Resolution 487 (1981)Israel to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA/Refrain from Acts or Threats

Resolution 487 (1981)

Adopted by the Security Council at its 2288th meeting
on 19 June 1981

The Security Council,

Having considered the agenda contained in document S/Agenda/2280,

Having noted the contents of the telegram dated 8 June 1981 from the Foreign Minister of Iraq (S/14509), Having heard the statements made to the Council on the subject at its 2280th through 2288th meetings,

Taking note of the statement made by the Director-General of the International Atomic Emergency Agency (IAEA) to the Agency’s Board of Governors on the subject on 9 June 1981 and his statement to the Council at its 2288th meeting on 19 June 1981,

Further taking note of the resolution adopted by the Board of Governors of the IAEA on 12 June 1981 on the “military attack on the Iraq nuclear research centre and its implications for the Agency” (S/14532),

Fully aware of the fact that Iraq has been a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons since it came into force in 1970, that in accordance with that Treaty Iraq has accepted IAEA safeguards on all its nuclear activities, and that the Agency has testified that these safeguards have been satisfactorily applied to date,

Noting furthermore that Israel has not adhered to the non-proliferation Treaty,

Deeply concerned about the danger to international peace and security created by the premeditated Israeli air attack on Iraqi nuclear installations on 7 June 1981, which could at any time explode the situation in the area, with grave consequences for the vital interests of all States,

Considering that, under the terms of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Charter of the United Nations: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations”,

1. Strongly condemns the military attack by Israel in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international conduct;

2. Calls upon Israel to refrain in the future from any such acts or threats thereof;

3. Further considers that the said attack constitutes a serious threat to the entire IAEA safeguards regime which is the foundation of the non-proliferation Treaty;

4. Fully recognizes the inalienable sovereign right of Iraq, and all other States, especially the developing countries, to establish programmes of technological and nuclear development to develop their economy and industry for peaceful purposes in accordance with their present and future needs and consistent with the internationally accepted objectives of preventing nuclear-weapons proliferation;

5. Calls upon Israel urgently to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards;

6. Considers that Iraq is entitled to appropriate redress for the destruction it has suffered, responsibility for which has been acknowledged by Israel;

7. Requests the Secretary-General to keep the Security Council regularly informed of the implementation of this resolution.

Source UN

Just  last week this one was also passed.   Seems rather redundant.

The non-binding measure was last voted on in 1991, when IAEA membership was much smaller, and passed.

The UN should also abide by what they say also. This statement applies to Iran as well.


4. Fully recognizes the inalienable sovereign right of Iraq, and all other States, especially the developing countries, to establish programmes of technological and nuclear development to develop their economy and industry for peaceful purposes in accordance with their present and future needs and consistent with the internationally accepted objectives of preventing nuclear-weapons proliferation;

This is under the “Non proliferation Treaty” which “Iran” has signed. Iran has complied to the Laws pertaining to the NPT.

Again in September of 2009

UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection

Third times a charm yes. Seems Israel just does whatever it wants.

Three Strikes they are out.  Once should have been enough.

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human Experiments  and WMD

Israels New visa requirement hinders travel in West Bank

The UN Mission 575 Page Report on Gaza/Israel War

Who Benefited the most by J.F. Kennedy’s Death?/Israel benefited big time

Iran Proposes Control System Aimed at Eliminating Nuclear Weapons

US Tests: Scary Crowd-Stopping Technology at Pittsburgh Protests

Robocops Employ Scary Crowd-Stopping Technology at Pittsburgh Protests

By Mike Ferner,

September 28, 2009.

An arsenal of “crowd control munitions,” was deployed with a massive, overpowering police presence in Pittsburgh during last week’s G-20 protests.

No longer the stuff of disturbing futuristic fantasies, an arsenal of “crowd control munitions,” including one that reportedly made its debut in the U.S., was deployed with a massive, overpowering police presence in Pittsburgh during last week’s G-20 protests.

Nearly 200 arrests were made and civil liberties groups charged the many thousands of police (most transported on Port Authority buses displaying “PITTSBURGH WELCOMES THE WORLD”), from as far away as Arizona and Florida with overreactingand they had plenty of weaponry with which to do it.

Bean bags fired from shotguns, CS (tear) gas, OC (Oleoresin Capsicum) spray, flash-bang grenades, batons and, according to local news reports, for the first time on the streets of America, the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD).

Mounted in the turret of an Armored Personnel Carrier (APC), I saw the LRAD in action twice in the area of 25th, Penn and Liberty Streets of Lawrenceville, an old Pittsburgh neighborhood.  Blasting a shrill, piercing noise like a high-pitched police siren on steroids, it quickly swept streets and sidewalks of pedestrians, merchants and journalists and drove residents into their homes, but in neither case were any demonstrators present.  The APC, oversized and sinister for a city street, together with lines of police in full riot gear looking like darkly threatening Michelin Men, made for a scene out of a movie you didn’t want to be in.

As intimidating as this massive show of armed force and technology was, the good burghers of Pittsburgh and their fellow citizens in the Land of the Brave and Home of the Free ain’t seen nothin’ yet.  Tear gas and pepper spray are nothing to sniff at and, indeed, have proven fatal a surprising number of times, but they have now become the old standbys compared to the list below that’s already at or coming soon to a police station or National Guard headquarters near you.  Proving that “what goes around, comes around,” some of the new Property Protection Devices were developed by a network of federally-funded, university-based research institutes like one in Pittsburgh itself, Penn State’s Institute for Non-Lethal Defense Technologies.

Raytheon Corp.’s Active Denial System, designed for crowd control in combat zones, uses an energy beam to induce an intolerable heating sensation, like a hot iron placed on the skin.  It is effective beyond the range of small arms, in excess of 400 meters.  Company officials have been advised they could expand the market by selling a smaller, tripod-mounted version for police forces.

M5 Modular Crowd Control Munition, with a range of 30 meters “is similar in operation to a claymore mine, but it delivers…a strong, nonpenetrating blow to the body with multiple sub-munitions (600 rubber balls).”

Long Range Acoustic Device or “The Scream,” is a powerful megaphone the size of a satellite dish that can emit sound “50 times greater than the human threshold for pain” at close range, causing permanent hearing damage.  The L.A. Times wrote U.S. Marines in  Iraq used it in 2004.  It can deliver recorded warnings in Arabic and, on command, emit a piercing tone…”[For] most people, even if they plug their ears, [the device] will produce the equivalent of an instant migraine,” says Woody Norris, chairman of American Technology Corp., the San Diego firm that produces the weapon. “It will knock [some people] on their knees.”  CBS News reported in 2005 that the Israeli Army first used the device in the field to break up a protest against Israel’s separation wall.  “Protesters covered their ears and grabbed their heads, overcome by dizziness and nausea, after the vehicle-mounted device began sending out bursts of audible, but not loud, sound at intervals of about 10 seconds…A military official said the device emits a special frequency that targets the inner ear.”

In “Non-lethal Technologies: An Overview,” Lewer and Davison describe a lengthy catalog of new weaponry including the “Directed Stick Radiator,” a hand-held system based on the same technology as The Scream.  “It fires high intensity ‘sonic bullets’ or pulses of sound between 125-150db for a second or two.  Such a weapon could, when fully developed, have the capacity to knock people off their feet.”

The Penn State facility is testing a “Distributed Sound and Light Array Debilitator” a.k.a. the “puke ray.”  The colors and rhythm of light are absorbed by the retina and disorient the brain, blinding the victim for several seconds.  In conjunction with disturbing sounds it can make the person stumble or feel nauseated.  Foreign Policy in Focus reports that the Department of Homeland Security, with $1 million invested for testing the device, hopes to see it “in the hands of thousands of policemen, border agents and National Guardsmen” by 2010.

Spider silk is cited in the University of Bradford’s Non-Lethal Weapons Research Project, Report #4 (pg. 20) as an up-and-comer.  “A research collaboration between the University of New Hampshire and the U.S. Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center is looking into the use of spider silk as a non-lethal ‘entanglement’ material for disabling people. They have developed a method for producing recombinant spider silk protein using E. coli and are trying to develop methods to produce large quantities of these fibres.”

New Scientist reports that the (I’m not making this up) Inertial Capacitive Incapacitator (ICI), developed by the Physical Optics Corporation of Torrance, California, uses a thin-film storage device charged during manufacture that only discharges when it strikes the target. It can be incorporated into a ring-shaped aerofoil and fired from a standard grenade launcher at low velocity, while still maintaining a flat trajectory for maximum accuracy.

Aiming beyond Tasers, the Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency, (FY 2009 budget: $1B) the domestic equivalent of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), plans to develop wireless weapons effective over greater distances, such as in an auditorium or sports stadium, or on a city street.  One such device, the Piezer, uses piezoelectric crystals that produce voltage when they are compressed.  A 12-gauge shotgun fires the crystals, stunning the target with an electric shock on impact.  Lynntech of College Station, Texas, is developing a projectile Taser that can be fired from a shotgun or 40-mm grenade launcher to increase greatly the weapon’s current range of seven meters.

Off the Rocker and On the Floor: Continued Development of Biochemical Incapacitating Weapons,” a report by the Bradford Disarmament Research Centre revealed that in 1992, the National Institute of Justice contracted with Lawrence Livermore National Lab to review clinical anesthetics for use by special ops military forces and police.  LLNL concluded the best option was an opioid, like fentanyl, effective at very low doses compared to morphine.  Combined with a patch soaked in DMSO (dimethylsufoxide, a solvent) and fired from an air rifle, fentanyl could be delivered to the skin even through light clothing.  Another recommended application for the drug was mixed with fine powder and dispersed as smoke.

After upgrades, the infamous “Puff the Magic Dragon” gunship from the Vietnam War is now the AC-130.  “Non-Lethal Weaponry: Applications to AC-130 Gunships,” observes that “With the increasing involvement of US military in operations other than war…” the AC-130  “would provide commanders a full range of non-lethal weaponry from an airborne platform which was not previously available to them.”  The paper concludes in part that “As the use of non-lethal weapons increases and it becomes valid and acceptable, more options will become available.”

Prozac and Zoloft are two of over 100 pharmaceuticals identified by the Penn State College of Medicine and the university’s Applied Research Lab for further study as “non-lethal calmatives.”  These Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs), noted the Penn State study, “…are found to be highly effective for numerous behavioral disturbances encountered in situations where a deployment of a non-lethal technique must be considered.  This class of pharmaceutical agents also continues to be under intense development by the pharmaceutical industry…New compounds under development (WO 09500194) are being designed with a faster onset of action.  Drug development is continuing at a rapid rate in this area due to the large market for the treatment of depression (15 million individuals in North America)…It is likely that an SSRI agent can be identified in the near future that will feature a rapid rate of onset.”

In Pittsburgh last week, an enormously expensive show of police and weaponry, intended for “security” of the G20 delegates, simultaneously shut workers out of downtown jobs for two days, forced gasping students and residents back into their dormitories and homes, and turned journalists’ press passes into quaint, obsolete reminders of a bygone time.

Most significant of all, however, was what Witold Walczak, legal director of the Pennsylvania ACLU, told the Associated Press: “It’s not just intimidation, it’s disruption and in some cases outright prevention of peaceful protesters being able to get their message out.”

Source

Seems they were experimenting on US Citizens.

Trying out some of their new toys.

Some in the US had the nerve to criticize Iran,  a while back.  They should be looking in their own back yard.  Seems pretty nasty to me.

Healthcare reform without the Public Option is not Real Reform

Public option still plagues Dems

By Jeffrey Young
September 28 2009

The most controversial component of healthcare reform promises to vex Democrats the rest of the year.

The spotlight this week will continue on the Senate Finance Committee, where amendments to add the public insurance option will be offered by Democratic Sens. Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.) and Chuck Schumer (N.Y.).

The issue will also continue to be a battle in the House, where liberal and centrists Democrats are fighting over whether it should be included in a House healthcare bill.

The Finance committee votes, which could come as early as this week, promise to be discomfiting for both liberals and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the embattled chairman of the Finance panel who is likely to vote against them.

Baucus has personally signaled an openness to the public option but steadfastly maintains that it lacks enough support to pass the Senate, making it a pointless and politically volatile exercise to include it in his bill.

But it’s not going to be fun for Baucus – who’s been a punching bag for the political left — to join Republicans and vote against a Democratic amendment when the time comes.

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), the chief advocate for the not-for-profit healthcare cooperatives that are included in the Finance bill as an alternative, is also expected to vote against the Schumer and Rockefeller amendments. Liberals have rejected the co-op compromise out of hand.

Conrad and Baucus on Thursday joined Republicans on the panel in defeating an amendment that would have caused the pharmaceutical industry to pull its support for the bill. That’s a pattern that could be repeated.

Rockefeller, Schumer and likeminded liberal senators begrudgingly acknowledge the votes are not there in the committee for the public option.

But they intend to force their colleagues to take a stand on the issue and possibly face the wrath of powerful interests such as labor unions and grassroots liberal activists.

The vehemence of support for the public option among liberals can hardly be overstated. Rockefeller summed up that view on Thursday when he said, “A healthcare plan without a public option is not much of a healthcare plan.”

Schumer declared that he and likeminded liberals would triumph in the end. “The healthcare bill that is signed into law by the president will have a good, strong, robust public option,” he said.

More votes on the public option are promised once the bill hits the Senate floor.

The issue will then become a headache for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) instead of Baucus.

Before a healthcare bill even reaches the Senate floor, Reid will have to decide whether to abide by the Finance Committee position (no public option) or the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee position (strong public option).

Reid sent a clear signal that he is prepared to compromise on Thursday.

Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe’s (Maine), a crucial swing vote, has proposed establishing a “trigger” for the public option that would be pulled in markets with insufficient private competition. During a conference call with Nevada reporters, Reid described the trigger as a “pretty doggone good idea,” according to the Las Vegas Sun.

“My first choice is a public option, because I think it will create competition and make the insurance companies more honest,” Reid said. “My No. 2 choice is the trigger that Snowe talked about.” A trigger would be preferable to co-ops, Reid indicated.

In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) isn’t having any easier a time despite having a large majority dominated by liberals. The centrist voting bloc, led by the Blue Dog coalition, is holding its ground against the public option.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) broke the deadlock on his panel over the issue in July by weakening the power of the public option in the bill but the deal did not survive the rocky August recess intact.

Pelosi insists time and again that the House bill will have a public option. She went to great lengths this week to sell it to the centrists but did not appear to make much progress.

Pelosi has also came out against the trigger option. “I don’t even want to talk about a trigger,” Pelosi said, describing it as “an excuse for not doing anything.”

It’s not clear whether Pelosi will have the votes to win a healthcare vote on the floor if the public option is not included in the bill. But it’s also not clear she’ll win a vote with the public option, since Republicans are expected to vote en masse against the bill.

There’s no easy way out of this predicament. To paraphrase one of President Barack Obama’s favorite sayings, if it were easy, somebody would’ve done it by now.

Source

CALL YOUR SENATOR. Demand a public option. (202) 224-3121.

There’s no public option in Senator Max Baucus’ Healthcare bill. Instead, we are forced to buy private insurance. This is a major step backwards for the healthcare reform movement! Watch the video and call your senator at (202) 224-3121.

Anyone who votes against the public option, is not who you want representing you.

The Public Option is needed. It will also go a long way to helping the 45 million who are not insured and those who are under insured.

Republicans are bought and paid for by Phrama companies and Insurance companies. Of course they will vote against the public option. Wouldn’t want to loose all that money.

When will Americans realize Republicans work for the  Corporations and  not for the people who elected them.

Of course some of the Democrat’s  may be just as bad.

On both sides they get tons of Cooperate donations, which of course, I call “bribes”.  Simply becasue that is what they actually are?

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Published in: on September 29, 2009 at 1:25 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , ,

Israels New visa requirement hinders travel in West Bank

September  27 2009

An engineer who designed a high-tech geo-thermal building in the West Bank says new visa rules are making it hard to travel in the area with his Canadian passport.

“I was denied three times in seven months, I was given one-week visas, one-month visas, Palestinian-Authority-Region-only visas,” says Khaled Al Sabawi.

The new “Palestinian Authority only” visa means he cannot pass through Israel to get in or out of the West Bank.

“That’s the same as someone coming into Canada and getting a ‘Saskatoon-only visa,’” says Al Sabwi.

Travellers who arrive at the Ben Gurion airport are now being told to take a long detour into the West Bank from Jordan.

The Al-Sabwi family, originally from London, Ont., have worked in the West Bank for more than 15 years. They say it has always been a hassle getting through, but the new rules have made it especially difficult in the last year, making it extra hard to do business in the area.

The U.S. government says the visa practices are unfair to Americans with Palestinian or Arab backgrounds. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada has posted a travel advisory about the restrictions, but has otherwise been silent over it.

One Canadian church worker says the rules make it so difficult to move around, it might deter tourists from coming to the country.

“It’s very arbitrary,” says Kathy Bergen, of the Society of Friends.

“It’s at the whim of the immigration officer. If I were living abroad, and knew about this, I would think twice about coming.”

It would be an especially big blow to cities like Bethlehem that thrive on tourism.

The Israeli government declined to speak to CTV News about the subject.

Source

Simply don’t go to Israel. Let their tourism bottom out?

You couldn’t pay me enough to go there. Even if you offered me a million happy dollars, I would not step foot in  Israel.

That would be the last place on the earth, I would ever want to go to. Especially knowing everything I know.

For those wanting to go to Gaza or the West Bank however this is just disgusting. Just one more Way Israel has found to make peoples lives miserable and to isolate the West Bank and Gaza. What some don’t know about traveling there is you can also be strip searched by officials.

Letting AP in on the Secret: Israeli Strip Searches are Torture

The UN Mission Report is quite though/ Most of What Israel said about  The Palestinian Fighters was a myth. Then again much of what Israel says is a Myth. Talk about fabricated lies. Now the propaganda machine is focusing on Iran. If anyone believes anything,  Israeli leaders  say, they should have their heads examined.

I don’t know how many times during the war they blatantly lied.

But I do  know they never told the truth.

The UN Mission 575 Page Report on Gaza/Israel War

Again they are not cooperating and yet they condemn Iran. Who has let inspectors in.

UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection

Unanimous! UN resolution aims for nuclear-free world

Who Benefited the most by J.F. Kennedy’s Death? Israel was one of the Big Winners

PA minister accuses Israel of neglecting prisoners’ health and torture children

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human Experiments  and WMD

Gaza (1): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

December and January Archives especially have many stories on Israels war crimes.

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

The UN Mission 575 Page Report on Gaza/Israel War

Sept. 17, 2009

A United Nations report has concluded that both the Israeli military and armed Palestinian groups committed actions amounting to war crimes during Israel’s three-week war in Gaza.

This report also includes violations in the West Bank as well.

The UN Mission repeatedly sought to obtain the cooperation of the Government of Israel. After numerous attempts had failed, the Mission sought and obtained the assistance of the Government of Egypt to enable it to enter the Gaza Strip through the Rafah crossing.

Due to the lack of cooperation from the Israeli Government, the Mission was unable to meet members of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. They had to travel to Geneva.

Which in itself says a lot about Israel.

This I found very disappointing.

The Mission received allegations that depleted and nondepleted uranium were used by Israeli forces in Gaza. These allegations were not further investigated by the Mission.

The report also covers a great deal of history.

Israel is a party to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, but has not ratified their Additional Protocols I or II on the protection of victims of armed conflict. In addition, Israel is a party to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, as well as its Protocol I on Non-Detectable Fragments, both of 10 October 1980.

Under the rules of State responsibility, Israel is responsible for any
violations of international law attributable to it. Specifically, under the Fourth Geneva Convention, article 29, “the Party to a conflict in whose hands protected persons may be, isresponsible for the treatment accorded to  them by its agents, irrespective of any individual responsibility which may be incurred.”

Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention defines
grave breaches as: … those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the present Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or

serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly. (Page 89-90)

Israeli /Air strikes started December 27 until  January 3 2009. (page 102)  In total, between 2,300 and 3,000 sorties were flown.

The report concludes the Police force officers who were killed many within the first five minutes of attacks on Gaza were in fact  Civilians.. This was something Israelis has argued about.

Many of the allegations Israel made against Palestinian fighters were not true.

The report also talks about crimes that were commited by Palestinian fighters.

It may be a long read but definitely worth reading.

Some parts are a bit repetitious,  but on a whole a rather  accurate report. I found they came to the same conclusions as I did while following the conflict.

Up to page 178  anyway, which is where I am at this point. I may add more comments as I read the rest of the report. I thought I would go ahead and publish it so others can read it as well.

Happy reading folks.

Download and read the 575-page report “Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories” by the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (UNFFMGC).

Download and save to file then open to read.  If you need Adobe I have provided the link to the latest version.

Download the latest version of Adobe Reader

Assassinations in Gaza and West Bank

Total Direct Aid to Israel Conservatively Estimated at almost$114 Billion

110th Congress Voting Records (114KB PDF)

2008 Pro-Israel PAC Contributions to Congressional Candidates (100KB PDF)

Who Benefited the most by J.F. Kennedy’s Death? Israel was a big winner/Links to many of Israel’s Terrorist activities through out the world as well.

