offending Muslims. Magazinet editor Vebjoern Selbekk said he failed to foresee the pain and anger the drawings would cause.

Many Muslims considered the caricatures offensive to Islam, which is interpreted to bar images of the revered prophet. The Danish newspaper that first published the drawings has apologized for offending Muslims but the Danish government has said it cannot apologize for something done by its free press.

In Pakistan, Mian Aslam, a leader of a coalition of Islamic groups, delivered a fiery speech urging Pakistan to sever ties with any country where the drawings were published. The turnout in Islamabad was the biggest in Pakistan since protests against the cartoons began about a week ago.

About 2,000 protesters briefly clashed with police in the northwestern Pakistani city of Peshawar, where they burned foreign-made dairy products. The crowd attacked shops before they were charged by police. At least half a dozen small protests were held around the southern city of Karachi.

In Kenya, thousands of demonstrators, shouting "Down with Denmark!" marched from the largest mosque in downtown Nairobi to Kenya's foreign ministry, to deliver a protest note. At least 200 demonstrators tried to go the home of the Danish envoy, triggering clashes with anti-riot police in which one person was injured.

Israeli police in Jerusalem unsuccessfully tried to prevent protests by barring all men under the age of 45 from attending Friday prayers at the Al Aqsa mosque compound in the Old City, Islam's third-holiest site. Despite the efforts, about 2,000 women, young boys and older men marched around the Dome of the Rock shrine on the compound, chanting "Bin Laden, strike again."

In Malaysia's largest city, Kuala Lumpur, about 3,000 protesters marched from a mosque to the high rise building housing the Danish Embassy shouting: "Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush. Destroy America!"

Meanwhile, a U.S. official praised Indonesia and Malaysia for their handling of the controversy, saying the two countries proved that Islam and democracy were compatible.

"The protests dissipated fairly quickly and there was a public discussion of it," said Eric John, deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs.

Small demonstrations were also held in Indonesia, where protesters burned tires in one town.

Denmark earlier this week advised its citizens to leave Indonesia after its embassy was stormed by a mob and pelted with eggs.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard said Friday he considered the violent reactions to the cartoons "are completely disproportionate to the offense that could possibly have been given."


With that stated, let once again look at an Illuminati structure of deceit, always a lie is boldfaced and media driven. The story never differs, and if information is then needed.. there is "an on going investigation", and therefore it cannot be discussed... althought they already have and are telling you its been foiled ... case and point LA BOMB scare !


Bush Plays Terror Card With Bogus LA Attack Plot

Bootlicking news networks follow suit with dramatic images of Library Tower being destroyed

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | February 10 2006

In an orchestrated set-up, George W. Bush announced that a plan to fly a plane into the LA Library Tower was thwarted in 2002 and within minutes news networks were showing footage of the same building being destroyed in the movie Independence Day.

Bush stated that the attack was prevented only with the help of NSA surveillance of communications, an attempt to shut up critics of the spying scandal in a move about as sophisticated as a 300lb Pittsburgh Steelers fan after a heavy drinking session.

The mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa, immediately went public with comments of his absolute bewilderment concerning the alleged plot.

"I'm amazed that the president would make this (announcement) on national TV and not inform us of these details through the appropriate channels," the mayor said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I don't expect a call from the president — but somebody."

Within minutes of the President's speech, news networks were showing images from the movie Independence Day, where the Library Tower is destroyed as part of the alien invasion.


We have to understand that the Mayor being completely oblivious to the supposed terror plot most likely means that it was completely invented by Karl Rove and his fellow scriptwriters. That meant that a target had to be chosen and they chose the Library Tower knowing full well that news networks would show images of it being destroyed from the movie Independence Day.

In the mind of the passive viewer this information enters the brain as if it is real, and they suspend disbelief to embrace the notion that the building was destroyed by terrorists. This residue remains in the viewer's psyche and the validity of the government's response to the 'attack,' in this instance passing the soon to expire Patriot Act and justifying spying on Americans, is unquestionable.

This isn't another tin-foil hat conspiracy theory, the suggestibility of television is a scientific fact that has been accepted for decades.

This represents an organized campaign of mind control and fearmongering. They have played the terror card so many times that the fingerprints of deception can be lifted and verified almost immediately.

These are the same people that brought you fake fat bin Laden 'confession' tapes found in a shack in Jalalabad and could psychically predict tapes tying Osama to Saddam airing on Al Jazeera days before they surfaced.

Furthermore, as Kurt Nimmo points out, one of the supposed ringleaders of the operation, Riduan Isamuddin, was “operations chief” of Jemaah Islamiyah, which was a creation of Indonesian intelligence and is widely acknowledged to wholly controlled by the CIA.

If the government has really thwarted an attack on LA you can bet your bottom dollar that they would have waved it in front of the anti-war crowd's face before invading Iraq in March 2003.

This is as obvious a political points scoring move as you're ever going to see. It has been deliberately and synthetically concocted to stifle heated criticism of the NSA spying.