Netanyahu compares Iran to Nazi Germany in UN speech/ Why is he lying?

September 24 2009

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu caused a stir at the United Nations Thursday when he waved old construction plans for the infamous Nazi death camp at Auschwitz in an attempt to convince the international community to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons.

“The most urgent challenge facing this body today is to prevent the tyrant of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said during his speech, referring to Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The comparison between Iran and the Nazi regime comes days after Ahmadinejad again denied the Holocaust.

At the UN, Netanyahu warned that Iran’s nuclear program threatens the whole world, not just Israel.

“Perhaps some of you think (Ahmadinejad) and his odious regime, perhaps they threaten only the Jews. Well, if you think that, you’re wrong. You’re dead wrong,” he said.

Iran continues to deny it is producing nuclear weapons but the country has refused to stop enriching uranium, which can be used to make bombs.

Israel says Iran is a threat because it has a nuclear program, missiles, and its leader frequently talks of Israel’s demise.

During his speech, Netanyahu also showed a copy of minutes from a 1942 meeting at Wannsee Lake in Germany, where Nazis formalized plans to kill millions of Jews.

The blueprints to Auschwitz included details for gas chambers and other facilities at a Nazi-run camp in occupied Poland, where three million Jews died during the Second World War.

The U.S., Israel, and other nations say they want to stop any possible nuclear ambitions Iran may have through sanctions.

There has been speculation Israel might launch a military strike against Iran’s nuclear sites as it did against an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981.

This week, Netanyahu said again that “all options are on the table” and Israel “reserves the right of self-defence.”

Netanyahu met briefly with Prime Minister Stephen Harper before Harper went on to Pittsburgh for the G20 summit.

Canada’s delegation walked out of the UN assembly on Wednesday when Ahmadinejad spoke.

Nuclear weapons

Netanyahu’s move came after that the United Nations Security Council  unanimously adopted a U.S.-sponsored resolution calling for stepped-up efforts to limit the spread of nuclear weapons and to promote worldwide disarmament.

From its opening paragraph, the resolution makes clear the council’s commitment “to seek a safer world for all and to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons.”

It backs the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and calls for the ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, two key agreements on nuclear arms control.
The resolution also reaffirms previous sanctions that were imposed on North Korea and Iran for their nuclear activities, but does not call for any new sanctions.

“There is no better way to begin this historic day than to pledge to end nuclear testing,” said UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon before the vote. “The CTBT is a fundamental building block for a world free of nuclear weapons.”

U.S. President Barack Obama presided over the meeting, reaffirming that nuclear arms reduction is one of his administration’s priorities. It was the first time a U.S president has chaired a meeting of the Security Council, said U.S. deputy ambassador Alejandro Wolff.

“The historic resolution we just adopted enshrines our shared commitment to a goal of a world without nuclear weapons,” Obama said following the vote. “It brings Security Council agreement on a broad framework for action to reduce nuclear dangers as we work toward that goal.”

“International law is not an empty promise, and treaties must be enforced,” he said. “We will leave this meeting with renewed determination.”

The leaders of China and Russia were among those who voted in favour of the resolution, which passed by a 15-0 margin.

After the vote, Ban described the resolution’s adoption as a watershed occasion.

“This is a historic moment, a moment offering a fresh start toward a new future,” he said.

Major countries that have not signed on to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty include India, Pakistan and Israel. The draft resolution calls on all countries that have not signed the treaty to do so, in order “to achieve its universality at an early date.”

Presiding over the UN meeting on Thursday fits with Obama’s pledge to support nuclear nonproliferation initiatives. In a speech the U.S. president gave in Prague five months ago, he said he wanted to see “a world without nuclear weapons.”

Obama’s aides called the adoption of the resolution an endorsement of his nuclear agenda.

Under the Bush administration, the U.S. opposed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. However, Obama plans to court support for the treaty in the U.S. Senate.

Source

Benjamin Netanyahu is trying to compare Iran to Hitlers Germany??????????

He really needs to get a grip on reality.  Iran is nothing like Germany was during the second world war. Not even close. Anyone who believes this man needs an education in the worst way.

Israel is much like Germany however.

They are a mirror image in many ways.

Even the UN made that clarification, “Pertaining to Gaza”.

The way the Palestinians are imprisoned, is much like a concentration camp.

The treatment of prisoner is deplorable. They still torture people, they even “torture children”.

This coming from the country who “forges or steals passports” from other countries, so their spies can scurry around the world assassinating people.

Setting off “car bombs” or bombing people as they sleep in their beds, in other countries I might add. Knowing what I know I have to wonder how many so called suicide bombers, reported on the news, may have actually been “assassinations”?????

Car bombing isn’t that a pretty common thing?  One has to wonder just how many bombs Israel has planted around the world and had other people from other countries blamed for it? That is what they do.

They even fooled the Americans into Bombing  Libya, with the use of the Trojan transmitter, sneaky and cunning. Not so for Libya of course.

One has to wonder how many other wars they have deliberately started?

They are a terrorist nation if there ever was one.

They hide their nuclear capabilities for years. When an employee blew the Whistle they had him  kidnapped form another country and put in prison for years.

Israel made employees of the Nuclear facility drink radioactive material as an experiment.

Israel has over 200 nuclear bombs and refuses to sign the Non proliferation Treaty.

The UN wants weapons inspectors in there and you can be they won’t get in.

J. F. Kennedy wanted inspectors in there during his Presidency and was assassinated before he could finished the job. Kennedy went through hell with Israel.

Even then Israel was doing some very underhanded trickery.

After Kennedy’s assassination,, everything went just the way Israel wanted. To perfect actually. As a result of his death and LBJ taking the Presidency The following occurred.

  • US  foreign and military aid to Israel increased dramatically once LBJ became president.
  • Rather than trying to maintain a BALANCE in the Middle East, Israel suddenly emerged as the dominant force.
  • Since the LBJ administration, Israel has always had weaponry that was superior to any of its direct neighbors.
  • Due to this undeniable and obvious increase in Israel’s War Machine, a constant struggle has been perpetuated in the Middle East.
  • LBJ also allowed Israel to proceed with its nuclear development, resulting in them becoming the 6th largest nuclear force in the world.
  • Finally, our huge outlays of foreign aid to Israel (approximately $10 billion/year when all is said and done) has created a situation of never-ending attacks and retaliation in the Middle East, plus outright scorn and enmity against the U.S. for playing the role of Israel’s military enabler.
  • LB Johnson was the best thing that could have ever happened to Israel.
  • LBJ even turned a blind eye to the USS Liberty attack. He gave them free reign to do whatever they wanted. Kennedy’s death was the best thing that could have ever happened for Israel. This was done to con the US into war with Egypt.

Iran has nuclear facilities yes, Nuclear Hydro.

How many countries around the world have Nuclear Hydro?

Iran has also signed the Non proliferation Treaty something the UN is trying to get Israel to do, but to date has refused. They like their 200 plus nuclear bombs.

Talk about calling the kettle BLACK.

Israel wants to con the rest of the world “again” into going to war. Only this time it is  with Iran. Who has a whole lot of oil to boot.

Anyone who believes Benjamin Netanyahu needs to do a very through reality check. He has even ordered “people assassinated”.

If Ahmadinejad is ever assassinated, you can rest assured,  Israel would be responsible.

That is what they do. They have been doing things like that for years.

They even assassinate other Jews. One of the first being, the young martyr, Dr. Yaakov Yisrael Dehan was murdered on July 1, 1924. He was a man who devoted all his energies and the best years of his life to saving the remnant of loyal Jews, and to promote peace with the veteran Arab residents of the Holy Land. Through his knowledge of politics and diplomacy, Dehan contributed much to crystallizing an independent position for Orthodox Jewry unaffiliated with the Zionist leadership.

The web they weave when they practice to deceive.

Resolution 487 (1981)Israel to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA/Refrain from Acts or Threats

UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection

Unanimous! UN resolution aims for nuclear-free world

To Israel Hamas is not al-Qaida

Not one penny has reached Gaza to rebuild

IOF willfully kill a Palestinian child in al-Jalazoun refugee camp, north of Ramallah

PA minister accuses Israel of neglecting prisoners’ health

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human Experiments  and WMD

There are many stories in the Archives pertaining to Israel and her criminal activity. Happy hunting.

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Unanimous! UN resolution aims for nuclear-free world

With Barack Obama presiding, the UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution today aimed at ridding the world of nuclear weapons.

Russia, China and developing nations supported the U.S.-sponsored measure, giving it global clout and strong political backing.

The resolution calls for stepped up efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, promote disarmament and “reduce the risk of nuclear terrorism.”

It was only the fifth time the Security Council met at summit level since the U.N. was founded in 1945. And Obama was the first American president to preside over a Security Council summit, gaveling the meeting into session and announcing that “the draft resolution has been adopted unanimously.”

“The historic resolution we just adopted enshrines our shared commitment to a goal of a world without nuclear weapons,” Obama said immediately after the vote. “And it brings Security Council agreement on a broad framework for action to reduce nuclear dangers as we work toward that goal.”

Just one nuclear weapon set off in a major city could cause major destruction, Obama said.

He said the global effort would seek to “lock down all vulnerable nuclear materials within four years.”

“This is not about singling out an individual nation,” he said. “International law is not an empty promise, and treaties must be enforced.”

“We will leave this meeting with renewed determination,” Obama said.

The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon saluted the national leaders for joining in the unprecedented Security Council summit on nuclear arms.

fresh start toward a new future,” he said.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that “our main shared goal is to untie the problem knots” among nations seeking nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament.

“This is complicated since the level of mistrust among nations remains too high, but it must be done,” he said.

Obama aides see adoption of the resolution as an endorsement of the president’s entire nuclear agenda, as laid out in his April speech in Prague. He declared his commitment to “a world without nuclear weapons.”

The president called in that speech for the slashing of U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals, adoption of the treaty banning all nuclear tests, an international fuel bank to better safeguard nuclear material, and negotiations on a new treaty that “verifiably” ends the production of fissile materials for atomic weapons.

He also strongly backed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, or NPT, which requires signatory nations not to pursue nuclear weapons in exchange for a commitment by the five nuclear powers to move toward nuclear disarmament. States without nuclear weapons are guaranteed access to peaceful nuclear technology for electricity generation.

All those measures are included in the draft resolution.

In its opening paragraph, the draft reaffirms the council’s commitment “to seek a safer world for all and to create the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons.”

Arms control advocates say those elements are interconnected. Some nations might eventually reject the limitations of the Nonproliferation Treaty, for example, if the U.S. and other nuclear powers don’t abide by that treaty’s requirement to move toward disarmament by reducing their arsenals, or if they reject the test ban.

Also Thursday, the US rejoined a biennial conference designed to win support for the treaty banning all nuclear bomb tests.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was scheduled to help kick off that UN session, uniting foreign ministers and other envoys from more than 100 nations that have ratified or at least signed the 1996 treaty. It represents the first U.S. participation since 1999.

Among the invited guests were U.N. nuclear chief Mohamed ElBaradei, former U.S. Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, former U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry, media mogul Ted Turner, former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn and Queen Noor of Jordan — all campaigners against nuclear weapons.

The draft resolution does not mention any country by name but it reaffirms previous Security Council resolutions that imposed sanctions on Iran and North Korea for their nuclear activities. It does not call for any new sanctions.

The draft “expresses particular concern at the current major challenges to the nonproliferation regime that the Security Council has acted upon.”

It also calls on all countries that are not parties to join the treaty “to achieve its universality at an early date,” and in the interim to comply with its terms. The major countries that are not members of the NPT are India and Pakistan, which have conducted nuclear tests, and Israel which is believed to have a nuclear arsenal.

* (Reuters) At the meeting, Gordon Brown said the world should consider “far tougher sanctions” against Iran if it continues to seek a nuclear bomb.

Iran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons, but it is defying UN Security Council resolutions ordering it to suspend enriching uranium.

“As evidence of its breach of international agreements grows, we must now consider far tougher sanctions together,” Brown said .

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said he supported dialogue with Tehran but so far it had produced no results and Iran had continued to enrich uranium.

“There comes a time when stubborn facts will compel us to take a decision if we want a world without nuclear weapons,” Sarkozy said after the Security Council passed a resolution calling on nuclear weapons states to scrap their arsenals.

Both leaders also spoke about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, saying it was violating international regulations.

“If we have the courage to affirm and impose sanctions together against those who violate resolutions of the Security Council, we will be lending credibility to our commitment towards a world with fewer nuclear weapons,” Sarkozy said.

Source

These are the Nuclear Countries  and how many Nuclear Bombs they posses, give or take a few…
China 410,
France 464,
India 60+?,
Pakistan 15-25,
Israel 200+?,
Russia 10,000,
United Kingdom 185,
United States 10,500

The use of DU and Nuclear weapons are  illegal for the following reasons.

LEGALITY TEST FOR WEAPONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW

Weapons must pass four tests in order to determine that they are legal under international law. The tests are:

(1) TEMPORAL TEST. Weapons must not continue to act after the battle is over.

(2) ENVIRONMENTAL TEST. Weapons must not be unduly harmful to the environment.

(3) TERRITORIAL TEST. Weapons must not act off of the battlefield.

(4) HUMANENESS TEST. Weapons must not kill or wound inhumanely.

Depleted Uranium and Nuclear, weaponry fail all four tests.

For these reasons they are illegal under International Treaties.

UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection

US-NATO Using Military Might To Control World Energy Resources

Study changes Canadian Province’s Flu Vaccine plan

Unpublished study influences Ont.’s vaccine plan

September 24 2009

Ontario says it is changing its approach to seasonal flu vaccine administration this year in part because of unpublished data that suggest the seasonal shot might raise the risk of catching swine flu.

Dr. Arlene King, the province’s chief medical officer of health, says people 65 and older, who aren’t at great risk of catching swine flu, will be offered seasonal flu vaccine in October.

But the seasonal flu won’t be offered to younger people in Canada’s most populous province until after they are first offered the vaccine for swine flu, which is likely to happen in November.

King says the unpublished study was clearly a factor in the decision to change the sequence of the vaccination program.

That study, based on research ongoing in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec, suggests that people who have received seasonal flu shots last year may be at greater risk of catching H1N1 flu this year.

While the study is still being peer-reviewed in an unnamed journal, King said it had a direct influence on the policy for this year’s flu vaccination program in Ontario.

“There is emerging unpublished evidence that suggests an association between prior seasonal flu vaccination and getting the H1N1 flu. The nature of the association is unclear at this time, so we want people under 65 to wait to get the seasonal flu shot until after the H1N1 flu vaccine until we learn more about this,” she told reporters.

The other factors influencing the plan are evidence from the southern hemisphere that shows that H1N1 is dominating other seasonal flu strains.

The vaccines are also being phased in because of the difficulties of trying to provide both types of shots at the same time. That’s because the seasonal flu vaccine will be ready in October but swine flu vaccine won’t be ready until mid-November.

She added that there is still no scientific data that giving both swine flu and seasonal flu shots at the same time is either safe or effective. So Ontario will take a cautious approach and phase in both flu vaccine programs over three phases:

In October, the seasonal flu vaccine will be offered to Ontarians 65 years and over and residents of long-term care homes

H1N1 vaccine will be offered to the general population in November, following the vaccine sequencing guidelines issues by the Public Health Agency of Canada. That means high-priority groups first, and then the rest of the population

The seasonal flu vaccine will be then offered to all other residents six months of age and older who still want it.

“It’s a different flu season this year and rolling out two flu vaccine programs is a great example of how different it is,” Dr. King said.

Earlier in the day, the World Health Organization addressed the worries raised in the unpublished Canadian study in a telephone news briefing.

In a response to a question on the study from CTV’s Avis Favaro, Marie-Paule Kieny, director of the WHO’s initiative for vaccine research, said researchers in no other countries have made similar findings.

“We are in contact with other countries and having them look at their own data to see if they could have similar observations and none have been able to find anything like that,” Kieny told the teleconference from WHO headquarters.

“So the reason why this may be different in Canada and in this particular study is not yet identified. It may be study bias; it may be that something is real.

“But the WHO is looking forward to be able to see the data and to study data and to come to a better understanding of whether this has any chance of indeed putting people are risk, the fact that they’ve received the seasonal vaccination,” Kieny said.

Other provinces mull vaccine plan changes

Meanwhile, a number of Canadian provinces are considering suspending their seasonal flu vaccination programs, in part because of the worries.

Saskatchewan Health Minister Don McMorris said Thursday seasonal flu shots will likely be suspended for everyone in his province except seniors and those in long-term care.

Seniors are more susceptible to the seasonal flu, but their age group seems to be mostly immune from swine flu because of presumed exposure to similar viruses in their lifetimes.

McMorris said he was also worried about the reports that seasonal flu vaccine might make people more susceptible to swine flu. He added that other factors influencing their decision were expectation from flu officials that H1N1 would dominate this winter and crowd out seasonal flu strains.

In Quebec, health officials said earlier this week they’re putting the seasonal flu shot program on standby. They too are considering either delaying seasonal flu vaccination until after swine flu vaccine programs are complete, or scrapping seasonal flu vaccination altogether.

“For the moment, it’s on hold,” Karine White, a media relations liaison with the Ministry of Health and Social Services in Quebec told The Canadian Press.

Swine flu vaccination programs likely wouldn’t begin until mid-November, the earliest that the vaccine manufacturer will have it ready, tested and approved

Source

What do we know about the vaccines’ safety? Not enough

Globe and Mail
August 06, 2009
Alan Cassels and Arthur Schafer

In the headlong rush to do good, we need to be sure we don’t end up doing harm. Who should be at the top of the list to receive the H1N1 vaccine or antiviral drugs if, as feared, they are in short supply? Bio-ethicists debate the niceties of how society should ration scarce medical resources, while public-health officials spend their days debating who should be first in line – pregnant women, health-care personnel or perhaps government leaders and corporate CEOs?

The majority of Canadians, listening to this rationing debate, would be forgiven for assuming that the H1N1 vaccine, when it becomes available in the autumn, will be a life saver. The unfortunate reality, however, is that we don’t know and, indeed, can’t know if that is the case.

Like most governments around the world, eager to appear to be “doing something,” the government of Canada has promised to stockpile enough of the vaccine so that most Canadians will be protected.

But, speaking of stockpiles, Canada already owns one of the world’s largest supplies of antiviral drugs, mostly Tamiflu and Relenza, two drugs designed to reduce the severity and length of the flu.

And yet the scientific evidence testing the preventive benefits of either Tamiflu or its near cousin, Relenza, shows that both are pathetically weak. People who take either of these “prophylactically,” i.e. before they become sick, hoping to prevent the flu, will get about as much effect as if they’d taken a placebo. That’s not a very impressive result.

Equally unimpressive: When the drugs are given within 48 hours
to someone who already has flu symptoms, with the goal of ameliorating the severity of the disease, it makes only a slight difference.

The “lucky ones” who take Tamiflu may reduce the average length of a five-day flu by about half a day. Not worth getting out of bed for, you might think. So perhaps it doesn’t matter all that much who is at the top of the list to receive the drugs and who is at the bottom.

Consider also that a recent international study reveals that about 50 per cent of children who have taken Tamiflu experienced side effects. Most have been minor (gut problems, diarrhea) but some have been more serious, including neuropsychiatric problems.

Why are public-health officials glossing over the fact there is a great deal of uncertainty and doubt surrounding the effectiveness, safety and side effects of flu drugs?

The same could be said for the H1N1 vaccine, currently in production and ramped up for Canada’s fall flu season. What do we know about its effectiveness or its safety?

The answer is, not enough. If one takes past flu campaigns as any indication, it is likely the effectiveness of the vaccine is going to be exaggerated, while the potential harms will either be ignored, understated or simply unknown. In that scenario, the rush to vaccinate yourself and your children might not turn out to be such a grand idea.

Public-health officials around the world seem to be suggesting there is a possibility this flu pandemic could get much worse, that is, become more lethal. If that were to happen, it seems “obvious” that wise people should seek to have a preventive flu shot or access to a pill. Many people will say to themselves:

Why not get the shot, just to be sure?

Part of the answer to that question is that until a million people
roll up their sleeves to get the vaccine, no one can be sure how safe it will be. This is also a decisive answer to those who favour making vaccination mandatory.
Some public-health officials have described flu vaccines as “highly effective,” but the internationally recognized Cochrane Collaboration (which accepts no money from the pharmaceutical industry) did a systematic review of all high-quality randomized trials (25 in all) studying influenza vaccination.

They concluded that “the evidence does
not support universal immunization of healthy adults.” Period.
So how does this information help us to think clearly about the current flu pandemic in which we’re mired?

Well, it seems that despite its spread, this flu virus is a bit of a
dud for the fear-mongers. If, as seems not unlikely, the H1N1 virus mutates, our government will have purchased enormous quantities of a flu vaccine around which we will have virtually no safety or effectiveness data, and an already existing and very costly stockpile of probably useless drugs.

In short, a big bust all around.

Governments and public-health officials are sensitive to the
exhortation: Don’t just stand there, do something. But it’s sometimes wise to reverse that dictum: Don’t just do something, stand there (and think a bit about what might actually produce more good than harm).

Alan Cassels is a drug policy researcher at the University of
Victoria. Arthur Schafer is director of the Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba.

SOME QUESTIONS TO ASK:

1. Why did WHO raise the pandemic alert to highest level when less than one thousand people WORLDWIDE have died from causes “associated with h1n1″?
Pandemic alert level 6 allows martial law and mandatory vaccination. Many if not most of the people who have died had “underlying health problems.”

*Worldwide, the number of deaths attributed to the flu each year is between 250,000 and 500,000? (Thomas Walkom, The Toronto Star, May 1, 2009).”

*”…Only 700 people have died from the swine flu world wide in the last year. In the same period, half a million people died of the regular flu, but that isn’t called a pandemic. We are being lied to.” [other reports put the numbers at even less. and then there's the epidemic of cancer, heart disease and diabetes...]

2. Poor quality testing to identify the specific flu strain. Some say it’s only accurate 1/2 the time, others say even less. How are tests made up? How quickly can you make up a test for something supposedly just discovered in May?

2a Where did this h1n1 come from. Some suggest it is made in a lab.
“This virus continues to be an enigma for virologists. In the April 30, 2009 issue of Nature, a virologist was quoted as saying,“Where the hell it got all these genes from we don’t know.” Extensive analysis of the virus found that it contained the original 1918 H1N1 flu virus, the avian flu virus (bird flu), and two new H3N2 virus genes from Eurasia. Debate continues over the possibility that swine flu is a genetically engineered virus. “

2b Hasty testing and preparation of the vaccine. Baxter Intl applied for the patent in 2008, long before the outbreak. How does that work?
“The Baxter vaccine, called Celvapan, has had fast track approval. It uses a new vero cell technology, which utilizes cultured cells from the African green monkey. This same animal tissue transmits a number of vaccine-contaminating
viruses, including the HIV virus.
“The Baxter company has been associated with two deadly scandals. The first event occurred in 2006 when hemophiliac components were contaminated with HIV
virus and injected in tens of thousands of people, including thousands of children. Baxter continued to release the HIV contaminated vaccine even after the contamination was known.

“The second event occurred recently when it was discovered that Baxter had released a seasonal flu vaccine containing the bird flu virus, which would have produced a real world pandemic, to 18 countries. Fortunately, astute lab workers in the Czech Republic discovered the deadly combination and blew the whistle before a worldwide disaster was unleashed.

*”GSK is one of several companies, including Novartis (NVS),
Sanofi-Aventis (SNY), and Baxter International (BAX), racing to
develop a swine flu vaccine. ” ie $$$$$$$$

3. Additives to vaccines are already a concern. Why the mercury, ie “thimerosal”? And now why this adjuvant called squalene which appears to mess with the immune system.

4. Historical precedent of the 1918 flu epidemic which killed about 40 million worldwide. There was a spring outbreak, then Rockefeller financed vaccination FOLLOWED by the major outbreak in the fall.

5. If you check the various provincial health web sites, they are no longer testing for the h1n1 and are lumping into their figures ALL cases of “influenza-like illness”. what kind of shoddy science is that??? why are they padding the numbers??

6. Pharma companies who are now making a killing already on sales of vaccines and antivirals like tamiflu, are NOT LIABLE for any damage caused by or as a result of these products.

7. Tamiflu has been considered useless by some doctors, in particular a Korean doctor. Others are playing down this information.

Government’s Tamiflu advice is wrong, says WHO

By Lewis Smith

August 22 2009

Only seriously ill and vulnerable patients should be prescribed antiviral drugs to help them to get over swine flu, the World Health Organisation said yesterday, in advice which conflicts with the decision taken by the British Government to prescribe Tamiflu to everyone with swine flu.

Most people will recover from swine flu within a week, just as they would from seasonal forms of influenza, the WHO said.
“Healthy patients with uncomplicated illness need not be treated with antivirals,” the WHO concluded in guidance issued on the internet. “Worldwide, most patients infected with the pandemic virus continue to experience typical influenza symptoms and fully recover within a week, even without any form of medical treatment.”

Swine flu, now present in 177 countries, has been blamed for 1,799 deaths, and it is feared that over-use of Tamiflu will lead to the virus becoming resistant to it. The WHO has been formally notified of 12 cases where the H1N1 virus has already been found to have developed resistance after mutating.

The WHO issued its advice after a panel of international experts reviewed the effectiveness and safety of antivirals in tackling the pandemic.

It agreed, however, that antivirals are appropriate in cases where patients suffer a severe bout of swine flu or have an underlying medical condition. In these cases the drugs have proved effective at reducing the risk of pneumonia setting in.

The Department of Health responded to the WHO guidance by saying that the decision to offer Tamiflu remained right and sensible.

“We believe a safety-first approach of offering antivirals, when required, to everyone remains a sensible and responsible way forward. However, we will keep this policy under review as we learn more about the virus and its effects,” a spokesman said.

Andrew Lansley, the shadow Health Secretary, has backed the Government’s approach, especially in the early stages of the outbreak when the severity of the disease was unclear.

He added: “In the light of this latest expert advice, it may be appropriate for GPs and the fluline to make clear to otherwise healthy patients that there may be little benefit in taking anti-virals. But I do not think it would be appropriate for us to not offer treatment to those who request it.”

The number of courses of antivirals issued in England by the National Pandemic Flu Service has almost halved since the beginning of the month. In the seven days up to 18 August there were 45,986 courses prescribed, compared to 90,363 the previous week. Last week there were 11,000 new cases of swine flu reported, down from 25,000 the week before.

In its advice the WHO included pregnant women as one of the at-risk groups that should continue to receive antivirals.

“As pregnant women are included among groups at increased risk, WHO recommends that pregnant women receive antiviral treatment as soon as possible after symptom onset,” it said.

The WHO recommended that children under five be regarded as being a high-risk group and should therefore be treated with antivirals as soon as possible once symptoms began.

Children over five years, however, should only be given the drugs if their condition becomes serious or if they have an underlying health problem.

Earlier this month a team of researchers from Oxford University said children with mild symptoms should not be given the antiviral to combat swine flu and urged the Department of Health to urgently rethink its [url]policy.
Source

What’s the Danger of Swine Flu Vaccinations?

By Dr. Anders Bruun Laursen

August 20, 2009

There seems to be quite a lot of uncertainty about the technical nature of Swine Flu (H1N1) vaccines.

As a medical doctor, I wish to clarify a number of important issues: First, we should talk about vaccines instead of vaccine, since the vaccines vary as for their compositions and even their ways of being dispensed: some by injection, another by the nose.

I think the fears as for the vaccines can be referred to:

1. The adjuvants – in particular squalene which was in all probability responsible for the Gulf War syndrome,

2. The virus antigen´s condition (dead, attenuated, live)

3. A deeply rooted mistrust in our politicians and the vaccine producers´ motives and morals: e.g. Baxter´s live bird flu virus last Winter (12), the Bayer AIDS haemophiliac product scandal.

First it is necessary to understand, that pandemic vaccines are made according to two procedures:

1. The Developement of a totally new vaccine from scratch. This takes more time, administration and testing than mock up vaccines (see below).

2. A Mock-up vaccine is a vaccine with all the adjuvants of the pandemic vaccine – but without the killed or attenuated pandemic virus. This virus is – until the pandemic virus is known – a different, attenuated known potentially pandemic virus, in the case of the Pandemrix vaccine for the EU it is an attenuated H5N1 bird flu virus. This is the mock-up vaccine. When the nature of the pandemic swine flu virus (H1N1) is known, it replaces the H5N1 virus in an attenuated form, the adjuvants being left unchanged.

Until now mock-up vaccine test-vaccinations have been going on on voluntary ”human guinea pigs.” Since most of the contents of the vaccine has already been approved, the approval of the pandemic vaccine is easier to implement.

After the exchange of virus in the vaccine, the company will have to apply for a ”variation”. However, this is just a matter of form, since such a variation approval is given by the EU within 5 days – which means that there is no objective testing of the vaccine requiring official approval. The safety is entirely left to the vaccine producer, who has been granted immunity to actions of damages due to expected side effects.

So, as you see, there is no confusion with regard to swine flu and bird flu viruses. But there is another important consideration: the role of squalene.

The average quantity of squalene injected into the US soldiers abroad and at home in the anthrax vaccine during and after the Gulf War was 34.2 micrograms per billion micrograms of water. According to one study, this was the other cause of Gulf War syndrom in 25% of 697.000 US personnel at home and abroad. You can find this table of FDA analyses from the Gulf War lots on The Military Vaccine Resource Directory website.

a.. AVA 020 – 11 ppb squalene (parts per billion)

> b.. AVA 030 – 10 ppb squalene

> c.. AVA 038 – 27 ppb squalene

> d.. AVA 043 – 40 ppb squalene

> e.. AVA 047 – 83 ppb squalene

These values were confirmed by Prof. R. F. Garry  before the House of Representatives. Prof Garry was the man to discover the connection between the Gulf War syndrome and squalene.

According to his findings, the Gulf War syndrome was caused by squalene, which was banned by a Federal Court Judge in 2004 from the Pentagon´s use.

As seen on p. 6 of this EMEA document , the Pandremix vaccine contains 10,68 mg of squalene per 0,5 ml. This corresponds to 2.136.0000 microgrammes pr. billion microgrammes of water, i.e. one million times more squalene per dose than in . There is any reason to believe that this will make people sick to a much higher extent than in 1990/91. This appears murderous to me.

I have contacted the Danish National Health Service: They are to decree mass vaccinations in Denmark – and yet they knew nothing about the composition of the Pandremix vaccine.

Then I addressed the Danish Medicinal Agency. They admitted that the Pandremix vaccine from GlaxoSmithKline does contain squalene and thimerosal. They have not rejected my remark that the squalene concentration is dangerous. In contrast, the AstraZeneca MedImmune nasal vaccination  avoids squalene side effects.

So far the use of squalene has been banned by the FDA in the US according to Der Spiegel . However, this may not last long .

“Clearly bypassing the FDA requirements for safety testing of these new adjuvants and the vaccines which contain them puts the entire population at risk for serious, possibly life threatening side effects, particularly any of the 12,000 paid trial participants (6,000 children) who are unfortunate enough to be randomized into the adjuvant containing groups.”

Still, on July 23, 2009, the FDA announced, “Currently, no U.S. licensed vaccine contains the adjuvants MF-59 or ASO3 (squalene). It is expected that a novel influenza A (H1N1) vaccine manufactured using the same process as U.S. licensed seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine but administered with MF-59 or ASO3 will be authorized for emergency use only.”

Furthermore, “Two of the manufacturers (Novartis and GSK) have proprietary oil-in-water adjuvants (MF-59 and ASO3, respectively) which have been evaluated in a number of clinical studies including studies with influenza vaccines. These manufacturers will include an evaluation of the utility of the adjuvant for dose sparing and higher effect in their clinical studies.“

“The same document indicates that vaccines containing the un-approved adjuvants will be given to 100 children 6 months to 3 years old, 100 children 3 years old to 8 years, 100 individuals 18 to 64 years old and 100 individuals 65 and older in each of the multiple clinical trials. In addition, 700 individuals in each trial will be given non-adjuvanted vaccine”.

Now for the immunological side effects of squalene to occur takes months to years – and cannot be evaluated after up to 6 weeks of observation. Der Spiegel calls the mass vaccinations on Europeans a gigantic cost free experiment to provide the FDA with mass vaccination experience to clear the track for sale in the US.

EMEA admits that side effects can only be found through extensive vaccination campaigns! .

Here is what EMEA  has to say about risks of GSK Pandemrix:

EMEAs Pandemrix is commonly or very commonly associated with a range of local and systemic adverse reactions but these are not often of severe intensity and the safety profile would not preclude the use of the vaccine in healthy adults aged 18-60 years or > 60 years.

However, there are some adverse reactions known to be very rarely associated with influenza vaccines and it is currently not possible to predict if higher rates might be observed with Pandemrix compared with, for example, seasonal influenza vaccines.

Dr Keiji Fukuda, the WHO’s flu chief, today warned about the potential dangers of the untested vaccine : “There are certain areas where you simply do not try to make any economies. One of the things which cannot be compromised is the safety of vaccines.”

Which is exactly what is going on!

What I do not know is, if they are going to leave the attenuated (or live – Baxter  bird flu vaccine – or to totally replace it by the H1N1 virus.

Other severe, but rare side effects are autism in children due to thimerosal and the Guillan-Barré syndrome seen with 400-500 Americans after the 1976 unnecessary mass vaccinations against swine flu  – videos. As for additional severe side effects of squalene – see Stephen Lendman .

My advice: If you are forced to be vaccinated against the harmless swine flu (H1N1) – demand a vaccination with the AstraZeneca nasal vaccine MedImmune– thereby avoiding squalene side effects.
Source

Tamiflu: Swine flu drug increases stroke risk
While Tamiflu is one of the most effective drugs in treating swine flu infection, a new report warns that the drug may increase the risk of stroke.

Previously, researchers had urged parents to avoid using the drug in their offspring as its risks outweighed the benefits. Nausea and nightmares were among the most frequent side effects reported in children.

According to the report recently released by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), Tamiflu may interact with the blood-thinning medication warfarin, placing the individual at an increased risk of uncontrolled bleeding (INR rate).

A significant increase in the INR rate could consequently lead to the development of a hemorrhagic stroke.

Despite the fact that such a complication was never reported in performed clinical testing, the MHRA has received 418 reports of suspected adverse reactions including two deaths because of Tamiflu.

Some 12 of these reactions were related to warfarin interactions.

Warfarin is known to interact with a wide range of drugs and even some foods and drinks. Many of the consumers, therefore, are hospitalized due to increased INR rates while many others die.

“We have seen indications that INR rates could possibly rise due to interactions between warfarin and Tamiflu. However, flu-like illnesses have also been known to cause this, so at this stage it is difficult to know whether it is the interaction with Tamiflu or the underlying flu,” said a MHRA spokesman.

The government watchdog therefore warned physicians of the high risk of stroke in Tamiflu users, adding that they should ask the patients regarding the use of the blood-thinning drug before prescribing the anti-swine flu medicine.
Source

Doctors told to watch for Guillain-Barre syndrome during Swine flu vaccination programme.
Doctors are being urged to watch for cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome, a rare nerve disorder, as the new swine flu vaccine is introduced in October.

Guillain-Barre syndrome which attacks the nervous system and can cause paralysis and death is linked to infections like flu but it has also been suggested a previous swine flu vaccine had caused cases of the disease in America in the 1970s.

American officials rushed out a vaccine in 1976 following an outbreak of swine flu in military barracks. Around 40million people received the vaccine but doctors reported an increase Guillain-Barre and 25 people had died before the immunisation programme was stopped.
It is not known for sure whether the vaccine or the flu was responsible and the current H1N1 swine flu jabs due to be introduced in Britain in October are very different to the version used thirty years ago, Government scientists have said.

However specialist doctors here are being urged to report every case of Guillain-Barre syndrome to the Health Protection Agency so the circumstances of each patient can be investigated.

Sources told the Daily Telegraph that experts are not expecting to spot any cases linked to the vaccinations.

They added that because Guillain-Barre can be caused by infections like flu, the new programme may in fact establish that vaccinations actually protect against the syndrome.

The syndrome affects around 1,500 people a year in the Britain.

A Health Protection Agency spokesman said enhanced surveillance was “routine” when introducing a new vaccine and all manner of potential side effects are monitored.

More than 13 million people in Britain, including people with severe asthma, diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease or with a compromised immune system will get the jab from October. Pregnant women and frontline health and social care workers will also be offered the jab.

The seasonal flu vaccination programme will continue as normal.

The spokesman said: “Guillain-Barre syndrome has long been identified as a potential adverse event that would require enhanced surveillance following the introduction of a pandemic vaccine but there is no evidence to suggest there is an increased risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome from this vaccine.”

He said there was also no increased risk of the syndrome associated with the seasonal flu vaccine.

“Establishing enhanced surveillance on Guillain-Barre syndrome has always been part of our pandemic plan because there is an increased risk of this disease after a flu-like illness.

“HPA is working in collaboration with the Association of British Neurologists Surveillance Unit (BNSU) and the British Paediatric Surveillance Unit (BPSU) who will ask clinicians to report each month whether they have seen any cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome.”

However critics have said the fact doctors are being told to report cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome is evidence that the authorities are concerned.

Jackie Fletcher of the campaign group, Jabs, added: “What we’ve got is a massive guinea-pig trial.”

A Department of Health spokesman said: “The European Medicines Agency has strict processes in place for licensing pandemic vaccines.

“In preparing for a pandemic, appropriate trials to assess safety and the immune responses have been carried out on vaccines very similar to the swine flu vaccine. The vaccines have been shown to have a good safety profile.

“It is extremely irresponsible to suggest that the UK would use a vaccine without careful consideration of safety issues. The UK has one of the most successful immunisation programmes in the world.”

Source

Swine flu jab link to killer nerve disease: Leaked letter reveals concern of neurologists over 25 deaths in America

By Jo Macfarlane
August 15 2009

Prevention: Is the swine flu jab safe?

A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a confidential letter.

The letter from the Health Protection Agency, the official body that oversees public health, has been leaked to The Mail on Sunday, leading to demands to know why the information has not been given to the public before the vaccination of millions of people, including children, begins.

It tells the neurologists that they must be alert for an increase in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.

GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, causing paralysis and inability to breathe, and can be fatal.

The letter, sent to about 600 neurologists on July 29, is the first sign that there is concern at the highest levels that the vaccine itself could cause serious complications.

It refers to the use of a similar swine flu vaccine in the United States in 1976 when:

* More people died from the vaccination than from swine flu.
* 500 cases of GBS were detected.
* The vaccine may have increased the risk of contracting GBS by eight times.
* The vaccine was withdrawn after just ten weeks when the link with GBS became clear.
* The US Government was forced to pay out millions of dollars to those affected.

Concerns have already been raised that the new vaccine has not been sufficiently tested and that the effects, especially on children, are unknown.

It is being developed by pharmaceutical companies and will be given to about 13million people during the first wave of immunisation, expected to start in October.

Top priority will be given to everyone aged six months to 65 with an underlying health problem, pregnant women and health professionals.

The British Neurological Surveillance Unit (BNSU), part of the British Association of Neurologists, has been asked to monitor closely any cases of GBS as the vaccine is rolled out.

One senior neurologist said last night: ‘I would not have the swine
flu jab because of the GBS risk.’

There are concerns that there could be a repeat of what became known as the ‘1976 debacle’ in the US, where a swine flu vaccine killed 25 people – more than the virus itself.

A mass vaccination was given the go-ahead by President Gerald Ford because scientists believed that the swine flu strain was similar to the one responsible for the 1918-19 pandemic, which killed half a million Americans and 20million people worldwide.

Swine flu vaccines being prepared

The swine flu vaccine being offered to children has not been tested on infants

Within days, symptoms of GBS were reported among those who had been immunised and 25 people died from respiratory failure after severe paralysis. One in 80,000 people came down with the condition. In contrast, just one person died of swine flu.

More than 40million Americans had received the vaccine by the time the programme was stopped after ten weeks. The US Government paid out millions of dollars in compensation to those affected.

The swine flu virus in the new vaccine is a slightly different strain from the 1976 virus, but the possibility of an increased incidence of GBS remains a concern.

Shadow health spokesman Mike Penning said last night: ‘The last thing we want is secret letters handed around experts within the NHS. We need a vaccine but we also need to know about potential risks.

‘Our job is to make sure that the public knows what’s going on. Why
is the Government not being open about this? It’s also very worrying if GPs, who will be administering the vaccine, aren’t being warned.’

Two letters were posted together to neurologists advising them of the concerns. The first, dated July 29, was written by Professor Elizabeth Miller, head of the HPA’s Immunisation Department.

It says: ‘The vaccines used to combat an expected swine influenza pandemic in 1976 were shown to be associated with GBS and were withdrawn from use.

‘GBS has been identified as a condition needing enhanced surveillance when the swine flu vaccines are rolled out.

‘Reporting every case of GBS irrespective of vaccination or disease history is essential for conducting robust epidemiological analyses capable of identifying whether there is an increased risk of GBS in defined time periods after vaccination, or after influenza itself, compared with the background risk.’

The second letter, dated July 27, is from the Association of British Neurologists and is written by Dr Rustam Al-Shahi Salman, chair of its surveillance unit, and Professor Patrick Chinnery, chair of its clinical research committee.
America swine flu 1976

Halted: The 1976 US swine flu campaign

It says: ‘Traditionally, the BNSU has monitored rare diseases for long periods of time. However, the swine influenza (H1N1) pandemic has overtaken us and we need every member’s involvement with a new BNSU survey of Guillain-Barre Syndrome that will start on August 1 and run for approximately nine months.

‘Following the 1976 programme of vaccination against swine influenza in the US, a retrospective study found a possible eight-fold increase in the incidence of GBS.

‘Active prospective ascertainment of every case of GBS in the UK is required. Please tell BNSU about every case.

‘You will have seen Press coverage describing the Government’s concern about releasing a vaccine of unknown safety.’

If there are signs of a rise in GBS after the vaccination programme begins, the Government could decide to halt it.

GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, leaving them unable to transmit signals to muscles effectively.

It can cause partial paralysis and mostly affects the hands and feet. In serious cases, patients need to be kept on a ventilator, but it can be fatal.

Death is caused by paralysis of the respiratory system, causing the victim to suffocate.
It is not known exactly what causes GBS and research on the subject has been inconclusive.

However, it is thought that one in a million people who have a seasonal flu vaccination could be at risk and it has also been linked to people recovering from a bout of flu of any sort.

The HPA said it was part of the Government’s pandemic plan to monitor GBS cases in the event of a mass vaccination campaign, regardless of the strain of flu involved.
But vaccine experts warned that the letters proved the programme was a ‘guinea-pig trial’.

Dr Tom Jefferson, co-ordinator of the vaccines section of the influential Cochrane Collaboration, an independent group that reviews research, said: ‘New vaccines never behave in the way you expect them to. It may be that there is a link to GBS, which is certainly not something I would wish on anybody.

‘But it could end up being anything because one of the additives in one of the vaccines is a substance called squalene, and none of the studies we’ve extracted have any research on it at all.’

He said squalene, a naturally occurring enzyme, could potentially cause so-far-undiscovered side effects.

Jackie Fletcher, founder of vaccine support group Jabs, said: ‘The Government would not be anticipating this if they didn’t think there was a connection. What we’ve got is a massive guinea-pig trial.’

Professor Chinnery said: ‘During the last swine flu pandemic, it was observed that there was an increased frequency of cases of GBS. No one knows whether it was the virus or the vaccine that caused this.

‘The purpose of the survey is for us to assess rapidly whether there is an increase in the frequency of GBS when the vaccine is released in the UK. It also increases consultants’ awareness of the condition.

Panic over? The number of swine flu cases has fallen sharply in the past few weeks.

‘This is a belt-and-braces approach to safety and is not something people should be substantially worried about as it’s a rare condition.’

If neurologists do identify a case of GBS, it will be logged on a central database.

Details about patients, including blood samples, will be collected and monitored by the HPA.

It is hoped this will help scientists establish why some people develop the condition and whether it is directly related to the vaccine.

But some question why there needs to be a vaccine, given the risks. Dr Richard Halvorsen, author of The Truth About Vaccines, said: ‘For people with serious underlying health problems, the risk of dying from swine flu is probably greater than the risk of side effects from the vaccine.

‘But it would be tragic if we repeated the US example and ended up with more casualties from the jabs.

‘I applaud the Government for recognising the risk but in most cases this is a mild virus which needs a few days in bed. I’d question why we need a vaccine at all.’

Professor Miller at the HPA said: ‘This monitoring system activates pandemic plans that have been in place for a number of years. We’ll be able to get information on whether a patient has had a prior influenza illness and will look at whether influenza itself is linked to GBS.

‘We are not expecting a link to the vaccine but a link to disease, which would make having the vaccine even more important.’

The UK’s medicines watchdog, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, is already monitoring reported side effects from Tamiflu and Relenza and it is set to extend that surveillance to the vaccine.

A Department of Health spokesperson said: ‘The European Medicines Agency has strict processes in place for licensing pandemic vaccines.

‘In preparing for a pandemic, appropriate trials to assess safety and the immune responses have been carried out on vaccines very similar to the swine flu vaccine. The vaccines have been shown to have a good safety profile.

‘It is extremely irresponsible to suggest that the UK would use a vaccine without careful consideration of safety issues. The UK has one of the most successful immunisation programmes in the world.’

I COULDN”T EAT OR SPEAK… IT WAS HORRENDOUS
Hilary Wilkinson

Victim: Hilary Wilkinson spent three months in hospital after she was diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome
When Hilary Wilkinson woke up with muscle weakness in her left arm and difficulty breathing, doctors initially put it down to a stroke.

But within hours, she was on a ventilator in intensive care after being diagnosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

She spent three months in hospital and had to learn how to talk and walk again. But at times, when she was being fed through a drip and needed a tracheotomy just to breathe, she doubted whether she would survive.

The mother of two, 57, from Maryport, Cumbria, had been in good health until she developed a chest infection in March 2006. She gradually became so weak she could not walk downstairs.

Doctors did not diagnose Guillain-Barre until her condition worsened in hospital and tests showed her reflexes slowing down. It is impossible for doctors to know how she contracted the disorder, although it is thought to be linked to some infections.

Mrs Wilkinson said: ‘It was very scary. I couldn’t eat and I couldn’t speak. My arms and feet had no strength and breathing was hard.

I was treated with immunoglobulin, which are proteins found in blood, to stop damage to my nerves. After ten days, I still couldn’t speak and had to mime to nurses or my family.

‘It was absolutely horrendous and I had no idea whether I would get through it. You reach very dark moments at such times and wonder how long it can last.

But I’m a very determined person and I had lots of support.’

After three weeks, she was transferred to a neurological ward, where she had an MRI scan and nerve tests to assess the extent of the damage.

Still unable to speak and in a wheelchair, Mrs Wilkinson eventually began gruelling physiotherapy to improve her muscle strength and movement but it was exhausting and painful.

Three years later, she is almost fully recovered. She can now walk for several miles at a time, has been abroad and carries out voluntary work for a GBS Support Group helpline.

She said: ‘It makes me feel wary that the Government is rolling out this vaccine without any clear idea of the GBS risk, if any. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone and it certainly changed my life.

‘I’m frightened to have the swine flu vaccine if this might happen again – it’s a frightening illness and I think more research needs to be done on the effect of the vaccine.’

Hotline staff given access to confidential records

Confidential NHS staff records and disciplinary complaints could be accessed by hundreds of workers manning the Government’s special swine flu hotline.

They were able to browse through a database of emails containing doctors’ and nurses’ National Insurance numbers, home addresses, dates of birth, mobile phone numbers and scanned passport pages – all details that could be used fraudulently.

And private and confidential complaints sent by hospitals about temporary medical staff – some of whom were named – were also made available to the call-centre workers, who were given a special password to log in to an internal NHS website.

It could be a breach of the Data Protection Act.

The hotline staff work for NHS Professionals, which was set up using taxpayers’ money to employ temporary medical and administrative staff for the health service.

The not-for-profit company runs two of the Government’s swine flu call centres – with 300 staff in Farnborough, Hampshire, and 900 in Watford, Hertfordshire.

Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley described the revelations as ‘disturbing’.

Anne Mitchell, a spokeswoman for Unison, said: ‘There’s no excuse for such a fundamental breach of personal security. Action needs to be taken as soon as possible to make sure this does not happen again.’

A spokeswoman for NHS Professionals would not confirm whether access to the confidential files had been granted.
Source

Swine Flu Vaccine Makers to Profit $50 Billion a Year!! Or more. Some drug companies to date have been selling it at 6 times what it costs to make. So if it cost $5 to make they sell it for $30.

Who Benefited the most by J.F. Kennedy’s Death?

Surprisingly most people are not aware of the  terrorism Israel has inflicted around the world.

Anything in Brown is a the link to the source of story.

Assassinations, Car bombs,  False flags, using fake or stolen passports, the list is rather long and getting longer. Israel funds Terrorism. There is even a connection to 9/11.

There is a list of  Terrorist Activity, Groups and Crimes  below.


New information is added as I find it.

New information was added February 24, 2010

So we start with Kennedy and who benefited the most from his assassination. Israel was a big winner.

Well I was puttering around today looking for something else and came across this. Considering what I had already read on my Quest this really got me to thinking. Many feel J. F. Kennedy’s death was a tragedy.  Many also do not accept the official, Warren Commission Report,  just like they don’t accept the official 9/11 Commission Report. Both reports leave a lot to be desired. Not all evidence was brought to either report and well if you are so inclined, you would have to read it in it’s entirety to understand.

“Israel need not apologize for the assassination
or destruction of those who seek to destroy it.
The first order of business for any country
is the protection of its people.”
Washington Jewish Week, October 9, 1997

Mossad And The JFK Assassination

In March, 1992, Illinois Representative Paul Findley said in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, “It is interesting – but not surprising – to note that in all the words written and uttered about the Kennedy assassination, Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned.”

Considering that the Mossad is quite possibly the most ruthless and efficient intelligence agency in the world, it is peculiar that they have never been scrutinized in relation to the Kennedy assassination, especially when practically every other entity in the world (short of Elvis impersonators) has been implicated. But that all changed in January, 1994 with the release of Michael Collins Piper’s Final Judgment. In this book, Piper says, “Israel’s Mossad was a primary (and critical) behind the scenes player in the conspiracy that ended the life of JFK. Through its own vast resources and through its international contacts in the intelligence community and in organized crime, Israel had the means, it had the opportunity, and it had the motive to play a major frontline role in the crime of the century – and it did.”

Their motive? Israel’s much touted Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, who ruled that country from its inception in 1948 until he resigned on June 16, 1963, was so enraged at John F. Kennedy for not allowing Israel to become a nuclear power that, Collins asserts, in his final days in office he commanded the Mossad to become involved in a plot to kill America’s president.

Ben-Gurion was so convinced that Israel’s very survival was in dire jeopardy that in one of his final letters to JFK he said, “Mr. President, my people have the right to exist, and this existence is in danger.”

In the days leading up to Ben-Gurion’s resignation from office, he and JFK had been involved in an unpublicized, contentious debate over the possibility of Israel getting nuclear capabilities. Their disagreement eventually escalated into a full-fledged war of words that was virtually ignored in the press. Ethan Bronner wrote about this secret battle between JFK and Ben-Gurion years later in a New York Times article on October 31, 1998, calling it a “fiercely hidden subject.” In fact, the Kennedy/Ben-Gurion conversations are still classified by the United States Government. Maybe this is the case because Ben-Gurion’s rage and frustration became so intense – and his power so great within Israel – that Piper contends it was at the center of the conspiracy to kill John Kennedy. This stance is supported by New York banker Abe Feinberg, who describes the situation as such: “Ben-Gurion could be vicious, and he had such a hatred of the old man [Joe Kennedy, Sr., JFK's father].” Ben-Gurion despised Joe Kennedy because he felt that not only was he an anti-Semite, but that he had also sided with Hitler during the 1930′s and 40′s. [We will touch upon this aspect of the story in an upcoming article entitled The CIA and Organized Crime: Two Sides of the Same Coin].

Anyway, Ben-Gurion was convinced that Israel needed nuclear weapons to insure its survival, while Kennedy was dead-set against it. This inability to reach an agreement caused obvious problems. One of them revolved around Kennedy’s decision that he would make America his top priority in regard to foreign policy, and not Israel! Kennedy planned to honor the 1950 Tripartite Declaration which said that the United States would retaliate against any nation in the Middle East that attacked any other country. Ben-Gurion, on the other hand, wanted the Kennedy Administration to sell them offensive weapons, particularly Hawk missiles.

The two leaders thus engaged in a brutal letter exchange, but Kennedy wouldn’t budge. Ben-Gurion, obsessed by this issue, slipped into total paranoia, feeling that Kennedy’s obstinance was a blatant threat to the very existence of Israel as a nation. Piper writes, “Ben-Gurion had devoted a lifetime creating a Jewish State and guiding it into the world arena. And, in Ben-Gurion’s eyes, John F. Kennedy was an enemy of the Jewish people and his beloved state of Israel.” He continues, “The ‘nuclear option’ was not only at the very core of Ben-Gurion’s personal world view, but the very foundation of Israel’s national security policy.”

Ben-Gurion was so preoccupied with obtaining nuclear weapons that on June 27, 1963, eleven days after resigning from office, he announced, “I do not know of any other nation whose neighbors declare that they wish to terminate it, and not only declare, but prepare for it by all means available to them. We must have no illusions that what is declared every day in Cairo, Damascus, and Iraq are just words. This is the thought that guides the Arab leaders … I am confident … that science is able to provide us with the weapons that will serve the peace and deter our enemies.”

Avner Cohen, in Israel and the Bomb, published by Columbia University Press, reinforces this sense of urgency by writing, “Imbued with lessons of the Holocaust, Ben-Gurion was consumed by fears of security … Anxiety about the Holocaust reached beyond Ben-Gurion to infuse Israel’s military thinking.” He further adds fuel to this point by pointing out, “Ben-Gurion had no qualms about Israel’s need for weapons of mass destruction,” and “Ben-Gurion’s world view and his decisive governing style shaped his critical role in instigating Israel’s nuclear progress.”

Kennedy, on the other hand, was adamant in his refusal to promote Israel’s ascension to the nuclear stage. Avener Cohen, in Israel and the Bomb, stresses, “No American president was more concerned with the danger of nuclear proliferation than John Fitzgerald Kennedy. He was convinced that the spread of nuclear weapons would make the world more dangerous and undermine U.S. interests.” Cohen continues at the end of this passage, “The only example Kennedy used to make this point was Israel.”

Realizing that Kennedy would not change his mind, Ben-Gurion decided to join forces with Communist China. Both countries were greatly interested in creating nuclear programs, and so began their secret joint dealings. Working in unison through intermediary Shaul Eisenberg, who was a partner of Mossad gun-runner and accountant Tibor Rosenbaum, Israel and China proceeded to develop their own nuclear capabilities without the knowledge of the United States.

If you find this scenario improbable, I strongly urge you to read Gordon Thomas’ excellent book, Seeds of Fire, where he exposes how the Mossad and CSIS (Chinese secret service) have conspired on many occasions to not only steal American military secrets, but to also doctor U.S. intelligence programs such as the Justice Department’s PROMISE software. This instance, I am afraid to say, is but the first where echoes of the JFK assassination can still be felt today reverberating through our post 9-11 world. The danger of Israel developing the Bomb in unison with China became a highly volatile situation, and was closely monitored by the CIA.

Intent on pursuing this path, the Israeli’s constructed a nuclear facility at Dimona. When Kennedy demanded that the U.S. inspect this plant, Ben-Gurion was so incensed that he erected another PHONY facility that held no evidence of nuclear research and development. (Does this scenario sound eerily familiar to the game we’re playing with Saddam Hussein in Iraq right now?) Fully aware of their shenanigans, though, JFK told Charles Bartlett, “The sons of bitches lie to me constantly about their nuclear capability.”

Avner Cohen, in Israel and the Bomb, reiterates this claim by saying that Ben-Gurion had taken the nuclear issue so closely to heart that he, “concluded that he could not tell the truth about Dimona to American leaders, not even in private.”

Dr. Gerald M. Steinberg, political science professor at Bar-Ilan University’s BESA Center for Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv, weighs in by saying, “Between 1961 and 1963, the Kennedy administration placed a great deal of pressure on Ben-Gurion in the effort to pressure for acceptance of international inspection of Dimona and Israeli abdication of their nuclear weapons. This pressure apparently did not alter Israeli policy, but it was a contributing factor to Ben-Gurion’s resignation in 1963.”

To convey how serious this situation had become in modern terms, look at what is happening in Iraq with United Nations security teams inspecting the royal palaces and bunkers for nuclear weapons and materials. This matter is so urgent that our nation is on the verge of war. Forty years earlier, the heat that JFK was placing on Ben-Gurion was equally as strong as what George Bush is laying on Saddam Hussein today.

In Israel and the Bomb, Avner Cohen reinforces this point. “To force Ben-Gurion to accept the conditions, Kennedy exerted the most useful leverage available to an American president in dealing with Israel: a threat that an unsatisfactory solution would jeopardize the U.S. government’s commitment to, and support of, Israel.”

The pressure on Ben-Gurion was so immense that he ended up leaving office. But Kennedy, in true pit-bull style, didn’t let up on Ben-Gurion’s successor, Levi Eshkol, as Avner Cohen reports. “Kennedy told Eshkol that the U.S. commitment and support of Israel ‘could be seriously jeopardized’ if Israel did not let the U.S. obtain ‘reliable information’ about its efforts in the nuclear field. Kennedy’s demands were unprecedented. They amounted, in effect, to an ultimatum.” Cohen concludes this thought by asserting, “Kennedy’s letter precipitated a near-crisis situation in Eshkol’s office.”

In the end, as we’re all aware, Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963; but less known is that China conducted its first nuclear test in October, 1964. What makes this event more profound is Piper’s claim that even though Israel said its first nuclear tests took place in 1979, they actually occurred in October, 1964 along with the Chinese! If this is true, other than August, 1945 when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, October 1964 may possibly be the most dangerous month in 20th century history.

Let’s return, though, to JFK’s assassination and the direct results of it in regard to the Jewish lobby, American foreign policy, and the militarization of Israel. To understand how powerful the Israeli lobby is in this country, venerable Senator J. William Fulbright told CBS Face the Nation on April 15, 1973, “Israel controls the U.S. Senate. The Senate is subservient, much too much; we should be more concerned about U.S. interests rather than doing the bidding of Israel. The great majority of the Senate of the U.S. – somewhere around 80% – is completely in support of Israel; anything Israel wants; Israel gets. This has been demonstrated time and again, and this has made [foreign policy] difficult for our government.”

Do you hear what Senator Fulbright said? This isn’t a crazy conspiracy theorist or a KKK anti-Semite. It’s a much-respected U.S. Senator saying that about 80% of the Senate is in Israel’s hip pocket. Adding clout to this argument is Rep. Paul Findley, who was quoted in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs in March, 1992, “During John Kennedy’s campaign for the presidency, a group of New York Jews had privately offered to meet his campaign expenses if he would let them set his Middle East policy. He did not agree … As the president, he provided only limited support of Israel.”

To understand how important Kennedy’s decisions were during his short-lived presidency, we need to look at the issue of campaign finance. Considering how influential the Israeli lobby is in the U.S. Senate (hearkening back to the words of Senator Fulbright), they had to have been enraged when President Kennedy genuinely wanted to cut the knees out from under the current campaign finance methods because it made politicians so reliant upon the huge cash inlays of special-interest groups. Regrettably, Kennedy did not have the time to implement this program, and to this day our political system is still monopolized by lobbyists from the very same special-interest groups. One can only imagine what changes would have occurred in regard to our foreign policy had Kennedy eradicated these vipers and blood-suckers from the halls of Congress.

Tragically, Kennedy’s ideas never came to fruition, and his heated battle with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion over whether Israel should be allowed to develop a nuclear program was ultimately lost. The reason why is that Lyndon Baines Johnson, who Kennedy intended to drop from his ticket in 1964 due to his extreme dislike for, had a complete reversal in foreign policy. As you will see, not only did Israel’s nuclear program move ahead unchecked; they also became the primary beneficiary of our foreign aid.

But this absolute turnaround would not have occurred if Kennedy would not have been assassinated. Up until LBJ became president, Kennedy dealt with the Middle East in a way that most benefited the U.S. His primary goal – and one which would most keep the peace – was a balance of power in the Middle East so that each and every nation would be secure. This decision adhered to the Tripartite Declaration which the U.S. signed in 1950. But under the Johnson administration, this fragile balance was overturned, and by 1967 – only four years after Kennedy’s assassination – the U.S. was Israel’s main weapons supplier, and OUR best interests were put well behind those of Israel!

As Michael Collins Piper writes: “The bottom line is this: JFK was adamantly determined to stop Israel from building the nuclear bomb. LBJ simply looked the other way. JFK’s death did indeed prove beneficial to Israel’s nuclear ambitions and the evidence proves it.”

Reuven Pedatzer, in a review of Avner Cohen’s Israel and the Bomb, in the Israeli Newspaper Ha’aretz on February 5, 1999 wrote, “The murder of American president John F. Kennedy brought to an abrupt end the massive pressure being applied by the U.S. administration on the government of Israel to discontinue their nuclear program.” He continues, “Kennedy made it quite clear to the Israeli Prime Minister that he would not under any circumstances agree to Israel becoming a nuclear state.” Pedatzer concludes, “Had Kennedy remained alive, it is doubtful whether Israel would today have a nuclear option,” and that, “Ben-Gurion’s decision to resign in 1963 was taken to a large extent against the background of the tremendous pressure that Kennedy was applying on him concerning the nuclear issue.”

If you’re still not convinced; how about some numbers? In Kennedy’s last fiscal budget year of 1964, Israeli aid was $40 million. In LBJ’s first budget of 1965, it soared to $71 million, and in 1966 more than tripled from two years earlier to $130 million! Plus, during Kennedy’s administration, almost none of our aid to Israel was military in nature. Instead, it was split equally between development loans and food assistance under the PL480 Program. Yet in 1965 under the Johnson administration, 20% of our aid to Israel was for the military, while in 1966, 71% was used for war-related materials.

Continuing in this same vein, in 1963 the Kennedy administration sold 5 Hawk missiles to Israel as part of an air-defense system. In 1965-66, though, LBJ laid 250 tanks on Israel, 48 Skyhawk attack aircrafts, plus guns and artillery which were all offensive in nature. If you ever wondered when the Israeli War Machine was created, this is it! LBJ was its father.

According to Stephen Green in Taking Sides: America’s Secret Relations with a Militant Israel, “The $92 million in military assistance provided in fiscal year 1966 was greater than the total of all official military aid provided to Israel cumulatively in all the years going back to the foundation of that nation in 1948.”

Green continues, “70% of all U.S. official assistance to Israel has been military. America has given Israel over $17 billion in military aid since 1946, virtually all of which – over 99% – has been provided since 1965.”