This, despite the fact that the spying debate still circles around foreign phone calls, when the real issue is the admitted fact that the Pentagon and other government agencies have been caught and continue to spy on peaceful anti-war and activist groups entirely made up of American citizens.

SIDE NOTE ON SOME PEOPLES THINK : To think on the NO SPIN ZONE [ Bill O'Reilly is host of The O'Reilly Factor ] the O'Reilly Radio show we had a caller on Wensday who stated Americans needed to pass as fast as they could the Pat Act II and Pact Act I and allow spying, because IF and WHEN the USA gets hit again his and everyone elses rights are gone. BLOOP, gone and Martial Law would be needed .. ROFL , why fight then, just do it now. You've lost ethier way idiots. This sort of conditioned thinking is exactly what they want. Fear, be scared. Give away your freedoma and rights for security no one ever has had or can have. Terror exsists in every country. In Iran and Iraq they use the USA as the Terror. Think on that.

HELP SUPPORT INFOWARS.NET

Twenty-Three Intel Experts Say LA Terror Plot a Sham

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | February 10 2006

Related: Bush Plays Terror Card With Bogus LA Attack Plot

Following yesterday's highly suspiciously timed announcement that the US government had foiled a 2002 terror plot against the Los Angeles Library Tower, intelligence experts and White House reporters have uniformly debunked the story.

As we reported yesterday, in an orchestrated set-up, George W. Bush announced that a plan to fly a plane into the LA Library Tower was thwarted in 2002 and within minutes news networks were showing footage of the same building being destroyed in the movie Independence Day.

After the mayor of LA, Antonio Villaraigosa, immediately went public with comments of his absolute bewilderment concerning the alleged plot, no fewer than twenty three intelligence experts told Capitol Hill Blue that President Bush was "cheapening and politicizing their work" by creating a "fantasy world" of discredited terror alerts and using them for political points scoring.

Both current and former NSA and FBI officials vented their fury with George Bush, one telling Capitol Hill Blue that he was "full of shit."

The LA attack plot arose from the same discredited informant who said that Washington and New York financial institutions were being targeted, which led the White House to raise the terror alert right as the 2004 election campaign was beginning.

In June 2004 John Pistole, the FBI's counterterrorism director, said he was "not sure what [the CIA] was referring to," after a CIA counterterrorism official who testified under the alias "Ted Davis" said that the US had prevented aviation attacks against the east and west coast.

Even former Homeland Security secretary Tom Ridge, before he was replaced by Michael Chertoff, stated that the White House would raise the terror alert with zeal based on the flimsiest evidence.

White House press reporters questioned the timing of the bogus attack claim Thursday evening in light of the NSA spying hearings, after Bush claimed NSA surveillance was key in preventing the alleged attack.

"But is it just a coincidence? You had February 6th circled on the calendar for the hearings, the NSA hearings. Is it just a pure coincidence that this comes out today?" asked one journalist.

McClellan was clearly ruffled and all he could do was repeat the same line about how the President likes to share information with the American people, a claim that would be funny if it were not so disturbingly tragic in light of today's report highlighting White House knowledge of levee breaks in New Orleans hours after Hurricane Katrina roared ashore.

"Scott, I wanted to just ask a follow-up about the LA plot. Is there something missing from this story, a practical application, a few facts? Because if you want to commandeer a plane and fly it into a tower, if you used shoe bombs, wouldn't you blow off the cockpit? Or is there something missing from this story?" asked another.

File this with the dozens of fake terror alerts, staged 'Al-Qaeda' arrests and hoax bin Laden tapes as another brazen attempt to frighten the American people into jettisoning their own liberty for the sake of a mythical security offered by an illegitimate occupational government.

Wednesday 8 February 2006

GLOBAL JIHAD 'Muhammad cartoon'proved fake

Well, seems some hatred built up may be in fact an issue with US Sysop wars. Even more offensive material was published then the original pictures I showed last post. Read on, also read below where once again a Russian minister states the US is involved and moving issues for their purposes.


GLOBAL JIHAD 'Muhammad cartoon'proved fake

LINK TO ARTICLE :
Imam added 3 especially provocative images to fuel outrage
Posted: February 8, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


One of three especially inflammatory but undocumented Muhammad images distributed by a Danish imam as an example of an "anti-Muslim environment" in the European country turns out to be a poorly reproduced copy of an Associated Press photo taken at a French pig-squealing contest.

The weblog NeanderNews pointed out the image used by Imam Ahmad Abu Laban was a faxed copy of AP's Aug. 15 photo of Jacques Barrot competing at the annual French Pig-Squealing Championships in Trie-sur-Baise.

Since last week, Muslims throughout the world have engaged in protests and deadly riots in response to 12 cartoons caricaturing Islam's prophet Muhammad published in September by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten and three much more provocative images that Muslim leaders have been unable to document.

One of those images of mysterious origin, which never were published, is from the AP photo. Another depicts Muhammad as a pedophile demon and a third has a praying Muslim being raped by a dog, according to the weblog Gateway Pundit.



Three undocumented images Danish imams used as examples of anti-Muslim hostility (courtesy Gateway Pundit)

Abu Laban, leader of the Islamic Society of Denmark, took the images on a tour of the Middle East in December to rally support for his protest against the newspaper and Danish government. Tour spokesman Akhmad Akkari explained the three drawings had been added to "give an insight in how hateful the atmosphere in Denmark is towards Muslims."

Akkari claimed he didn't know the origin of the three images, saying they had been sent anonymously to Danish Muslims. But he rejected a request by the Danish newspaper Ekstra Bladet to speak with the people who supposedly received them.

In a television interview, Abu Laban told Fox News the cartoons came from threatening letters, but he has not replied to the network's request to provide copies of the letters.

A profile of Abu Laban Friday night on Danish television documented his close ties to the Egyptian terrorist group Gamaa Islamiya.


LINK TO ARTICLE :

Russian Ultranationalist Leader Expects U.S. to Attack Iran in Late March

Created: 07.02.2006 10:54 MSK (GMT +3)

MosNews


A senior Russian parliamentary official and leader of the ultranationalist Liberal Democratic Vladimir Zhirinovsky believes that a U.S. attack on Iran is inevitable, he has told Ekho Moskvy radio station.

“The war is inevitable because the Americans want this war,” he said. “Any country claiming a leading position in the world will need to wage wars. Otherwise it will simply not be able to retain its leading position. The date for the strike is already known — it is the election day in Israel (March 28). It is also known how much that war will cost,” Zhirinovsky said.

He went on to add that the publication of Prophet Muhammad cartoons in the European press was a planned action by the U.S. whose aim is “to provoke a row between Europe and the Islamic world”. “It will all end with European countries thanking the United States and paying, and giving soldiers,” he said. Russia should “choose a position of non-interference and express minimal solidarity with the Islamic world”, Zhirinovsky added.

For his part, the head of the Centre for Strategic Studies of Religions and Modern World Politics, Maxim Shevchenko, also believes that a U.S. attack on Iran is very likely although he sees no preconditions for this war. “Iran does not threaten anyone, is not pointing its missiles at anyone. No Iranian leader has ever threatened to carry out a strike against the U.S. Therefore preparations for a war against Iran appear to be a global act of provocation,” he said.

In Shevchenko’s opinion, the reason behind “this barefaced promotion of a world war lies not in a conflict between the West and the Islamic World but in a fight for power in the world between US and European elites”. “The fate of humanity will be decided between a saber-rattling America and an allegedly democratic Europe,” Shevchenko concluded.

Whereas a senior research associate of the World Economy and International Relations Institute, Georgy Mirsky, is confident that “there will be no war”.

“The Americans got so very much stuck in Afghanistan and Iraq that they will not start a new war without definite proof of the fact that Iran poses a threat to the world. Besides, the U.S. has mid-term elections this year and the Republicans, who have suffered a severe blow to their trust, will not be able to win these elections if they drag the country into a new hazardous escapade.

”As for Israel, it can carry out a strike against Iran but only when it knows for certain that only one step remains before an Iranian atomic bomb is created. But that time has not come yet,“ Mirsky said.

In the meantime, check this picture out.


Tuesday 7 February 2006

Prophet Muhammad Cartoons

While I fully agree with the Muslims that posting the pictures / cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad were and could be viewed as offensive, I beleive the amount of protest has reached an epically stupid level. Where was the outcries when videos were release and pictures released of westerners captured. This is tit-for-tat thinking, but do the Muslims wish Western countries and people to react in the same way when they see something or someone of Arab or Muslim decent making fun of their beliefs? Muslims around the world are only re-enforing the negitive image the western powers have worked so hard to build up. Wake up, grow up ! Cause if you do not, and others are ignorant and silly in the west take offence to something trivial, well then we would have WWIII wouldn't we.
So since these pictures are getting harder to view, and I an am atheist, so to me any religion fiqure is not worth killing over. I mean, does not God always say to love one another ?





US Budget is terrible due to war, yet more war is coming !!!!

Like I stated in my posts in early December it was very easy to see where the US was going, if you did not have your head buried in the Media made quicksand. The push to invade a 3rd Islamic country is on, and all in the name of peace. War = Peace. Killing = Freedom. Invasion = Safety from threats over the world for American, Britian ect. This is the way from day 1 the admins of these and other countries have pushed their global agenda. But the main country, and one leading the charge, the mis-information and sysop's is of course the USA. And the people are now slowly waking up to see the landscape is changing.