Can you see what’s happening here? Within two years of JFK’s assassination, Israel went from being a weak, outmatched member of the volatile Middle Eastern community that was not allowed to develop nuclear weapons to one that was well on its way to becoming a undeniable military force on the world stage. John Kennedy adamantly put his foot down and refused to allow Israel to develop a nuclear program, while LBJ bent over backward to facilitate and bolster them. Or, as Seymour Hersh wrote in The Samson Option, “By 1968, the president had no intention of doing anything to stop the Israeli bomb.”

The result of this shift in focus from the Kennedy to Johnson administration is, in my opinion, the PRIMARY reason behind our current troubles in the Middle East which culminated in the 9-11 attacks and our upcoming war with Iraq (and beyond). I have a great deal of confidence in this statement, for as Michael Collins Piper points out, here are the results of John F. Kennedy’s assassination:

1) Our foreign and military aid to Israel increased dramatically once LBJ became president.

2) Rather than trying to maintain a BALANCE in the Middle East, Israel suddenly emerged as the dominant force.

3) Since the LBJ administration, Israel has always had weaponry that was superior to any of its direct neighbors.

4) Due to this undeniable and obvious increase in Israel’s War Machine, a constant struggle has been perpetuated in the Middle East.

5) LBJ also allowed Israel to proceed with its nuclear development, resulting in them becoming the 6th largest nuclear force in the world.

6) Finally, our huge outlays of foreign aid to Israel (approximately $10 billion/year when all is said and done) has created a situation of never-ending attacks and retaliation in the Middle East, plus outright scorn and enmity against the U.S. for playing the role of Israel’s military enabler.
In Israel’s, and especially David Ben-Gurion’s eyes then, what were their alternatives – to remain weakened (or at least balanced) in relation to their neighbors and handcuffed by JFK’s refusal to bow to their will, or KILL the one man standing in their way to becoming dominant in the Middle East, the recipient of huge amounts of military aid, and one of the premier nuclear forces in the world? It’s something to think about. Also, while these thoughts are running through your head, ask yourself this question. If Kennedy, LBJ, and all subsequent administrations would have adhered to the 1950 Tripartite Declaration and did everything in their power to maintain balance in the Middle East instead of pushing Israel to the forefront, would our Towers have been attacked on 9-11, 2001, and would we be on the verge of a possibly catastrophic war today? It’s certainly something to ponder.

Source

Here are a few Examples and there are more this is just the tip of the Iceburg.

How the Mossad Tricked US into Bombing Libya

Operation Trojan was one of the Mossad’s greatest successes. It brought about the air strike on Libya that President Reagan had promised.

On the night of February 17-18, two Israeli missile boats, dropped off Mossad agents and they started transmitting fake transmissions.

By the end of March, the Americans were already intercepting messages broadcast by the Trojan, which was only activated during heavy communication traffic hours. Using the Trojan, the Mossad tried to make it appear that a long series of terrorist orders were being transmitted to various Libyan embassies around the world (or, as they were called by the Libyans, Peoples’ Bureaus). As the Mossad had hoped, the transmissions were deciphered by the Americans and construed as ample proof that the Libyans were active sponsors of terrorism. What’s more, the Americans pointed out, Mossad reports confirmed it.

*****************

On April 14, 1986, one hundred and sixty American aircraft dropped over sixty tons of bombs on Libya.

Related:

Trojan device in Tripoli, Libya

1986: US launches air strikes on Libya

We now know that they would start a war on purpose. They tricked President Reagan.

New Zealand jails Mossad men and breaks ties with Israel

In 2004

New Zealand imposed diplomatic sanctions on Israel today after two suspected Mossad agents were jailed by an Auckland court for illegally trying to obtain a New Zealand passport.

What we now know is they will try to get a passport form another country.

Mossad hardman in first foreign kill

ISRAEL’S foreign intelligence service, Mossad, has carried out what is believed to be its first assassination on foreign soil in more than seven years, signaling a radical shift in operations under the hard line general who runs it.

Meir Dagan, 58, has been determined to breathe new fire into the once formidable organisation since his appointment by Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, five months ago.

Last weekend he claimed his first success: Abu Mohammed al-Masri, head of Al-Qaeda in Lebanon, was killed in a car bomb detonated by Mossad as he arrived at a mosque.

What we now know is they will use a car bomb in another country to kill.

A botched assassination attempt by seven Israeli agents and the rise to power of Khalid Mishal

In March 1997, disappointed over the latest reversals in the peace process in the Middle East, King Hussein of Jordan wrote a letter to Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister of ten months’ standing, that must figure as one of the saddest documents in the history of the Arab–Israeli conflict. Having openly endorsed Netanyahu in the Israeli general election of May 1996 – a disastrous miscalculation – Hussein felt a deep sense of betrayal. Netanyahu had wasted no opportunity in the ensuing months to disparage the peace process begun in Oslo in 1993, and to assert a combative line on new settlements in the Occupied Territories.

************************

The undisputed leader of Hamas today, barricaded with his family inside a fortified office complex on the outskirts of Damascus, is Khalid Mishal. The racy title of McGeough’s book sums up his central thesis, that Mishal came to power largely as the result of a botched assassination attempt by seven Mossad agents in September 1997.

Eschewing the more familiar air-to-ground missile, car bomb or silent bullet in the night, Israel’s secret service opted for a poison that would supposedly result in death a day or so later, while leaving no clues for the autopsy. Stepping out of his car on the way to the office one morning, Mishal encountered a couple of men posing as tourists. One caught his attention by noisily pulling open a soda can; the other leapt up and squirted a deadly toxin into his ear. At this point, however, Mossad’s plan went awry. A bodyguard chased and caught the two assailants, who were handed over to the police. Mishal himself was taken to hospital in time to halt, and eventually reverse, the usually fatal after-effects. And four Mossad accomplices were run to ground in the local Israeli embassy.


Canadian Passport Abuse

But Canada’s involvement is significant enough to have chilled diplomatic relations between Ottawa and Israel. It resulted in the recall “for consultations” late last week of Canada’s ambassador to Israel, an official signal of displeasure proposed by Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy and sanctioned by Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, both of whom, according to a senior Ottawa adviser, “are mightily pissed off” at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government in Jerusalem.

Passports are the reason for Canada’s official ire: the fact that Meshal’s assailants were masquerading as a pair of Canadian tourists. While details remain unclear, it appears that the two men who attacked the Hamas leader had entered Jordan along with three male companions, all of them travelling on tourist visas stamped into forged or doctored Canadian passports. Despite Israeli denials, there is little doubt the five were part of a team sent into Jordan by Israel’s secret services – Mossad in all probability – to assassinate Meshal.

On the face of it, Axworthy seems to have a point. It is, however, a connection that might never have come to light had it not been for the bulldog tenacity of a single individual, Mohammed Abu Seif. He was one of Meshal’s two bodyguards that morning in Amman when the Hamas leader was sprayed with what appears to have been a time-delayed nerve gas, an insidious poison that within 24 hours prompted an acute form of respiratory failure. It could very well have cost Meshal his life.

The following year, 50 blank passports were stolen from the vault of the Canadian Embassy in Vienna. One of those documents, traced by the registration number, turned up a year later in Nicosia, Cyprus. It was left behind by a member of a Mossad team that had detonated explosives under the hotel bed of a sleeping Palestinian guerrilla leader, killing him instantly.

Not least in Israel. The bungled assassination attempt in Jordan is not the first time that Israel’s secret service has been caught manipulating Canadian passports. In 1973, Israeli agents travelling on doctored Canadian passports botched another execution attempt in Lillehammer, Norway. A team from Mossad, the Jewish state’s external security service, killed Ahmed Bouchiki, mistaking the Moroccan-born waiter for the Palestinian who planned the murder of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. One member of that hit squad, arrested by Norwegian police, was found to be using the identity of Canadian Patricia Roxborough, a legal secretary whose passport had been stolen months earlier from the desk of her Montreal office.

In addition to outright theft, Israel’s clandestine services have other means to obtain Canadian documents. It is an open secret that new immigrants to the Jewish state, especially from Canada, are sometimes encouraged to donate passports, both valid and expired, to unidentified bureaucrats in the interests of what is euphemistically known as “the security of the state.”

As for the forgeries, Mossad defector Victor Ostrovsky, in the 1991 book he co-authored with Canadian journalist Claire Hoy, By Way of Deception, described a secret Israeli factory engaged in the manufacture of forged passports, including a batch of more than 1,000 Canadian documents. Israel’s spies might be embarrassed by the revelation.

What we know is that Israel doesn’t keep their word. This is of course nothing new.

We also know that Mossad would use a a deadly toxin to assassinate someone. Their agents even used Canadian forged passports.  So were they going to have Canadians blamed for trying to assassinate Meshal.

To add to this

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu authorized assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh

PM approved Dubai assassination in early January of

February 23 2010

By Yossi Melman, Ofer Aderet, Liel Kyzer, Barak Ravid and Avi Issacharoff

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu authorized in early January the assassination of Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, according to a report published in the Sunday Times. Interpole is looking for 11 suspects. They also used fake passports.

Mossad commits crimes and if they get caught other countries get blamed. Well how many times have they done that one has to wonder?

The Lavon Affair

Israel and Terror in Egypt

The Lavon affair (“Esek Habish” – the shameful affair) was one of the most bizarre chapters in Israeli history.  In 1954, the Israeli secret service set up a spy ring in Egypt, with the purpose of blowing up US and British targets. The operation was code-named “Susanah.” The terrorist hits were to be blamed on the regime of Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser, with the purpose of alienating the US and Britain from Egypt and Nasser and somehow preventing Egyptian nationalization of the Suez canal. The ring was discovered. Strict censorship ensured that that the Israeli public officially knew little or nothing of the affair for many years. Names were not mentioned, the affair was called “Esek Bish” – the affair of shame, and key protagonists were referred to as “X” and “the third man.” Unofficially and through leaks, most people knew at least the outlines of the affair.

A short list of Assassinations

In the deadly shadow war between Arab and Jew in the Middle East, Israel’s secret services have demonstrated a ruthless and inventive mastery of the black arts of kidnap and assassination. Among the many casualties attributed to the long arm of Israeli vengeance:

1979

Ali Hassan Salameh, architect of the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes during the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, is killed on a Beirut street by a remote-controlled car bomb.

1988

Khalil al-Wazir, aka Abu Jihad, the PLO’s second-in-command, is shot to death in his beachfront office in Tunis by a squad of seaborne Israeli commandos.

1989

Sheik Abdel Karim Obeid, spiritual leader of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah, is kidnapped in south Lebanon and transported to an Israeli prison.

1992

Hezbollah guerrilla leader Abbas Musawi is ambushed and killed in Israeli-occupied south Lebanon.

1994

Islamic Jihad activist and journalist Hani Abed dies when his car explodes in the Gaza Strip.

1995

Islamic Jihad leader Fathi al-Shiqaqi dies on a busy street in Sliema, Malta, when he is shot five times in the head by two assailants on a passing motorcycle.

1996

Yahiya Ayyash, known in the Hamas movement as “the engineer” for his skill in bomb-making, is decapitated when 50 g of explosives planted in his cellular telephone detonates as he makes a call.

Israel’s Failed Assassination Attempt On US Ambassador John Gunther Deanís In Lebanon in 1979

Had Mossad, Israel’s secret intelligence organization, succeeded, it would have been the perfect crime – the crime of the century. The plan was breathtaking in concept: to assassinate the American ambassador to Lebanon, in Lebanon, with American weapons, intended for Israeli’s defense only. Everything about it would point to Lebanon as the culprit.

Jewish Terrorists Assassinate U.N. Peacekeeper Count Folke Bernadotte

It was 47 years ago, Sept. 17, 1948, when Jewish terrorists assassinated Count Folke Bernadotte of Sweden as he sought to bring peace to the Middle East. His three-car convoy had been stopped at a small improvised roadblock in Jewish-controlled West Jerusalem when two gunmen began shooting out the tires of the cars and a third gunman thrust a Schmeisser automatic pistol through the open back window of Bernadotte’s Chrysler. The 54-year-old diplomat, sitting on the right in the back, was hit by six bullets and died instantly. A French officer sitting next to Bernadotte was killed accidentally.

The we have this.

Assassinations in Gaza and West Bank/ a rather long list

The Zionist Terror Network

Jewish Defense League, Tagar/Betar  are in fact terrorist organizations.

Mossad, is

responsible for setting up Jewish defense groups, called “frames,” or misgerot, all over the world, now including some parts of the United States, where anti-Semitism is regarded as a threat…The main job is to help the leaders of Jewish communities outside Israel plan for their own security. Part of this is done through the hets va-keshet, or “bow and arrow,” Israel’s paramilitary youth brigades.
…Often youths from other countries are brought over [to Israel] to spend the summer learning about security, picking up such skills as completing obstacle courses, pitching tents, and learning how to use a sniper rifle and Uzi assault rifle. Still others learn upgraded security skills, such as how to build a slick, for hiding weapons or documents, when and how to do security checks, as well as fundamentals of investigation and intelligence gathering.

You have your bombings,  you have your arson and the list goes on and on.  They will attack any person or country.

It is a very long list of crimes and terrorist acts they have committed.

They even attack those who question the Holocaust.

As we all well know many of things, we were told were false. Many of the records have been open to examine and as it turns out many of the new findings confirm much of the Official story, are in fact false.

Israel provides weapons for the many “Jewish defense groups,”

Israel encourages their hatred, terrorist activity and violence.

One of the early assassinations was:
When the Zionists Killed Yaakov Yisrael Dehan on July 1, 1924
The young martyr, Dr. Yaakov Yisrael Dehan was murdered on July 1, 1924. He was a man who devoted all his energies and the best years of his life to saving the remnant of loyal Jews, and to promote peace with the veteran Arab residents of the Holy Land. Through his knowledge of politics and diplomacy, Dehan contributed much to crystallizing an independent position for Orthodox Jewry unaffiliated with the Zionist leadership.
At a time when the first followers of the Zionist movement began streaming into the Holy Land in large numbers, defiling the holiness of the land, and by virtue of their idiotic ideas began to work to expel the Arabs who had been living there for centuries in order to establish a Zionist state.

The Zionists first approached the British authorities by pretending to present themselves as the representatives of the Jewish nation, who desired to establish a “national home” without any regard whatsoever of the fact that the vast majority of the Jewish People opposed Zionism in those days. However, through their various contacts, the Zionists managed to bring about the Balfour Declaration (known among our rabbis of the time as the Baal Peor Declaration – a pun referring to the idolatry mentioned in the Bible), based on the “right” of the Jews to establish a state in Palestine, and ultimately the state itself to our great misfortune.
USS Liberty

Israel attacked the USS Liberty using UNMARKED AIRCRAFT. This is the single fact which proves Israel knew exactly who they were attacking. Israel’s story is that they thought USS Liberty was an Egyptian ship and therefore a legitimate target of war. Were that true, there would be no reason to attack a supposedly Egyptian ship with unmarked aircraft. The only possible reason to use unmarked aircraft to attack the ship is that Israel knew it was an American ship and intended to sink it, then to blame the attack on Egypt.

The cover-up of the USS Liberty

Despite the overwhelming evidence that Israel had attacked the ship and killed the American servicemen deliberately, the Johnson administration and Congress covered up the entire incident. Johnson was planning to run for president the following year and needed the support of pro-Israel voters.

We now know they would perpetrate a False Flag.

Would Johnson have covered up who Assassinated J. F. Kennedy just to get into power? Now one has to wonder.

Mossad agent may testify in Lockerbie case
Libya-Israel, Politics, 8/11/1999

Former Mossad agent Victor Ostroviski has proposed to be a witness in the defense of the two Libyans suspected of being involved in the Lockerbie incident of 1988.

The London based al-Sharq al-Awsat daily quoted Ostroviski as saying that he has evidence which will prove innocent the two Libyans, Abdul Bassit al-Miqrahi and al-Amin Khaleifa Fahima. He indicated a role played by the Israeli foreign intelligence in the explosion, which resulted in killing 270 persons.

The paper added that Ostroviski told the defense lawyer for the two suspects that he maintained firm relations with former colleagues, who told him the secrets of this crisis and leaked information to him that might cause great embarrassment for Israel.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat said that Otroviski, who will give his testimony through a sattelite television channel, asked a British army officer who held a meeting with him just a short time after the Lockerbie incident to contact an officer in the Mossad who had told Ostroviski that the Israeli security system had a hand in the Lockerbie incident.  Source

Bomb in San Lázaro, Mexico

The two arrested Israelis were also found to be carrying Pakistani passports.

There  was uproar in the Chamber of Deputies, provoked by the arrested of two individuals, presumed to be of Israeli origin, who were carrying a high power gun and an attaché case with nine grenades, three magazines with 53 cartridges and C-4 explosives, considered to be highly powerful.

Obviously they were going to blow up something. Maybe make another car bomb of blow up a building. And again the Passports.

Israel Has Long Spied on US, Say Officials

We know they spied on the US.

How Israel Wages War in Plain Sight

From 1981-1985, Israeli agent Jonathan Pollard stole 360 cubic feet of classified U.S. intelligence documents on Soviet arms shipments, Pakistani nuclear weapons, Libyan air defense systems and other data sought by Tel Aviv. With oversight by only a few case officers (katsas), Israeli agents routinely manage sophisticated operations with the help of pre-staged assets and a network of sayanim.

Jonathan Jay Pollard, an intelligence analyst working in the U.S. Naval Investigative Service’s Anti-Terrorist Alert Center, systematically stole highly sensitive security secrets from almost every major intelligence-gathering agency in the United States. Over the course of eighteen months in the mid-1980s, he took and subsequently sold to Israel more than one million pages of classified material, enough to fill a six-by-ten-foot room stacked six feet high. No other spy in the history of the United States has stolen so many secrets, so highly classified, in such a short period of time. Ronald J. Olive, the author of this book, was the assistant special agent in charge of counterintelligence in the Washington office of the Naval Investigative Service who led the whirlwind investigation against Pollard. Olive interrogated Pollard and garnered the confession that led to his arrest in November 1985 and eventual life sentence.

Stewart Nozette, 52, a former Nasa scientist

He worked on the Reagan administration’s Star Wars missile shield programme, faces a lengthy criminal complaint.

A leading American scientist who once had access to top-secret materials related to national defence and atomic research appeared in court yesterday after being charged with attempting to pass classified materials to Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency.

Two Jewish Defense League leaders charged in bomb plot

Federal authorities Wednesday charged two leaders of the Jewish Defense League with conspiring to blow up Arab and Muslim institutions in southern California, including the offices of Arab-American congressman Rep. Darrell Issa.

Irv Rubin and Earl Krugel were taken into federal custody following late Tuesday raids by members of an antiterrorism task force, said Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for U.S. Attorney John S. Gordon.

“When you target innocents based on religious or political affiliation or belief, we consider that terrorist activity,” Gordon said.

We now know that terrorist activities could and have been carried out by some in the Jewish community. There is no difference in this then Mossad has done.

False Flag Attacks in Argentina: 1992 and 1994

Added October 17 2009

Coinciding with Thierry Meyssan’s earlier conclusions and with those of other Argentinian investigators [*], economist and globalization expert Adrian Salbuchi chronicles the events that shook Buenos Aires in 1992 and 1994, contouring their unmistakable false-flag profile and connecting them to a wider pattern of similar “terrorist attacks”.

Since Sept. 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, either under the new patriot anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations.

A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States.

There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9/11 attacks, but investigators suspect that they Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are “tie-ins.” But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, “evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.”

Prior to Sept. 11, as many as 140 other Israelis had been detained or arrested in a secretive and sprawling investigation into suspected espionage by Israelis in the United States.

So this makes one wonder if they had any connection to 9/11.

Odigo says workers were warned of attack

Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack.

Micha Macover, CEO of the company, said the two workers received the messages and immediately after the terror attack informed the company’s management, which immediately contacted the Israeli security services, which brought in the FBI.

“I have no idea why the message was sent to these two workers, who don’t know the sender. It may just have been someone who was joking and turned out they accidentally got it right. And I don’t know if our information was useful in any of the arrests the FBI has made,” said Macover. Odigo is a U.S.-based company whose headquarters are in New York, with offices in Herzliya.

As an instant messaging service, Odigo users are not limited to sending messages only to people on their “buddy” list, as is the case with ICQ, the other well-known Israeli instant messaging application.

Odigo usually zealously protects the privacy of its registered users, said Macover, but in this case the company took the initiative to provide the law enforcement services with the originating Internet Presence address of the message, so the FBI could track down the Internet Service Provider, and the actual sender of the original message

“OK so now we just have to wonder”?

Ex-staffer at Dimona nuclear reactor says made to drink uranium

Mordechai Vanunu also reveals secret weapons production.

So we now know they were making WMD.

Perpetrated by Mossad, they are Israels  “Acts of Terrorism” and the following legally applies to them. International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism

So now that we know all that ,we will go back to 1963. The old saying if we knew then what we know now, things may have been very different. So now who would benefit most from Kennedy’s death.

In the winter of 1963, Lyndon Baines Johnson invited John F. Kennedy to make a tour of Texas. While in Dallas on on 22nd November, Kennedy was assassinated and Johnson was immediately sworn in as president on on Air Force One while he travelled back to Washington.

As noted above

1) Our foreign and military aid to Israel increased dramatically once LBJ became president.

2) Rather than trying to maintain a BALANCE in the Middle East, Israel suddenly emerged as the dominant force.

3) Since the LBJ administration, Israel has always had weaponry that was superior to any of its direct neighbors.

4) Due to this undeniable and obvious increase in Israel’s War Machine, a constant struggle has been perpetuated in the Middle East.

5) LBJ also allowed Israel to proceed with its nuclear development, resulting in them becoming the 6th largest nuclear force in the world.

6) Finally, our huge outlays of foreign aid to Israel (approximately $10 billion/year when all is said and done) has created a situation of never-ending attacks and retaliation in the Middle East, plus outright scorn and enmity against the U.S. for playing the role of Israel’s military enabler.

Attacck of USS Liberty ignored by Johnson

Israel is a happy camper.

Tonkin Gulf Lie Launched Vietnam War

The weapons industry are happy campers.

Amazingly enough he didn’t launch Operation Northwood.  Something Kennedy refused to do.

President John F.Kennedy, The Federal Reserve And Executive Order 11110

On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy’s order gave the Treasury the power “to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury’s vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. In all, Kennedy brought nearly $4.3 billion in U.S. notes into circulation. The ramifications of this bill are enormous.

With the stroke of a pen, Mr. Kennedy was on his way to putting the Federal Reserve Bank of New York out of business.

****************

A number of “Kennedy bills” were indeed issued – the author has a five dollar bill in his possession with the heading “United States Note” – but were quickly withdrawn after Kennedy’s death. According to information from the Library of the Comptroller of the Currency, Executive Order 11,110 remains in effect today, although successive administrations beginning with that of President Lyndon Johnson apparently have simply ignored it and instead returned to the practice of paying interest on Federal Reserve notes. Today we continue to use Federal Reserve Notes, and the deficit is at an all-time high.

The Federal Reserve was also given back the powers to make money.

They are happy campers.

So who came out on top? Seems a few did.

Maybe the Warren Commission Report is a farce.

When you looking at a crime one must have a motive.

Maybe Lee Harvey Oswald was right he was just a pasty.

He was murdered by Jacob Rubenstein (Jack Ruby) Jack Ruby shot Oswald in basement carpark of Dallas police dept. On November 24 1963, after Kennedy died November 22 1963.

Why would Ruby kill Oswald? What would his motive be?

Had Oswald made it to court they may have found,  he was not guilty. Dead men don’t talk.

Neither one had anything to gain.

Somehow it all seems rather fishy.

Vanunu’s comments that there are “near-certain indications” that Israel was involved in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy support the thesis of Michael Collins Piper, presented in his book Final Judgment, that Israeli agents played a key role in the murder.

AFP asked Vanunu to explain his comments about Israeli involvement in the murder of President Kennedy.

“My view is that Kennedy was assassinated because of his strong opposition to [Israeli prime minister] Ben Gurion,” Vanunu said.

At the time, Ben Gurion was working to create a nuclear arsenal for Israel.

The group that was involved with Ben Gurion in developing and protecting Israel’s nuclear arsenal “was behind the assassination of Kennedy,” Vanunu said.

As Piper documents in Final Judgment, Kennedy’s resistance to Israel becoming a nuclear-armed state led to increasing hostility between the two leaders until Ben Gurion resigned in June 1963. Kennedy had realized that the Israelis were producing illegal nuclear weapons from the nuclear reactor given to Israel in 1959 under the “Atoms for Peace” program. Source

Israeli Connections to 9/11

A Jewish Defector Warns America He tell a mighty educational story. Also a couple of articles about the mass killing of 100,000 Jewish children in Israel

Israel and US were behind the Georgian Attacks on South Ossetia and Abkhazia

To Israel Hamas is not al-Qaida

UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection

Israel declares the shooting of American activist, Tristan Anderson to be an “act of war”

President John F.Kennedy, The Federal Reserve And Executive Order 11110

FEDERAL RESERVE OWNERS AND HISTORY

To Israel Hamas is not al-Qaida

The two are radically different – the position of the democratically elected Hamas is about land, not religion, creed or race.

September 21 2009

By Anas Altikriti

The exiled Democratically elected Hamas leader, Khaled MeshalThe exiled Hamas leader, Khaled Meshal, speaking at a press conference in Damascus in 2008. Photograph: Louai Beshara/AFP/Getty

The New Statesman’s interview with Khaled Meshal, the Hamas leader, was one of the most significant interviews with the leading figure in a movement that has been demonised and excommunicated by most of the western world and its media. The fact that Meshal realises that his words will be scrutinised by his allies and supporters as closely as his adversaries confirms that he speaks of the official position of Hamas on a number of crucial issues which the pro-Israel propaganda apparatus has managed to manipulate for so long.

Arguably, the most important assertion made in the interview, conducted by Ken Livingstone, is that in which Meshal clearly stated that the Palestinian struggle was anything but a conflict between Muslims and the Jewish people. He insisted that the Palestinians were fighting against the occupier who had dispossessed them of their homes and lands, regardless of religion, creed or race. He also went on to confirm that the concept of coexistence was largely present in the Palestinian psyche, and that genocide, as suffered by Jews in Europe (and which he described as “horrible and criminal”) was alien not only to the Palestinians but to the inhabitants of the region as a whole.

His statement that Jews, Muslims and Christians had for centuries lived side by side – implying there was nothing intrinsic to prevent this happening again in the future – is crucial. This mirrors Ismail Haniyeh’s response, after he became prime minister in 2006, to the question of whether the Palestinians wished to throw the Jews into the sea: “Does a besieged people that is waiting breathlessly for a ship to come from the sea want to throw the Jews into the ocean? Our conflict is not with the Jews, our problem is with the occupation.”

This unequivocal stand is one that ought to be welcomed by Jewish communities around the world. Rather than the fear-mongering tactics of the Israeli media machine, particularly during the Gaza attack earlier this year, warning Jews of imminent attacks against them and their facilities, Meshal was sending a clear message of assurance that the Palestinian struggle was political rather than religious and about real political grievances and not against the Jewish people per se. This comes after Meshal had himself publicly rejected any attack committed anywhere in the world which exploited the premise of the Palestinian struggle.

His comments on democracy were equally enlightening. He explained that since the Palestinian people included the entire political, religious and ideological spectrums, Hamas would abide by the outcome of their vote, respect the rights of different faiths and political views, and refrain from imposing Islamic law against the wishes of the people. This position has been condemned by al-Qaida and the leading Salafi-jihadi theologian Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi who stated that they and Hamas shared “neither ideology nor doctrine”.

Meshal’s interview was denounced by Foreign Office minister Ivan Lewis on grounds that would equally exclude the government from talking to Israel were it not for the double standards applied to Palestine and the Middle East. Indeed, the very fact that Ivan Lewis should be made a minister with responsibility for the Middle East, given his clear bias as a former deputy leader of the Labour Friends of Israel, is a sad indication of how little interest it displays in convincing people of any kind of fairness in its approach to this part of the world.

The British government led the way in proscribing Hamas when the Islamic movement won the majority of seats in the Palestinian parliament in January 2006. More recently it is reported that the British government has been heavily involved in training and supporting the security forces of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, which have been accused of imprisoning, torturing and physically abusing members of Hamas and other political factions. While finding time to condemn an interview in a weekly magazine, neither Ivan Lewis nor the British government as a whole has accepted the finding of the authoritative UN report on Gaza authored by a committee led by a South African judge well known for his support for Israel, which condemned Israel for war crimes and possibly even crimes against humanity in Gaza.

A few weeks ago in Oxford, the foreign secretary, David Miliband, spoke promisingly on the Palestinian issue, making clear that al-Qaida and Hamas were quite different. On that he was right. When the Twin Towers were attacked in September 2001, the Palestinian intifada was at its peak and people around the world were gripped by the resolve and tenacity of the Palestinian people. Visiting South Africa at the time, I found most universities had unions supporting the Palestinian struggle and comparing it to their own successful struggle against apartheid.

However, one immediate reaction to the collapse of the towers and the death of almost 3,000 Americans was the mobilisation of the Israeli propaganda machine which claimed that the fight it was engaged in on the streets of Palestinian towns and villages was the same as that which the US and its people had horrifically come face to face with. The message was that Hamas, which was in the forefront of the Palestinian struggle, was one and the same as al-Qaida, and that their persecution of Hamas was simply part of the global war on terror. The radical different policies and methods of Hamas and al-Qaida, not least the refusal of Hamas to take up arms outside Palestine, were dismissed.

Even the most superficial examination exposes these lies. Al-Qaida has four main features: it has called for a “global war on the Crusaders and Jews“; it sees any target anywhere around the world that serves its cause as legitimate; it dismisses democracy as an affront to Islam and a satanic system of rule; and it believes in enforcing Sharia law in all Muslim countries, if not beyond.

As Gideon Levy, a columnist for the popular Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz, explains in the New Statesman, Hamas is totally different. In fact, Hamas supports democracy, is the democratically elected majority representative of the Palestinian people and takes up arms solely within Palestine because there is no alternative against an illegal occupying power that confiscates its people’s lands and destroys their livelihoods. In similar circumstances, as Israeli leaders have themselves admitted, any people in the world would do the same.

It is high time that we act assertively to resolve the 61-year Palestinian tragedy and end the ongoing crisis. It is time for the British government to stop discrediting itself by blatant double standards and to listen to many, including the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, and to recognise and speak directly to those whom the Palestinian people have chosen to represent them: Hamas.

Source

People should be allowed to elect who they want to represent them.

The West and Europe should be ashamed of themselves.

PA minister accuses Israel of neglecting prisoners’ health Plus two very good reports on the way Israel forces Palistinians to plead Guilty to crimes they didn’t commit

UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection

US-NATO Using Military Might To Control World Energy Resources

Pentagon’s Global Mission To Secure Oil And Gas Supplies

By Rick Rozoff

September 22, 2009
Stop NATO

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s 2009 Year Book documented that international military expenditures for 2008 reached $1.464 trillion. The denomination in dollars is germane as the United States accounted for 41.5 percent of the world total.

Earlier this month the Congressional Research Service in the U.S. reported that American weapons sales abroad reached $37.8 billion, or 68.4 percent of all global arms transactions. The next largest weapons supplier was Italy at $3.7 billion, less than one-tenth the U.S. amount. Russia was third at $3.5 billion. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, however, asserted that Germany had superseded Britain and France and become the world’s third largest weapons exporter.

Western nations in general and the U.S. overwhelmingly among them dominate the global arms market.

21st century weaponry is daily more technologically advanced, more linked with computer networks and satellite communications, and progressively approaching a blurring of conventional and strategic, terrestrial and space-based capabilities.

And in the U.S. and allied nations the notion of so-called preemptive warfare has advanced precariously to include cyber and satellite attacks that can cripple a targeted nation’s communications, control and air defense centers, thus rendering it both helpless and toothless: Not able to fend off attacks and unable to retaliate against or even forestall them with a secure deterrent force.

The vast preponderance of American and other NATO states’ arms are sold to nations neither in North America and Europe nor on their peripheries.

They are sold to nations like Saudi Arabia, India, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Egypt, Taiwan, South Korea, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Colombia, Kuwait, the Philippines, Morocco and other Western client states and military outposts far removed from the much-vaunted Euro-Atlantic space.

The weapons along with the military technicians, trainers and advisers that inevitably accompany them are spread throughout nations in geostrategically vital areas of the world, near large oil and natural gas reserves and astride key shipping lanes and choke points. In many instances Western-fueled arms buildups are accelerating in nations bordering Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela. Geopolitics in its most transparent, cynical and brutal manifestation.

The growing sales of Western arms in the Persian Gulf, the South Caucasus, South America (Chile and Colombia most pronouncedly), Africa, Far East Asia and the South Pacific (Australia in the first instance) are an integral element of American and general Western plans to gain access to and domination over world energy resources.

The campaign is not limited to efforts to muscle into nations and regions rich in oil and natural gas (and uranium), nor to employing fair means or foul, peaceful or otherwise, to seize the commanding heights of the international energy market.

The overarching objective is to control the ownership, transport and consumption of energy worldwide. To determine who receives oil and natural gas, through which routes and at which prices. And to dictate what the political and military quid pro quo will be for being invited to join a U.S.-dominated international energy transportation and accessibility network.

Those who are allowed to exploit, sell and transit hydrocarbons to the Western and ultimately world market are levied for a handsome share of their energy-derived revenues for unprecedented acquisition of arms and for the stationing of U.S. and other NATO states’ military forces on their soil. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Azerbaijan and Georgia are salient examples. The last two-named nations have increased their military budgets by well over 1,000 percent in the first case and by over 3,000 percent in the second in the span of a few years.

A United Press International report of August 25, 2009 estimated that Middle Eastern nations would purchase $100 billion worth of arms over the next five years, with the lion’s share going to the oil-rich Western client states of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.

There are six major areas in the world that the United States and its allies have targeted in history’s largest scramble for hydrocarbons and, it’s important to remember, against a recent backdrop of diminishing energy consumption, plunging prices and both the discovery and presumption of oil and natural gas reserves hitherto unexploited.

They are the Persian Gulf, the southern rim of the Caribbean Basin, the Gulf of Guinea off the coast of Western Africa, the Caspian Sea, the Arctic Circle, and the Antarctic Ocean and adjoining parts of the South Atlantic Ocean.

The first two were the private preserves of Washington and Western Europe until the Iranian revolution of 1979 in the first example and in the second the election of Hugo Chavez as president of Venezuela in 1998 and subsequent developments in that country and in nearby Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua and El Salvador.

South American oil and gas are no longer available to Washington on its own terms. Though Venezuelan and Ecuadoran officials have voiced the suspicion that the U.S. has recently acquired the use of seven new military bases in neighboring Colombia in part to seize the region’s energy resources.

The U.S. belatedly compensated for the loss of Iran after the overthrow of its proxy, Shah Reza Pahlavi, thirty years ago by invading neighboring Iraq in 2003.

The announcement of the Carter Doctrine in January of 1980, which bluntly affirmed that the U.S. would wage war for control of Persian Gulf energy resources and by extension those in other parts of the world, codified then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s threat five years earlier to go to war over oil after the Arab petroleum boycott of 1973-1974.

President Carter’s State of the Union address in 1980 included the following comments:

“This situation demands careful thought, steady nerves, and resolute action, not only for this year but for many years to come. It demands collective efforts to meet this new threat to security in the Persian Gulf and in Southwest Asia. It demands the participation of all those who rely on oil from the Middle East….Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.”

The reference to an outside force at the time was the Soviet Union, much nearer the Persian Gulf than the United States. It was later used against a nation in the Gulf, Iraq in 1991, and now is aimed at Iran, another Persian Gulf country.

With the breakup of the Soviet Union in the same year that the U.S. and its NATO and Gulf allies first applied the Carter Doctrine, 1991, areas that for several decades had been off limits to the West now became open frontiers for a new oil rush. The Black Sea and Caspian Sea regions most immediately.

The Gulf of Guinea, where America is planning to soon import 25 percent of all its oil – high-grade crude shipped straight across the Atlantic Ocean on tankers – is the center of plans going back to the beginning of this century for what is now Africa Command (AFRICOM), the U.S.’s first new regional command since Central Command (CENTCOM), which itself was set up in 1983 as an upgrade of the Carter administration’s Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force in the Middle East, and the NATO Response Force.

In addition to securing West African oil, U.S. and NATO military expansion in the region also aims at denying it to nations like China and Russia. The practice of acquiring oil wells abroad and of denying them to competitors played no small role in triggering the two world wars of the last century.

The Arctic oil and natural gas bonanza is arguably among the main world developments of the new millennium and an analogous situation obtains in the Antarctic and South Atlantic Oceans.

Three news reports of the past week, one American and two Russian, provide an idea of the magnitude of what is at stake.

On September 17 United Press International ran a feature called “Amid Africa’s oil boom, U.S. binds ties” which included these observations:

“Potentially major oil strikes announced by an American-led consortium and a British company in West Africa have bolstered the region’s reputation as the world’s hottest energy zone.

“It has also become the focus of the U.S. military’s global mission to protect America’s energy supplies….”

The “U.S. military’s global mission to protect America’s energy supplies” is a phrase that warrants being pondered deliberately and within historical perspective. Even the bellicose brusqueness of Kissinger’s war-for-oil advocacy and the Carter Doctrine pale in comparison to the strategic scope of what is now underway.

The same article added these details, pertaining to both ends of the African continent:

“The Texas-based Anadarko Petroleum Corp. said Wednesday its deepwater Venus 1B well off the coast of Sierra Leone had hit paydirt and formed one of two ‘bookends’ 700 miles apart across two prospective basins that extend into waters controlled by Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire and Ghana.

“These could each contain 150 million to 1 billion barrels of oil, according to Anadarko’s CEO Al Walker.

“One of Anadarko’s consortium partners, Tullow Oil of Britain, which has a vast array of licenses in Africa, recently announced a new potentially important discovery in its Ngassa field in Uganda.”

The United Press International report sums up the situation in a single effective sentence: “In the scramble for new oil reserves as the planet’s older fields become depleted, the U.S. military has become a predominant force in U.S.-African relations.”

A billion barrels of oil is not an insignificant figure, yet far more is being fought over in an area where there is a serious rival with one of the world’s two major nuclear arsenals and strategic nuclear triads.

The Voice of Russia on September 15 revealed that “British Petroleum, Europe’s second largest oil company, estimates that the Arctic Ocean may hold around 200 billion barrels of oil resources, about a half of the world’s prospective hydrocarbons. This is the main reason behind a sharp surge of interest in the Arctic ‘oil pie.’”

According to a recent estimate by the Oil and Gas Journal, the world’s largest petroleum exporter, Saudi Arabia, possesses approximately 267 billion barrels of proven oil reserves. The Arctic Ocean, whose reserves have yet to be explored in any thorough manner, may be home to even more.

In May the U.S. Geological Survey released the results of a study on the Arctic which estimated that 30 percent of the world’s undiscovered natural gas reserves and 13 percent of its oil may be in the Arctic Circle.

If the British Petroleum figure cited above is closer to the truth, the U.S. Geological Survey estimate is woefully conservative.

With the melting of the Arctic polar ice cap and the navigability of the Northwest Passage for the first time in recorded history opening up the area for energy exploitation, the U.S. released National Security Presidential Directive 66 on January 12, 2009, which contained these claims:

“The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region and is prepared to operate either independently or in conjunction with other states to safeguard these interests. These interests include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence, and maritime security operations; and ensuring freedom of navigation and overflight.”

Sixteen days later NATO abruptly convened a two-day Seminar on Security Prospects in the High North in Iceland and then Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer’s comments included:

“[T]he High North is going to require even more of the Alliance’s attention in the coming years.

“As the ice-cap decreases, the possibility increases of extracting the High North’s mineral wealth and energy deposits.

“At our Summit in Bucharest last year, we agreed a number of guiding principles for NATO’s role in energy security….”

Alluding to the fact that of the five formal claimants to Arctic territory – Russia, the United States, Canada, Denmark and Norway – only the first is not a member of the bloc, Scheffer said, “NATO provides a forum where four of the Arctic coastal states can inform, discuss, and share, any concerns that they may have. And this leads me directly onto the next issue, which is military activity in the region.

“Clearly, the High North is a region that is of strategic interest to the Alliance.”

On September 16 the Voice of Russia featured an article on Antarctica which reported that “British geologists have discovered a wide array of oil and gas fields in the Falkland Islands….Edinburgh-based British Geological Survey Agency…experts insisted that as much as 60 billion barrels may be recoverable on the shelf. If these estimates prove right that may well rival the world’s oil-rich nations, not least Libya and Nigeria.

“The late 1970s saw breaking news about a spate of lucrative oil and gas fields in the Falkland Islands – deposits that experts insisted were 13 times as much as those in the North Sea at the time.

“Many believe that the 1982 war between Britain and Argentina with almost 1,000 servicemen killed in the hostilities was all about oil and gas fields in the South Atlantic.”

On May 11 of this year Britain submitted a claim to the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf for one million square kilometers in the South Atlantic reaching into the Antarctic Ocean.

As early as October 23, 2007 The Scotsman reported that “the value of the oil under the sea in the region is understood to be immense. Seismic tests suggest there could be about 60 billion barrels of oil under the ocean floor.”

Britain is two hemispheres, the west and south, away from the Falklands/Malvinas Islands, which lie off the southeastern coast of Argentina.

The Russia source quoted earlier warned:

“Given London’s unwillingness to try to arrive at a political accommodation with Buenos Aires, a UN special commission will surely have tougher times ahead as far as its final decision on the continental shelf goes. And it is only to be hoped that Britain will be wise enough not to turn the Falkland Islands into another regional hot spot.”

In April of last year the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, through some combination of select compliance and procedural negligence if not complicity, granted Australia – Britain’s, the U.S.’s and increasingly NATO’s main outpost in the South Pacific – 2.5 million more square kilometers in the Antarctic Ocean so that the nation’s territory, in the words of Resources Minister Martin Ferguson as quoted by Agence France-Presse on April 21, 2008, “expanded by an area five times the size of France,” which could “potentially provide a ‘bonanza’ in underwater oil and gas reserves.”