Everything would not be such so tragic if more people around the world seen that this whole war is a smoke screen by world power brokers. 9/11 was a tool used to mold the US people into a usable force to proceed with this agenda. I suggest anyone who has not looked into the facts [ and I do mean FACTS,] to find them out yourself. Videos can be watched, news read .... the internet is great since you can get unfiltered, unwashed and unbiase news from Isreal,Iran,China,Russia,American,Canada,Britan ect ect. To use the internet to goto places that have bit torrent or use Winamp to watch videos online. When watching all I ask is you understand what the people are propsing and if what they say is true, or could be true but you need to look into it more. Just question the goverment.

It is because the facts do not add up. 3 builinds drop in NYC when NEVER EVER BEFORE has any building fallen from fire, and they fell in seconds ! They were blowen up !! oH, AND JETFUEL even at its highest temperature and with the perfect mix of 0xygen cannot melt steel incase you were about to say that. Look it up, not inthe news, on the chemistry charts and in science. Thats not hard to do right. This is why I blog constantly about the war on terror, against this US Goverment in power and their allies. Their is no war, just an agenda. The cause [ 9/11 ] was just another in a long line of self made attacks, or attacks allowed to push goverment agendas.

*And now for the news which shows clearly where this is all going : *


Meanwhile today in American they can feel the effects of the war on terror by knowing that their president SPYS on them or has agencies doing this for them, LINK ,LINK ,LINK, and the latest budget spending trillion and much more cuts Education, Medicare and Speical needs while the wealth of monies is given to the Millitary spending !!!!


Bush pens $2.7-trillion budget
Plan boosts funds for war on terror, trims Medicare


The Associated Press
Published: Tuesday, February 07, 2006

WASHINGTON -- President George W. Bush sent Congress a $2.77-trillion budget plan yesterday that would boost spending in the war against terror but squeeze a wide swath of other government programs to deal with exploding budget deficits.

Bush, hoping to get his domestic agenda back on track after a year of political setbacks, unveiled a budget blueprint with a heavy emphasis on keeping the country strong militarily. It would also make his first-term tax cuts permanent, at a cost of $1.4 trillion over 10 years, and still achieve his goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009.

Achieving these two goals constrained Bush's efforts to offer new initiatives although he did put forward a few mostly modest programs to deal with American anxieties about global competition, soaring energy costs and skyrocketing medical bills.

But among the losers were 141 government programs that Bush sought to sharply reduce or eliminate entirely. Almost one-third of the targeted programs are in education, including ones that provide money to support the arts, vocational education, parent resource centres and drug-free schools.

"My administration has focused the nation's resources on our highest priority -- protecting our citizens and our homeland," Bush said. His spending proposals, contained in four massive volumes, are for the 2007 budget year that begins next Oct. 1. The $2.77 trillion in spending would be up by 2.3 per cent from projected spending of $2.71 trillion this year.

The administration said the deficit for this year will soar to an all-time high of $423 billion, reflecting increased spending for the Iraq war and hurricane relief.

But the administration says the deficits will be halved by 2009, the year Bush leaves office.

Bush is also seeking savings by trimming spending by Medicare, the government's health-care program for the elderly and disabled, by $35.9 billion over five years.

Other savings in so-called mandatory spending, because the payments are set in law for all who are eligible, include $4.99 billion in changes in farm commodity programs, and $16.7 billion in reforms of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., the government program that backs private pensions.
I guess this budget is causing some concern : link
While other countries scoff : link

"Their is no war, just an agenda. The cause [ 9/11 ] was just another in a long line of self made attacks, or attacks allowed to push goverment agendas." - Plato

Russian Ultranationalist Leader Expects U.S. to Attack Iran in Late March

Created: 07.02.2006 10:54 MSK (GMT +3),

Russian Ultranationalist Leader Expects U.S. to Attack Iran in Late March

Created: 07.02.2006 10:54 MSK (GMT +3),

MosNews


“The war is inevitable because the Americans want this war,” he said. “Any country claiming a leading position in the world will need to wage wars. Otherwise it will simply not be able to retain its leading position. The date for the strike is already known — it is the election day in Israel (March 28). It is also known how much that war will cost,” Zhirinovsky said.

He went on to add that the publication of Prophet Muhammad cartoons in the European press was a planned action by the U.S. whose aim is “to provoke a row between Europe and the Islamic world”. “It will all end with European countries thanking the United States and paying, and giving soldiers,” he said. Russia should “choose a position of non-interference and express minimal solidarity with the Islamic world”, Zhirinovsky added.

For his part, the head of the Centre for Strategic Studies of Religions and Modern World Politics, Maxim Shevchenko, also believes that a U.S. attack on Iran is very likely although he sees no preconditions for this war. “Iran does not threaten anyone, is not pointing its missiles at anyone. No Iranian leader has ever threatened to carry out a strike against the U.S. Therefore preparations for a war against Iran appear to be a global act of provocation,” he said.

In Shevchenko’s opinion, the reason behind “this barefaced promotion of a world war lies not in a conflict between the West and the Islamic World but in a fight for power in the world between US and European elites”. “The fate of humanity will be decided between a saber-rattling America and an allegedly democratic Europe,” Shevchenko concluded.