The expansion of Australia’s seabed borders included the Kerguelen Plateau around the Heard and McDonald Islands, which extend southwards into Antarctica. As such Australia became the first nation to be granted exclusive property rights in the ocean.

In the Caspian Sea Basin and its neighborhood, which takes in the Afghanistan-Pakistan war theater and the turbulent and explosive Caucasus, Azerbaijan last week marked the fifteenth anniversary of what was called the Contract of the Century in 1994, engineered by the United States and Britain to open up the Caspian region to Western energy companies.

In the interim several oil and natural gas transit projects – the Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan oil and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum and Nabucco natural gas pipelines – have been launched.

The intent of all of them is to prevent Iran from exporting hydrocarbons to Europe and to expel Russia entirely from its previous contracts to provide Europe with natural gas and Caspian oil. Russia currently supplies the European Union with 30 percent of its gas, but the West – the U.S. and its EU allies – is well on its way to replacing Russian oil and gas with supplies from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan via Azerbaijan and from Iraq and North Africa through Turkey where all of the three pipelines mentioned above end.

Plans for what has accurately been called a Peace Pipeline from Iran through Pakistan and to India and China were heavy-handedly quashed by former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her successor.

Caspian energy supplies are only to flow west to Europe and east to Asia by routes under Western control if the U.S. and its partners have their way.

The Trend News Agency of Azerbaijan on September 16 reproduced parts of a letter from U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose husband had begun the process with the Contract of the Century, to President Ilham Aliyev from which the following is excerpted:

“The development of the Azeri-Chiraq-Gunashli offshore oilfields, and the
subsequent formation of the Azerbaijan International Operating Company (AIOC), was a landmark event in international oil and gas development, as well as a great success for international energy diplomacy.

“Promotion of international energy security remains critical for the Eurasia region. In this regard, the July 13 signing of the Nabucco inter-governmental agreement was a major milestone in our joint efforts to open the Southern Corridor, which will bring Caspian gas to Europe.

“We hope that Azerbaijan, Turkey, and other interested countries will be able to build on this momentum and agree on those remaining issues needed to make the southern corridor [Nabucco] a reality.

“Azerbaijan is on the threshold of a new and even more promising phase of energy development, and we look forward to continuing to work with you and other leaders in the region to develop new oil and gas resources and new routes to bring those resources to market.”

New routes mean any other than Russian ones.

The Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan oil pipeline is to branch out through Ukraine – where the reverse flow of Russian oil has been cut off – and from there to Poland and the Baltic Sea city of Gdansk.

The Russian South Stream project to transport natural gas from Russia to Greece and the Balkans and then to Central Europe is being undermined by the Nabucco pipeline. The Nord Stream pipeline planned to deliver Russian gas to Germany through the Baltic Sea is also under assault, with pro-Western figures in Poland, the Baltic States and Finland accusing it of being a security and even a military threat.

Never before in history have all parts of the world been so intensely fought over simultaneously as they are currently.

Nothing less than uncontested, irreversible global domination is what is being sought by the West – the United States and its NATO, Asia-Pacific and Middle Eastern allies and clients.

Possession of energy supplies and control of their destinations and transit routes are an essential part of that strategy and will be enforced through a military machine that has penetrated most of the world and is still expanding.

Source

Map of Oil Reserves, Consumption and Producers

Well I knew this years ago. All one had to do was follow the trail of oil, gas, mining and wars.  Just have to connect the dots is all.

Their quest for resources however is causing a great deal of pollution. War, Free Trade, WTO, IMF are all connected to their quest for control over resources. They all have lead to pollution in many countries including their own.  Their corporations are the ones who are polluting.

They are killing and polluting for resources.  They are power hungry and suffering from a total lack of morality.

They are killing the entire planet.  They are the cause of Global warming.

They dump their garbage in third world countries. They poison their water and their land. They could care less who suffers or dies.

How blind are those people who, elect these politicians to their Governments? The US has been the worst of the culprits, but the followers are just as guilty.

Follow the Corporations that Pollution, Wars, Free Trade, WTO, IMF.

One doesn’t have to a genius to figure it out just well read. It’s not rocket science. It’s just a matter of adding things up.

It’s like putting a puzzle togeather.

They all connect.

Pollution in Africa compliment if the IMF

Pollution Reports including Top 100 Corporate Air Polluters 2007 in US

Pollution Reports including Top 100 Corporate Air Polluters 2002 in US

Privatization, Pollution and Free Trade, WTO

Pollution Costs Trillions Annually

US Air Testing Bombs

Depleated Uranium Information

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human experiments and WMD

The world’s worst radiation hotspot

How UK oil company Trafigura tried to cover up African pollution disaster

A Few of the World’s most polluted places

Alberta Oil Sands a Pollution Nightmare

Depleted Uranium – Far Worse Than 9/11

Depleted Uranium Dust – Public Health Disaster For The People Of Iraq and Afghanistan

By Doug Westerman
May 3, 2006

In 1979, depleted uranium (DU) particles escaped from the National Lead Industries factory near Albany, N.Y.,which was manufacturing DU weapons for the U.S military. The particles traveled 26 miles and were discovered in a laboratory filter by Dr. Leonard Dietz, a nuclear physicist. This discovery led to a shut down of the factory in 1980, for releasing morethan 0.85 pounds of DU dust into the atmosphere every month, and involved a cleanup of contaminated properties costing over 100 million dollars.

Imagine a far worse scenario. Terrorists acquire a million pounds of the deadly dust and scatter it in populated areas throughout the U.S. Hundreds of children report symptoms. Many acquire cancer and leukemia, suffering an early and painful death. Huge increases in severe birth defects are reported. Oncologists are overwhelmed. Soccer fields, sand lots and parks, traditional play areas for kids, are no longer safe. People lose their most basic freedom, the ability to go outside and safely breathe. Sounds worse than 9/11? Welcome to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Dr. Jawad Al-Ali (55), director of the Oncology Center at the largest hospital in Basra, Iraq stated, at a recent ( 2003) conference in Japan:

“Two strange phenomena have come about in Basra which I have never seen before. The first is double and triple cancers in one patient. For example, leukemia and cancer of the stomach. We had one patient with 2 cancers – one in his stomach and kidney. Months later, primary cancer was developing in his other kidney–he had three different cancer types. The second is the clustering of cancer in families. We have 58 families here with more than one person affected by cancer. Dr Yasin, a general Surgeon here has two uncles, a sister and cousin affected with cancer. Dr Mazen, another specialist, has six family members suffering from cancer. My wife has nine members of her family with cancer”.

“Children in particular are susceptible to DU poisoning. They have a much higher absorption rate as their blood is being used to build and nourish their bones and they have a lot of soft tissues. Bone cancer and leukemia used to be diseases affecting them the most, however, cancer of the lymph system which can develop anywhere on the body, and has rarely been seen before the age of 12 is now also common.”,

“We were accused of spreading propaganda for Saddam before the war. When I have gone to do talks I have had people accuse me of being pro-Saddam. Sometimes I feel afraid to even talk. Regime people have been stealing my data and calling it their own, and using it for their own agendas. The Kuwaitis banned me from entering Kuwait – we were accused of being Saddam supporters.”

John Hanchette, a journalism professor at St. Bonaventure University, and one of the founding editors of USA TODAY related the following to DU researcher Leuren Moret.  He stated  that he had prepared news breaking stories about the effects of DU on Gulf War soldiers and Iraqi citizens, but that each time he was ready to publish, he received a phone call from the Pentagon asking him not to print the story.  He has since been replaced as editor of USA TODAY.

Dr. Keith Baverstock, The World Health Organization’s chief expert on radiation and health for 11 years and author of an unpublished study has charged that his report ” on the cancer risk to civilians in Iraq from breathing uranium contaminated dust ” was  also deliberately suppressed.

The information released by the U.S. Dept. of Defense is not reliable, according to some sources even within the military.

In 1997, while citing experiments, by others, in which 84 percent of dogs exposed to inhaled uranium died of cancer of the lungs, Dr. Asaf Durakovic, then Professor of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine at Georgetown University in Washington was quoted as saying,

“The [US government's] Veterans Administration asked me to lie about the risks of incorporating depleted uranium in the human body.”

At that time Dr. Durakovic was a colonel in the U.S. Army.  He has since left the military, to found the Uranium Medical Research Center, a privately funded organization with headquarters in Canada.

PFC Stuart Grainger of 23 Army Division, 34th Platoon. (Names and numbers have been changed) was diagnosed with cancer several after returning from Iraq.  Seven other men in the Platoon also have malignancies.

Doug Rokke, U.S. Army contractor who headed a clean-up of depleted uranium after the first Gulf War states:,

“Depleted uranium is a crime against God and humanity.”

Rokke’s own crew, a hundred employees, was devastated by exposure to the fine dust. He stated:

“When we went to the Gulf, we were all really healthy,”

After performing clean-up operations in the desert (mistakenly without protective gear), 30 members of his staff died, and most others”including Rokke himself”developed serious health problems. Rokke now has reactive airway disease, neurological damage, cataracts, and kidney problems.

“We warned the Department of Defense in 1991 after the Gulf War. Their arrogance is beyond comprehension.

Yet the D.O.D still insists such ingestion is “not sufficient to make troops seriously ill in most cases.”

Then why did it make the clean up crew seriously or terminally ill in nearly all cases?

Marion Falk, a retired chemical physicist who built nuclear bombs for more than 20 years at Lawrence Livermore Lab, was asked if he thought that DU weapons operate in a similar manner as a dirty bomb.

“That’s exactly what they are. They fit the description of a dirty bomb in every way.”

According to Falk, more than 30 percent of the DU fired from the cannons of U.S. tanks is reduced to particles one-tenth of a micron (one millionth of a meter) in size or smaller on impact.  “The larger the bang” the greater the amount of DU that is dispersed into the atmosphere, Falk said. With the larger missiles and bombs, nearly 100 percent of the DU is reduced to radioactive dust particles of the “micron size” or smaller, he said.

When asked if the main purpose for using it was for destroying things and killing people, Falk was more specific:

“I would say that it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people.”

When a DU round or bomb strikes a hard target, most of its kinetic energy is converted to heat ” sufficient heat to ignite the DU.  From 40% to 70% of the DU is converted to extremely fine dust particles of ceramic uranium oxide (primarily dioxide, though other formulations also occur). Over 60% of these particles are smaller than 5 microns in diameter, about the same size as the cigarette ash particles in cigarette smoke and therefore respirable.

Because conditions are so chaotic in Iraq, the medical infrastructure has been greatly compromised.  In terms of both cancer and birth defects due to DU, only a small fraction of the cases are being reported.

Doctors in southern Iraq are making comparisons to the birth defects that followed the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII. They have numerous photos of infants born without brains, with their internal organs outside their bodies, without sexual organs, without spines, and the list of deformities goes on an on.  Such birth defects were extremely rare in Iraq prior to the large scale use of DU. Weapons. Now they are commonplace.  In hospitals across Iraq, the mothers are no longer asking, “Doctor, is it a boy or girl?” but rather, “Doctor, is it normal?”  The photos are horrendous, they can be viewed on the following website

Ross B. Mirkarimi, a spokesman at The Arms Control Research Centre stated:

“Unborn children of the region are being asked to pay the highest price, the integrity of their DNA.”

Prior to her death from leukemia in Sept. 2004, Nuha Al Radi , an accomplished Iraqi artist and author  of the “Baghdad Diaries” wrote:

“Everyone seems to be dying of cancer. Every day one hears about another acquaintance or friend of a friend dying. How many more die in hospitals that one does not know? Apparently, over thirty percent of Iraqis have cancer, and there are lots of kids with leukemia.”

“The depleted uranium left by the U.S. bombing campaign has turned Iraq into a cancer-infested country. For hundreds of years to come, the effects of the uranium will continue to wreak havoc on Iraq and its surrounding areas.”

This excerpt in her diary was written in 1993, after Gulf War I (Approximately 300 tons of DU ordinance, mostly in desert areas)  but before Operation Iraqi Freedom, (Est. 1,700 tons with much more near major population centers).  So, it’s 5-6 times worse now than it was when she wrote than diary entry!!   Estimates of the percentage of D.U. which was ‘aerosolized’ into fine uranium oxide dust are approximately 30-40%. That works out to over one million pounds of dust scattered throughout Iraq.

As a special advisor to the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and the Iraqi Ministry of Health, Dr. Ahmad Hardan has documented the effects of DU in Iraq between 1991 and 2002.

“American forces admit to using over 300 tons of DU weapons in 1991.  The actual figure is closer to 800.  This has caused a health crisis that has affected almost a third of a million people.  As if that was not enough, America went on and used 200 tons more in Bagdad alone during the recent invasion.

I don”t know about other parts of Iraq, it will take me years to document that.

“In Basra, it took us two years to obtain conclusive proof of what DU does, but we now know what to look for and the results are terrifying.”

By far the most devastating effect is on unborn children.  Nothing can prepare anyone for the sight of hundreds of preserved fetuses ” scarcely human in appearance. Iraq is now seeing babies with terribly foreshortened limbs, with their intestines outside their bodies, with huge bulging tumors where their eyes should be, or with a single eye-like Cyclops, or without eyes, or without limbs, and even without heads. Significantly, some of the defects are almost unknown outside textbooks showing the babies born near A-bomb test sites in the Pacific.

Dr. Hardan also states:

“I arranged for a delegation from Japan’s Hiroshima Hospital to come and share their expertise in the radiological diseases we

Are likely to face over time. The delegation told me the Americans had objected and they decided not to come. Similarly, a world famous German cancer specialist agreed to come, only to be told later that he would not be given permission to enter Iraq.”

Not only are we poisoning the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, but we are making a concerted effort to keep out specialists from other countries who can help.  The U.S. Military doesn”t want the rest of the world to find out what we have done.

Such relatively swift development of cancers has been reported by doctors in hospitals treating civilians following NATO bombing with DU in Yugoslavia in 1998-1999 and the US military invasion of Iraq using DU for the first time in 1991. Medical experts report that this phenomenon of multiple malignancies from unrelated causes has been unknown until now and is a new syndrome associated with internal DU exposure.
Just 467 US personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served in the first Gulf War now have medical problems.

Although not reported in the mainstream American press, a recent Tokyo tribunal, guided by the principles of International Criminal Law and International Humanitarian Law, found President George W. Bush guilty of war crimes. On March 14, 2004, Nao Shimoyachi, reported in The Japan Times that President Bush was found guilty “for attacking civilians with indiscriminate weapons and other arms,”and the “tribunal also issued recommendations for banning Depleted Uranium shells and other weapons that indiscriminately harm people.” Although this was a “Citizen’s Court” having no legal authority, the participants were sincere in their determination that international laws have been violated and a war crimes conviction is warranted.

Troops involved in actual combat are not the only servicemen reporting symptoms. Four soldiers from a New York Army National Guard company serving in Iraq are among several members of the same company, the 442nd Military Police, who say they have been battling persistent physical ailments that began last summer in the Iraqi town of Samawah.

“I got sick instantly in June,” said Staff Sgt. Ray Ramos, a Brooklyn housing cop. “My health kept going downhill with daily headaches, constant numbness in my hands and rashes on my stomach.”

Dr. Asaf Durakovic, UMRC founder, and nuclear medicine expert examined and tested nine soldiers from the company says that four “almost certainly” inhaled radioactive dust from exploded American shells manufactured with depleted uranium. Laboratory tests revealed traces of two manmade forms of uranium in urine samples from four of the soldiers.

If so, the men – Sgt. Hector Vega, Sgt. Ray Ramos, Sgt. Agustin Matos and Cpl. Anthony Yonnone – are the first confirmed cases of inhaled depleted uranium exposure from the current Iraq conflict.

The 442nd, made up for the most part of New York cops, firefighters and correction officers, is based in Orangeburg, Rockland County. Dispatched to Iraq in Easter of 2003, the unit’s members had been providing guard duty for convoys, running jails and training Iraqi police. The entire company is due to return home later this month.

“These are amazing results, especially since these soldiers were military police not exposed to the heat of battle,” said Dr. Asaf Duracovic, who examined the G.I.s and performed the testing.

In a group of eight U.S. led Coalition servicemen whose babies were born without eyes, seven are known to have been directly exposed to DU dust. In a much group (250 soldiers) exposed during the first Gulf war, 67% of the children conceived after the war had birth defects.

Dr. Durakovic’s  UMRC research team also conducted a three-week field trip to Iraq in October of 2003. It collected about 100 samples of substances such as soil, civilian urine and the tissue from the corpses of Iraqi soldiers in 10 cities, including Baghdad, Basra and Najaf. Durakovic said preliminary tests show that the air, soil and water samples contained “hundreds to thousands of times” the normal levels of radiation.

“This high level of contamination is because much more depleted uranium was used this year than in (the Gulf War of) 1991,” Durakovic told The Japan Times.

“They are hampering efforts to prove the connection between Depleted Uranium and the illness,” Durakovic said

“They do not want to admit that they committed war crimes” by using weapons that kill indiscriminately, which are banned under international law.”

(NOTE ABOUT DR. DURAKOVIC;  First, he was warned to stop his work, then he was fired from his position, then his house was ransacked, and he has also reported receiving death threats.  Evidently the U.S. D.O.D is very keen on censoring DU whistle-blowers!)

Dr. Durakovic, UMRC  research associates Patricia Horan and Leonard Dietz, published a unique study in the August 2002 issue of Military Medicine Medical Journal. The study is believed to be the first to look at inhaled DU among Gulf War veterans, using the ultrasensitive technique of thermal ionization mass spectrometry, which enabled them to easily distinguish between natural uranium and DU.  The study, which examined British, Canadian and U.S. veterans, all suffering typical Gulf War Syndrome ailments, found that, nine years after the war, 14 of 27 veterans studied had DU in their urine. DU also was found in the lung and bone of a deceased Gulf War veteran. That no governmental study has been done on inhaled DU “amounts to a massive malpractice,” Dietz said in an interview.

The Japanese began studying DU effects in the southern Iraq in the summer of 2003. They had a Geiger counter which they watched go off the scale on many occasions. During their visit,a local hospital was treating upwards of 600 children per day, many of which suffered symptoms of internal poisoning by radiation.  600 children per day? How many of these children will get cancer and suffer and early and painful death?

“Ingested DU particles can cause up to 1,000 times the damage of an X-ray”, said Mary Olson, a nuclear waste specialist and biologist at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington D.C.

It is this difference in particle size as well as the dust’s crystalline structure that make the presence of DU dust in the environment such an extreme hazard, and which differentiates its properties from that of the natural uranium dust that is ubiquitous and to which we all are exposed every day, which seldom reaches such a small size.  This point is being stressed, as comparing DU particles to much larger natural ones is misleading.

The U.S. Military and its supporters regularly quote a Rand Corp. Study which uses the natural uranium inhaled by miners.

Particles smaller than 10 microns can access the innermost recesses of lung tissue where they become permanently lodged. Furthermore, if the substance is relatively insoluble, such as the ceramic DU-oxide dust produced from burning DU, it will remain in place for decades, dissolving very slowly into the bloodstream and lymphatic fluids through the course of time. Studies have identified DU in the urine of Gulf War veterans nine years after that conflict, testifying to the permanence of ceramic DU-oxide in the lungs.  Thus the effects are far different from natural uranium dust, whose coarse particles are almost entirely excreted by the body within 24 hours.

The military is aware of DU’s harmful effects on the human genetic code. A 2001 study of DU’s effect on DNA done by Dr. Alexandra C. Miller for the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Md., indicates that DU’s chemical instability causes 1 million times more genetic damage than would be expected from its radiation effect alone.

Studies have shown that inhaled nano-particles are far more toxic than micro-sized particles of the same basic chemical composition. British toxicopathologist Vyvyan Howard has reported that the increased toxicity of the nano-particle is due to its size.

For example, when mice were exposed to virus-size particles of Teflon (0.13 microns) in a University of Rochester study, there were no ill effects. But when mice were exposed to nano-particles of Teflon for 15 minutes, nearly all the mice died within 4 hours.

“Exposure pathways for depleted uranium can be through the skin, by inhalation, and ingestion,”  writes Lauren Moret, another DU researcher. “Nano-particles have high mobility and can easily enter the body. Inhalation of nano-particles of depleted uranium is the most hazardous exposure, because the particles pass through the lung-blood barrier directly into the blood.

“When inhaled through the nose, nano-particles can cross the olfactory bulb directly into the brain through the blood brain barrier, where they migrate all through the brain,” she wrote. “Many Gulf era soldiers exposed to depleted uranium have been diagnosed with brain tumors, brain damage and impaired thought processes. Uranium can interfere with the mitochondria, which provide energy for the nerve processes, and transmittal of the nerve signal across synapses in the brain.