Whereas a senior research associate of the World Economy and International Relations Institute, Georgy Mirsky, is confident that “there will be no war”.

“The Americans got so very much stuck in Afghanistan and Iraq that they will not start a new war without definite proof of the fact that Iran poses a threat to the world. Besides, the U.S. has mid-term elections this year and the Republicans, who have suffered a severe blow to their trust, will not be able to win these elections if they drag the country into a new hazardous escapade.

”As for Israel, it can carry out a strike against Iran but only when it knows for certain that only one step remains before an Iranian atomic bomb is created. But that time has not come yet,“ Mirsky said.


Now in related new to this, sraeli acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said on Sunday that Iran would pay "a very heavy price" if the Islamic Republic defiantly resumes full-scale uranium enrichment to build nuclear weapons. Wow, its all nice and neat. Once one bully decides the time is right to take the lunch money and tell em when they are down, other smaller bullies will jump in.

"Their is no war, just an agenda. The cause [ 9/11 ] was just another in a long line of self made attacks, or attacks allowed to push goverment agendas." - Plato


"Their is no war, just an agenda. The cause [ 9/11 ] was just another in a long line of self made attacks, or attacks allowed to push goverment agendas." - Plato


Iran to pay "heavy price" for nuclear weapon ambition: Israel

JERUSALEM, Feb. 5 (Xinhuanet) -- Israeli acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said on Sunday that Iran would pay "a very heavy price" if the Islamic Republic defiantly resumes full-scale uranium enrichment to build nuclear weapons.

"At the end of the day, it shows that Iran will pay a very heavy price if it continues with its plans to try and enrich its fuel in order to be able to use it as an option to make non-conventional weapons," said Olmert at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting.

He also said that Israel had played an important role in what he described as an intensive and stormy diplomatic effort leading to Iran's referral to the UN Security Council.

Olmert's warning came shortly after Iran announced that it had ended all voluntary cooperative measures with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), including snap checks of its nuclear sites and suspension of uranium enrichment.

The IAEA, the UN's nuclear watchdog, decided on Monday to report Iran's nuclear program to the Security Council, which might lead to sanctions.

Israel, believed to be the only nuclear power in the Mideast region, has accused Iran of secretly developing nuclear weapons under a civilian front, a charge categorically denied by Iran. Enditem


Last, shame on Iran. For failing to see what is going on, and being bullied and manipulated into doing exactly what those wanting war hoped for. Their leaders are even more shortsighted and blind then most Westerners who watch the news! And shame on the US for finding enemies of every nation in the world that is not democratic. What a lovely world, then again it's been the same throughout history :

Iran kicks out UN nuclear agency

The Associated Press
Published: Tuesday, February 07, 2006

VIENNA -- Iran has told the UN nuke agency to remove cameras and agency seals by the end of next week and immediately cut back suspected nuclear-site inspections, in response to referral to the UN Security Council, the agency reports.


And ....


Beijing rejects Pentagon report

ALEXA OLESEN
Associated Press

BEIJING - China said Tuesday it has formally complained to Washington over a Pentagon report that calls China a potential military threat, and the foreign ministry accused the United States of trying to mislead public opinion.

The report, released Friday, expressed concerns about Beijing's rising military spending to project power beyond China's borders.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said the report made "groundless accusations regarding the normal national defense development in China, interferes with China's domestic affairs and plays up the theory of the Chinese military threat, thereby misleading public opinion."

Kong said China had made "solemn representations to the U.S. side," without providing details.

"We are an important force that promotes the peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region and the world," Kong said. "We have not, do not and will not pose a threat."

China's official military budget for 2005 was $30.7 billion, based on current exchange rates, after a decade of double-digit annual increases. But foreign analysts say the true spending is several times that. A Pentagon report last year put the figure at between $50 billion and $70 billion, which it said was the world's third-highest military budget.

"Of the major and emerging powers, China has the greatest potential to compete militarily with the United States and field disruptive military technologies that could over time offset traditional U.S. military advantages absent U.S. counter strategies," the latest Pentagon report said.

By comparison, President Bush in his budget proposal this week said America's military budget in 2007 should be $439.3 billion, a 6.9 percent increase over 2006 for the Pentagon. That figure does not include the costs of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

China has spent heavily in recent years to modernize its 2.5 million-member army, focusing on adding high-tech weapons to extend its reach and back up threats to attack rival Taiwan.

"The United States should correct its wrong view and treat China's peaceful development in an objective and positive manner," Kong said. "It should stop making groundless remarks and do more to benefit the stable and healthy development of China-U.S. relations."

Asian governments from Japan to Southeast Asia to India worry about Beijing's growing military power.

Sunday 5 February 2006

Russian expert claims Iran cannot make Nukes for 10 Years.

POSTED HERE


Iran Incapable of Building Nuclear Bomb — Russian Expert

Created: 01.02.2006 19:44 MSK

Mos

Iran is not capable of building its own nuclear weapons, the former head of a nuclear power plant and current regional leader in southern Russia said Wednesday.

“In reality, the U.S. is provoking Iran, accusing it of aiming, along with the implementation of its peaceful nuclear programs, to create its own nuclear weapons,” Governor of the Saratov Region Pavel Ipatov was quoted by RIA Novosti as saying.

Ipatov, who was head the Balakovo power plant for almost 20 years, said that currently, in view of the methods in place for controlling the proliferation of nuclear weapons,
“Iran is in no state to create a nuclear bomb secretly.”

The United States, along with the trio of European negotiating with Iran (Great Britain, France and Germany), are employing “double standards” in accusing Iran of attempting to create nuclear weapons, and this greatly complicates the situation the country, he said.

If Iran’s nuclear file is referred to the UN Security Council, Russia and China, both veto-wielding permanent members, could block resolutions on Iran, the governor said.

Ipatov also said that although Iran had adopted an “unconstructive position,” he hoped Russia and China would be able to reach an agreement with the country on creating a peaceful joint project to enrich uranium for Iran on Russia’s territory.


Other people feel that Iran is capable of making them, yet the movtive is not near as deadly as the neo-con war machine would have us believe. Awesome article posted by Robert E. Hunter, a senior advisor at the Rand Corp., has held many senior government appointments, including serving as U.S. Ambassador to NATO from 1993 to 1998 and Director of Middle East Affairs at the National Security Council from 1979 to 1981. LINK HERE . Robert E. Hunter stated in this article that the main reason [ and this is for most countries, well all except the US which has used it in agression on Japan ], nukes are for deterrence. Here is the part titled "


What Happens if Iran Gets the Bomb?

What will happen if Iran gets “the bomb”? In contemplating this possibility, some analysts throw up their hands in horror, others are relatively calm about the results, and still others deny the possibility of such an outcome. Nevertheless, any realistic U.S. policy must consider such a scenario.

One frequently expressed concern is that Iran would consider its nuclear weapons capability to be held in trust for the Islamic world or would give custody of a weapon to someone else, perhaps even a terrorist group. Such an outcome is theoretically possible, but not very probable. With one notable and quickly regretted exception—Soviet transfer of some U-235 to China in the 1950s—no country with bomb-making fissionable materials has knowingly transferred them to anyone else.

More useful to consider is the role that nuclear weapons would play in shaping post-nuclear Iran’s relationships with its neighbors—friends and foes. When all is said and done, such weapons would have little military utility except for deterrence. This would operate at four levels: to deter a conventional attack from a non-nuclear regional power; to deter an openly nuclear regional state—today only including Pakistan and India; to deter Israel; or to deter a major external power, notably the United States but, in theory at least, also including Russia.

The first case is obvious: no country with just conventional arms is likely to try the patience of a nuclear power. But in the other three cases, “proportional deterrence” would come into play. Originally developed by France, this doctrine holds that a relatively less-capable nuclear power such as Iran can deter a much stronger nuclear power (the United States, Russia, Pakistan, India, Israel) if it is viewed as able and willing to destroy “value targets” in the attacking nation even while it is being obliterated. This complex doctrine can be summarized as the “death throes” of a country under nuclear or even extreme conventional attack.

Such a doctrine depends on the potential attacker such as the United States or Israel calculating that the targets in its own country that would be destroyed in retaliation would be more “valuable” to it than the benefit (military or political) of annihilating Iran. Of course, proportional deterrence can only succeed if the potential retaliation is credible, hence the need for a survivable second-strike capability. The threat of retaliation must not be so precise that the original attacking nation can calculate with precision whether the game is worth the candle (uncertainty principle). There should also be a margin for the leadership of the attacked nation to over-respond (irrationality principle). All these ideas were worked out in detail during the Cold War.

By the same token, of course, Iran would also be subject to deterrence, as it is today by Israel, in particular. Indeed, recent commentary about Iranian advances in missile technology may not be related to a future nuclear arsenal. They are more likely to be an attempt to gain the ability to launch relatively accurate conventional warheads at Israel, counting on that capability to have some proportional deterrent effect on Israel if, for example, that country was inclined to launch an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities like that on the Iraqi Osirak reactor in 1981.

These calculations can be elaborated further. What they add up to is an Iran with one or more nuclear weapons that would not, per se, have a destabilizing effect on security in the region. That would be very much “scenario dependent.” Nevertheless, as with all issues involving nuclear weapons, psychology and politics are critical elements. Indeed, if they were not—if the world had not witnessed Hiroshima and Nagasaki—we would likely have seen much more proliferation over the past 60 years, as many analysts long predicted, or even the further use of nuclear weapons in war.

As things now stand in the Middle East and are likely to stand for the foreseeable future, a nuclear-armed Iran would change the politics and the security of the region dramatically in terms of perceptions. The point need hardly be spelled out. Further, even if regional and outside countries could in time adjust to a nuclear-armed Iran, judged from today, it is highly unlikely that Iran would be permitted to gain such a capability. The United States, Israel, or perhaps some third-party would likely use whatever means necessary to prevent Iran from ever getting into that position.

In the past Iran was thought of in much higher respect then Iraq , IE from 1995-1998 the Atomic Scientists put out this report about Iran not being like Iraq. Ok that was years ago, how say in the last few years has Iran changed ?.... They stated they would pursue Nuclear power for the people. And with this, the next step could be weapons. By why then is Isreal allowed and the USA and Pakistan allowed weapons and not Iran? Is it democracy only club ? They may not like Americans and vice versa sometimes, or sure Isreal and Iran trade talks, but a weapon on each side makes less the threat of total war then one weapon on one side I say. Irans foreign minister wrote this :

Iran’s nuclear option
Kamal Kharrazi

LINK

Iran has every right to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy agenda, insists Kamal Kharrazi. America’s double standards have increased mistrust around the world

Extremism doesn’t only breed terrorism. It also chips away at the solidarity of nations united against terrorism, undermines the rule of international law and creates chaos in international relations.

Recent years have been tragically marked by extremism in its various forms. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and other subsequent acts have claimed thousands of lives. However, the US administration’s response to those attacks, as well as its counterproductive approach to world affairs – which has only increased uncertainty and instability in the world – could also be described as extremist.

The same can be said of America’s approach to Iran’s peaceful energy programme – a stance which runs explicitly against efforts made by my government, together with the European Union (EU), to build confidence in it.

An extremist and unilateralist approach is at work in Washington’s view to undermine recent constructive efforts to resolve the misunderstanding over Iran’s nuclear programme. Washington does not view Iran’s nuclear file objectively or on its own merits. By insisting on referring the Iranian case to the Security Council and dismissing the valuable efforts undertaken by the Europeans, the US government is instead trying to settle its own scores with Iran.

This approach persists, despite the latest developments that demonstrate Iran’s readiness to go to extra lengths to prove that its nuclear programme is peaceful and to do whatever it takes to build confidence with the entire world in this respect.

The International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA’s) board of governors in its last resolution “welcomes the fact that Iran has decided to continue and extend its suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities”. At the same time, it recognizes that the suspension “is a voluntary confidence-building measure, not a legal obligation”.

Demonstration of goodwill
The agreement we reached with Britain, France and Germany and other EU countries on November 14, 2004, paved the way for the reasonable outcome at the end of the board’s deliberations on Iran’s nuclear energy programme. Despite the difficulties and misgivings on the domestic scene, we reached an agreement that demonstrated our goodwill, in the hope that it would be reciprocated and allow us to continue down the path of further confidence-building.

These two developments came on the heels of the latest IAEA report in mid-November, which confirmed that inspectors had uncovered no evidence of concealed nuclear activities or an atomic weapons programme in Iran. The report specifies that “all the declared material in Iran has been accounted for and therefore such material is not diverted to prohibited activities”. The new developments, along with the other measures we adopted in the past two years, demonstrate Iran’s full commitment to the non-proliferation treaties, particularly the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and the policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran to strengthen the NPT safeguards regime. This is the course we are prepared to continue pursuing. At the same time, we are unwavering in our refusal to succumb to those who may wish to deprive us of our inalienable rights under the NPT.

The Iranian approach
The following considerations lie at the heart of the Iranian approach to its nuclear energy programme.
First, Iran must diversify its energy resources in order to ensure its sustainable development, as well as the livelihood of its present and future generations. We therefore decided to develop nuclear energy – as early as the beginning of the 1970s. In fact, by the eve of the Islamic Revolution, the Iranian nuclear energy programme was well advanced, having benefited from the active assistance of a number of European countries, and a favourable and encouraging stance by the United States.

All Iranian governments in recent history – both royal and Islamic – have sought nuclear energy, not out of political affiliation, but rather because of a strong economic rationale for diversifying the country’s energy mix. Iran’s desire to become economically self-sufficient and to be able to redistribute its wealth while doing away with overdependency on oil export revenues is a sentiment widespread throughout Iranian polity and society.

The country’s population, currently around 70 million, has doubled since 1979, and is projected to hit 105 million by 2050. And with a territory of 1.6 million square kilometres, we have no choice other than gaining access to a more diversified and secure source of energy.

Iran’s economy is growing at around 7%. It consumes half its crude oil production inside the country, and needs an additional 2,000 megawatts of electricity per year.

It would be profoundly negligent of any government to shun the needs of future generations and jeopardize their wellbeing by not taking action now. Oil and gas are finite resources that will be depleted in a few decades at the current rates of consumption, unless we find alternative sources of energy – and foreign currency. If Iran continues on its current trajectory, we may end up being a net importer of energy in about 20 years. So we cannot sit back and not prepare ourselves for such eventualities.

Aside from the economic and environmental justifications for Iran’s quest for nuclear energy, it is a matter of principle that a mid-sized emerging economy such as Iran’s cannot and should not deprive itself of the powerful momentum that nuclear technology would provide. The national consensus on this issue is based on the fact that all economic sectors would thrive upon achieving nuclear-grade standard, across all industries.

A legitimate right
Second, given that Iran is technologically and materially capable, legally entitled and politically – in terms of public opinion – mandated to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy programme, how could any Iranian government give it up? Since we possess all the necessary components of such a programme, including uranium mines, technical know-how, human resources and equipment, every Iranian asks why we should therefore deprive ourselves of it.

The international mechanisms governing nuclear programmes provide for rights and obligations. While Iranians abide by their obligations, they expect, at the same time, to be able to enjoy their rights. No-one is entitled to seek arbitrarily to deprive a sovereign state of its legitimate rights.

Third, Iran is legally bound to forgo the pursuit of nuclear weapons. It is also in its interest, as the largest and the most populous country in the region, to discourage an arms race in the region. Moreover, given the prevailing international climate, developing nuclear weapons would be a liability, not an advantage. Going nuclear will not enhance Iran’s security, and on this understanding we signed the NPT in 1968 and proposed, in 1974, to declare the Middle East a nuclear weapons-free zone.

Iran’s commitment to its NPT obligations stems not only from its contractual obligation and security considerations, but also from its religious and ethical considerations. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has reiterated on several occasions a fatwa prohibiting the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons. He repeated this fatwa in an address on November 5, 2004. Given the importance of the fatwa institution in Shia Islam, the broad significance of this should not be underestimated. Fourth, Iran’s efforts to strengthen the safeguard regime so far have included the signing of the Additional Protocol on December 18, 2003 and its immediate implementation; the voluntary suspension of the enrichment and reprocessing activities; active cooperation with the IAEA in providing information, making people available for interviews and granting the agency access to and permission for environmental sampling at all locations in respect of which the agency had made requests; agreeing on February 24, 2004 to suspend voluntarily the manufacture, assembly and testing of centrifuges and the domestic manufacture of centrifuge components; and, finally, suspension of all tests and production of uranium conversion facility, as well as suspending the manufacture of components, and assembly and testing of centrifuge, on November 14, 2004.

Failures blown out of proportion
On some occasions in the past several years, the IAEA has highlighted certain failures on the part of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and has then asked that officials take corrective measures. Yet in the politically charged environment created by American and Israeli officials alike, cases that would typically be considered routine elsewhere were blown out of proportion and led to irresponsible speculation.

True, over the past 18 years Iran has not always provided the agency with all the information it has demanded. But this should be viewed against the backdrop of illegal restrictions, including the United States’ extraterritorially imposed sanctions. Moreover, hardly any member-state can claim to be flawless, as any cursory review of the IAEA’s Safeguard Implementation Reports will show. Negligence or failure on the part of NPT signatories is routine.

It is also important to recall that the IAEA report from November 2003 had confirmed that “to date there is no evidence that the previously undeclared nuclear material and activities… were related to a nuclear weapons programme”.

Fifth, the only way to counter the challenges related to the proliferation of nuclear weapons is to strengthen the relevant international instruments through multilateral, comprehensive and non-discriminatory efforts. The NPT is the cornerstone of international efforts to achieve complete nuclear disarmament; to halt vertical and horizontal proliferation of this deplorable weapon.

However, it is worrying to note shortcomings and a number of setbacks, particularly since 2000, such as the United States’ intention to develop and stockpile a new generation of tactical nuclear weapons for use in conventional conflicts and against non-nuclear adversaries; America’s reliance on nuclear weaponry for the foreseeable future; and the notion of pre-emptive strike, developed as a part of the US national security strategy.

While the NPT constitutes an integrated structure, its effectiveness lies in full compliance with all its provisions by all parties. The selective approach by a few states to the provisions of the NPT undermines international interest in its full implementation. The refusal of certain states to address the issue of nuclear disarmament, as referred to in the NPT, is the treaty’s key provision which remains unaddressed and unimplemented. Selective and discriminatory approaches towards the implementation of the NPT will impair its credibility and thereby its effectiveness to address the challenges at hand.

America’s extremist approach towards Iran’s peaceful nuclear programme, as well as towards non-proliferation issues in general – including double standards, such as its tacit acceptance of Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons programme – has increased mistrust among countries not only within the Muslim world but in the entire world. We must take corresponding and appropriate measures to allay such mutual suspicion. But, given the depth of the mistrust, drastic action is required. Otherwise, the gulf between the moderate mainstream in both the Islamic world and the west could widen, and the bleak notion of a clash of civilizations might prevail.

Kamal Kharrazi
Kamal Kharrazi is Iran’s foreign minister.

All I can say is if they and I know they can stop Iran without war, the UN and the USA goto war, it is only to take control of the main 3 reigons for movement of Oil and supplies and power.

Peace out.