Based on dissolution and excretion rate data, it is possible to approximate the amount of DU initially inhaled by these veterans. For the handful of veterans studied, this amount averaged 0.34 milligrams. Knowing the specific activity (radiation rate) for DU allows one to determine that the total radiation (alpha, beta and gamma) occurring from DU and its radioactive decay products within their bodies comes to about 26 radiation events every second, or 800 million events each year.  At .34 milligrams per dose, there are over 10 trillion doses floating around Iraq and Afghanistan.

How many additional deaths are we talking about? In the aftermath of the first Gulf War, the UK Atomic Energy Authority came up with estimates for the potential effects of the DU contamination left by the conflict. It calculated that “this could cause “500,000 potential deaths”. This was “a theoretical figure”, it stressed, that indicated “a significant problem”.

The AEA’s calculation was made in a confidential memo to the privatized munitions company, Royal Ordnance, dated 30 April 1991. The high number of potential deaths was dismissed as “very far from realistic” by a British defense minister, Lord Gilbert. “Since the rounds were fired in the desert, many miles from the nearest village, it is highly unlikely that the local population would have been exposed to any significant amount of respirable oxide,” he said.  These remarks were made prior to the more recent invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq, where DU munitions were used on a larger scale in and near many of the most populated areas.  If the amount of DU ordinance used in the first Gulf War was sufficient to cause 500,000 potential deaths, (had it been used near the populated areas), then what of the nearly six times that amount used in operation Iraqi Freedom, which was used in and near the major towns and cities?  Extrapolating the U.K. AEA estimate with this amount gives a figure of potentially 3 million extra deaths from inhaling DU dust in Iraq alone, not including Afghanistan. This is about 11% of Iraq’s total population of 27 million. Dan Bishop, Ph.d chemist for IDUST feels that this estimate may be low, if the long life of DU dust is considered.  In Afghanistan, the concentration in some areas is greater than Iraq.

What can an otherwise healthy person expect when inhaling the deadly dust? Captain Terry Riordon was a member of the Canadian Armed Forces serving in Gulf War I. He passed away in April 1999 at age 45. Terry left Canada a very fit man who did cross-country skiing and ran in marathons. On his return only two months later he could barely walk.

He returned to Canada in February 1991 with documented loss of motor control, chronic fatigue, respiratory difficulties, chest pain, difficulty breathing, sleep problems, short-term memory loss, testicle pain, body pains, aching bones, diarrhea, and depression. After his death, depleted uranium contamination was discovered in his lungs and bones. For eight years he suffered his innumerable ailments and struggled with the military bureaucracy and the system to get proper diagnosis and treatment.  He had arranged, upon his death, to bequeath his body to the UMRC.  Through his gift, the UMRC was able to obtain conclusive evidence that inhaling fine particles of depleted uranium dust completely destroyed his heath.  How many Terry Riordans are out there among the troops being exposed, not to mention Iraqi and Afghan civilians?

Inhaling the dust will not kill large numbers of Iraqi and Afghan civilians right away, any more than it did Captain Riordan. Rather, what we will see is vast numbers of people who are chronically and severely ill, having their life spans drastically shortened, many with multiple cancers.

Melissa Sterry, another sick veteran, served for six months at a supply base in Kuwait during the winter of 1991-92. Part of her job with the National Guard’s Combat Equipment Company “A” was to clean out tanks and other armored vehicles that had been used during the war, preparing them for storage.

She said she swept out the armored vehicles, cleaning up dust, sand and debris, sometimes being ordered to help bury contaminated parts. In a telephone interview, she stated that after researching depleted uranium she chose not to take the military’s test because she could not trust the results.  It is alarming that Melissa was stationed in Kuwait, not Iraq.  Cleaning out tanks with DU dust was enough to make her ill.

In, 2003, the Christian Science Monitor sent reporters to Iraq to investigate long-term effects of depleted uranium. Staff writer Scott Peterson saw children playing on top of a burnt-out tank near a vegetable stand on the outskirts of Baghdad, a tank that had been destroyed by armor-piercing shells coated with depleted uranium. Wearing his mask and protective clothing, he pointed his Geiger counter toward the tank. It registered 1,000 times the normal background radiation. If the troops were on a mission of mercy to bring democracy to Iraq, wouldn”t keeping children away from such dangers be the top priority?

The laws of war prohibit the use of weapons that have deadly and inhumane effects beyond the field of battle. Nor can weapons be legally deployed in war when they are known to remain active, or cause harm after the war concludes.  It is no surprise that the Japanese Court found President Bush guilty of war crimes.

Dr. Alim Yacoub of Basra University conducted an epidemiological study into incidences of malignancies in children under fifteen years old, in the Basra area (an area bombed with DU during the first Gulf War). They found over the 1990 to 1999 period, there was a 242% rise.  That was before the recent invasion.

In Kosovo, similar spikes in cancer and birth defects were noticed by numerous international experts, although the quantity of DU weapons used was only a small fraction of what was used in Iraq.

FIELD STUDY RESULTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

Verifiable statistics for Iraq will remain elusive for some time, but widespread field studies in Afghanistan point to the existence of a large scale public health disaster. In May of 2002, the UMRC (Uranium Medical Research Center) sent a field team to interview and examine residents and internally displaced people in Afghanistan.  The UMRC field team began by first identifying several hundred people suffering from illnesses and medical conditions displaying clinical symptoms which are considered to be characteristic of radiation exposure.  To investigate the possibility that the symptoms were due to radiation sickness, the UMRC team collected urine specimens and soil samples, transporting them to an independent research lab in England.

UMRC’s Field Team found Afghan civilians with acute symptoms of radiation poisoning, along with chronic symptoms of internal uranium contamination, including congenital problems in newborns. Local civilians reported large, dense dust clouds and smoke plumes rising from the point of impact, an acrid smell, followed by burning of the nasal passages, throat and upper respiratory tract. Subjects in all locations presented identical symptom profiles and chronologies. The victims reported symptoms including pain in the cervical column, upper shoulders and basal area of the skull, lower back/kidney pain, joint and muscle weakness, sleeping difficulties, headaches, memory problems and disorientation.

Two additional scientific study teams were sent to Afghanistan. The first arrived in June 2002, concentrating on the Jalalabad region. The second arrived four months later, broadening the study to include the capital Kabul, which has a population of nearly 3.5 million people. The city itself contains the highest recorded number of fixed targets during Operation Enduring Freedom. For the study’s purposes, the vicinity of three major bomb sites were examined. It was predicted that signatures of depleted or enriched uranium would be found in the urine and soil samples taken during the research. The team was unprepared for the shock of its findings, which indicated in both Jalalabad and Kabul, DU was causing the high levels of illness. Tests taken from a number of Jalalabad subjects showed concentrations 400% to 2000% above that for normal populations, amounts which have not been recorded in civilian studies before.

Those in Kabul who were directly exposed to US-British precision bombing showed extreme signs of contamination, consistent with uranium exposure. These included pains in joints, back/kidney pain, muscle weakness, memory problems and confusion and disorientation. Those exposed to the bombing report symptoms of flu-type illnesses, bleeding, runny noses and blood-stained mucous.  How many of these people will suffer a painful and early death from cancer? Even the study team itself complained of similar symptoms during their stay. Most of these symptoms last for days or months.

In August of 2002, UMRC completed its preliminary analysis of the results from Nangarhar.  Without exception, every person donating urine specimens tested positive for uranium contamination. The specific results indicated an astoundingly high level of contamination; concentrations were 100 to 400 times greater than those of the Gulf War Veterans tested in 1999.   A researcher reported. “We took both soil and biological samples, and found considerable presence in urine samples of radioactivity; the heavy concentration astonished us.  They were beyond our wildest imagination.”

In the fall of 2002, the UMRC field team went back to Afghanistan for a broader survey, and revealed a potentially larger exposure than initially anticipated. Approximately 30% of those interviewed in the affected areas displayed symptoms of radiation sickness.  New born babies were among those displaying symptoms, with village elders reporting that over 25% of the infants were inexplicably ill.

How widespread and extensive is the exposure?  A quote from the UMRC field report reads:

“The UMRC field team was shocked by the breadth of public health impacts coincident with the bombing. Without exception, at every bombsite investigated, people are ill. A significant portion of the civilian population presents symptoms consistent with internal contamination by uranium.”

In Afghanistan, unlike Iraq, UMRC lab results indicated high concentrations of NON-DEPLETED URANIUM, with the concentrations being much higher than in DU victims from Iraq. Afghanistan was used as a testing ground for a new generation of “bunker buster” bombs containing high concentrations of other uranium alloys.

“A significant portion of the civilian population”? It appears that by going after a handful of terrorists in Afghanistan we have poisoned a huge number of innocent civilians, with a disproportionate number of them being children.

The military has found depleted uranium in the urine of some soldiers but contends it was not enough to make them seriously ill in most cases. Critics have asked for more sensitive, more expensive testing.

————————————

According to an October 2004  Dispatch from the Italian Military Health Observatory, a total of 109 Italian soldiers have died thus far due to exposure to depleted uranium.  A spokesman at the Military Health Observatory, Domenico Leggiero, states “The total of 109 casualties exceeds the total number of persons dying as a consequence of road accidents. Anyone denying the significance of such data is purely acting out of ill faith, and the truth is that our soldiers are dying out there due to a lack of adequate protection against depleted uranium”. Members of the Observatory have petitioned for an urgent hearing “in order to study effective prevention and safeguard measures aimed at reducing the death-toll amongst our serving soldiers”.

There were only 3,000 Italian soldiers sent to Iraq, and they were there for a short time.  The number of 109 represents about 3.6% of the total.  If the same percentage of Iraqis get a similar exposure, that would amount to 936,000.  As Iraqis are permanently living in the same contaminated environment, their percentage will be higher.

The Pentagon/DoD have interfered with UMRC’s ability to have its studies published by managing, a progressive and persistent misinformation program in the press against UMRC, and through the use of its control of science research grants to refute UMRC’s scientific findings and destroy the reputation of UMRC’s scientific staff, physicians and laboratories. UMRC is the first independent research organization to find Depleted Uranium in the bodies of US, UK and Canadian Gulf War I veterans and has subsequently, following Operation Iraqi Freedom, found Depleted Uranium in the water, soils and atmosphere of Iraq as well as biological samples donated by Iraqi civilians. Yet the first thing that comes up on Internet searches are these supposed “studies repeatedly showing DU to be harmless.”  The technique is to approach the story as a debate between government and independent experts in which public interest is stimulated by polarizing the issues rather than telling the scientific and medical truth. The issues are systematically confused and misinformed by government, UN regulatory agencies (WHO, UNEP, IAEA, CDC, DOE, etc) and defense sector (military and the weapons developers and manufacturers).

Dr. Yuko Fujita, an assistant professor at Keio University, Japan who examined the effects of radioactivity in Iraq from May to June, 2003,  said : “I doubt that Iraq is fabricating data because in fact there are many children suffering from leukemia in hospitals,” Fujita said. “As a result of the Iraq war, the situation will be desperate in some five to 10 years.”

The  March 14, 2004  Tokyo Citizen’s Tribunal that “convicted” President Bush gave the following summation regarding DU weapons: (This court was a citizen’s court with no binding legal authority)

1.   Their use has indiscriminate effects;

2.   Their use is out of proportion with the pursuit of military objectives;

3.   Their use adversely affects the environment in a widespread, long term and severe manner;

4.   Their use causes superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering.

Two years ago, President Bush withdrew the United States as a signatory to the International Criminal Court’s statute, which has been ratified by all other Western democracies. The White House actually seeks to immunize U.S. leaders from war crimes prosecutions entirely. It has also demanded express immunity from ICC prosecution for American nationals.

CONCLUSIONS:

If terrorists succeeded in spreading something throughout the U.S. that ended up causing hundreds of thousands of cancer cases and birth defects over a period of many years, they would be guilty of a crime against humanity that far surpasses the Sept. 11th attacks in scope and severity. Although not deliberate, with our military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, we have done just that.  If the physical environment is so unsafe and unhealthy that one cannot safely breath, then the outer trappings of democracy have little meaning. At least under Saddam, the Iraqi people could stay healthy and conceive normal children. Few Americans are aware that in getting rid of Saddam, we left something much worse in his place.

Source

Congratulations NATO. You are Guilty of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity.

You leave this “gift of death” everywhere you go.

France: Riot police storm The Jungle Refugee Camp at Calais,

September 22, 2009

These are refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan who traveled to Calais, hoping they could make it to Britain.

278 people have  been detained by the French police, 132  are children.

This is the day they destroy the  Calais refugee camp known as the Jungle.   French riot police were apparently armed with flamethrowers, stun guns and tear gas.

At 7.40 am, dozens of vans accompanied by bulldozers began circling the camp.

Aproximatly 500 officers were at the site.

Camp refugees, many of whom were children, were dragged away by police officers and put into waiting buses. Others were escorted out.

Refugees

As I was wandering around I noticed how many didn’t want these people in their country. Not naming names or anything. When ‘I first noticed the story, I went all over.

These people have come from war torn countries. There are a few million displaced civilians because of the Iraq war and Afghanistan..

With every war there are always refugees. Now what is also interesting many of these same folks, who were complaining about the refugees were supportive of  the wars.

Now however because there is a refugee problem, they don’t want to help them.

Well if you don’t want refugees don’t start wars.

Many of the children may be orphans.  They can’t send children back to Afghanistan  at this point in time.  Many people thought they should be just shipped back.

There really may not be much for them to go back to and if their parents have been killed there is even less reason for them to go back.

We are not helping them. We are doing more harm then good.

Then there is the DU and the radiation from the Bunker Busters.

Well more will get cancer and die.

It will also affect the soldiers who are in those areas.

I think it is time to face those facts.

In Afghanistan  53 %  are living in poverty and rising each year.

Unemployment has risen to 40% way up from 2000 when it was only 8%.

They have about 8,000 dead and over 59,000 who were injured.

They also have a heroin problem again. The Taliban as awful as they may be, had destroyed all the poppy fields.

Now Iran and Iraq have a heroin problem. Under Saddam heroin was never a problem in Iraq.

The heroin is now being shipped out to North America and European countries.  So now they have a heroin problem too.

Now folks are complaining about the refugees.

Well what did they expect?

Every war creates millions of refugees.

Remembering all the other wars around the world that is a fact of life.

My heart goes out to them.They have suffered so much tragedy and loss.

Arial view of camp

This the areal View of the Camp. Not a very special place, but to the refugees it was home and it was safe.  Safer then the war zones they came from.

police

refugee arrested

Refugee arrested

refugee 7

refugee 6

Refugee 5

refugee camp 4

refugee camp 3

refugee camp 2

camp 10

What will happen to them now is unknown. They didn’t start the wars they are the victims of it.

Now they have been arrested by the very people who they thought might help them.

Seems no matter where they go they are not welcome.

Nato however had no problem invading their countries.

Nato had no problem destroying their homes and their lives.

They had no problem polluting their homeland with DU and Radiation from Bunker Busters.

No problem bombing their homes.

No problem killing their friends and realtives.

No problem at all.

They ran away from their home land, because they couldn’t take the wars anymore. They want and need to feel safe. Well I guess they will be safe in prison.

No body wants them. How shameful this is.

Especially for the children.

(Afghanistan 5) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Victims’ families tell their stories following Nato airstrike in Afghanistan

Afghan war ‘deteriorating,’ U.S. NATO boss warns

Afghan war ‘deteriorating,’ U.S. NATO boss warns

September 21 2009

Weeks after taking command of all NATO troops based in Afghanistan, U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal wrote a confidential report to the Pentagon, advising that the war was “deteriorating” and could be lost without sending in additional troops.

In a report dated August 30, McChrystal informed U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates that NATO would not be successful in defeating the country’s insurgents if it didn’t change its strategy and better organize its approach with allied forces.

“Although considerable effort and sacrifice have resulted in some progress, many indicators suggest the overall effort is deteriorating,” McChrystal said in his report.

While McChrystal acknowledged in his report that “additional resources are required” to win the war, he wrote that focusing too heavily on “force or resource requirements misses the point entirely.”

The Washington Post published the report on its website on Monday, with the exception of some portions that the U.S. government requested be withheld. The newspaper first reported the details of McChrystal’s assessment of the war late Sunday.

Geoff Morrell, a spokesperson for the U.S. defence secretary, confirmed the report, but said the Pentagon would not release McChrystal’s assessment.

“While we would have much preferred none of this be made public at this time we appreciate the paper’s willingness to edit out those passages which would likely have endangered personnel and operations in Afghanistan,” Morrell said in an email statement.

Additionally, McChrystal wrote that “there is a crisis of confidence among Afghans — in both their government and the international community — that undermines our credibility and emboldens the insurgents. Further, a perception that our resolve is uncertain makes Afghans reluctant to align us against the insurgents.”

CTV’s South Asia Bureau Chief Janis Mackey Frayer said that Afghan officials don’t want to see any more foreign troops inside their borders.

“Afghan officials, and particularly those affiliated with the Afghan security forces, are saying that, really, international troops are the last thing that Afghanistan needs,” Frayer told CTV’s Canada AM on Monday morning from Kabul.

Instead, the officials would rather have money sent “to try to bolster, train and hire more Afghan forces,” Frayer said. “There are currently about 130,000 Afghan police, some 80,000 Afghan soldiers and they (officials) are saying that should be the focus here, not to reinforce to Afghans that there is a foreign occupation of their country.”

McChrystal’s report is now in the hands of U.S. President Barack Obama, who is reviewing its contents while he decides whether to send more U.S. service members into Afghanistan.

A separate report from McChrystal on the Afghan war will soon be sent to the White House and the Pentagon, which will detail the troop and resource needs of U.S. troops. Weekend media reports suggested the U.S. general had completed the second report, though his senior spokesperson, Rear Adm. Gregory Smith said Sunday that it was not yet finished.

In a series of recent television interviews, Obama explained the questions he is asking the military as he considers what resources to provide them with.

“How does this advance America’s national security interests? How does it make sure that al Qaeda and its extremist allies cannot attack the United States homeland, our allies, our troops who are based in Europe?” the president said.

“If supporting the Afghan national government and building capacity for their army and securing certain provinces advances that strategy, then we’ll move forward,” Obama continued. “But if it doesn’t, then I’m not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan.”

The release of McChrystal’s report on the Post’s website comes at a time when a partisan debate on the future of the war is raging in Washington: Senate Republicans want to see more troops in the war-torn country, while many Democrats want to put on the brakes.

Since taking office, Obama has sent 21,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, who pushed into Taliban-districts in the weeks leading up to the country’s Aug. 19 election.

McChrystal officially took command of the nearly 90,000 U.S. and NATO troops in the Afghanistan on June 15.

Source

A 66 page report mostly propaganda. We can win, ya right. They really need a reality check.

The war in Afghanistan is not winnable.

Canadians: Tell your MP – End the War In Afghanistan Bring the Troops Home NOW!

‘Hush’ over Afghan mission must end

Published in: on September 21, 2009 at 7:09 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , ,

Canadians: Tell your MP – End the War In Afghanistan Bring the Troops Home NOW!

Pan-Canadian Call in Day Tell your MP – End the War In Afghanistan Bring the Troops Home NOW!
September 21, 2009

Parliament had started the fall session.. It is likely that the session will break for another election. The peace movement needs to make sure that the war in Afghanistan is an election issue, but to do so we need to send a message to the parties today. Send a note to the PM and your MP and remind them that that a majority of Canadians want to end the war in Afghanistan NOW.

The Conservatives have said that they will not extend the mission after the 2011 end date but NATO and the US have already openly called for Canada to stay. We have an important job in this country to bring our troops home. Canada’s international reputation as a peacekeeper is being used by NATO countries as an argument in favour of sending their own troops to Afghanistan. If Canada extends its commitment to the war, that is a set back for the anti-war movement internationally.

It is unlikely that there will be an extension before a federal election. The Conservatives and Liberals,  both of whom are responsible for the tragedy unfolding in Afghanistan do not want to run an election where the war is an issue. But we have to make the war an issue now, during and after the election. To that end the Canadian Peace Alliance, has produced new resources to build that campaign.

Download the NEW fact-sheet, Top Ten Reasons to End the War In Afghanistan
Download the NEW postcard or call or e-mail the CPA office to get a stack of postcards mailed to you.
Download the Petition calling for an end to the war.

We need to send a message to Harper and all Members of Parliament that it is time to end the war now.

E-mail Stephen Harper at:
pm@pm.gc.ca
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa
K1A 0A2
Fax: 613-941-6900

Call, FAX, E-mail, or send a postcard to your MP. A list of MP’s and their contact info is available on the Parliamentary website.

********************************************

Soldiers and civilians are dieing and injured every day. It is time to make absolutely sure the Canadian troops are brought home.

This war has been going on and on for 8 years.

Each year more troops die. In 2000  it was 12.  In 2009  358.

Each year there were more.  This year isn’t over yet.

Canada has lost 131 to date.  The numbers are growing.

When civilians die their relatives want revenge and many have joined the Taliban. The more civilians that die the more people want revenge for their deaths. Personalty I can not say I blame them. If someone wiped out my entire family or my wife or my children I would be out to kill those who killed them too. Wouldn’t you?

Nato invaded their country. Afghans are defending their country, they have every right to do that. Apparently over 11,000 have died defending their country and they have a few more million that could join the fight.If we keep killing their people they will surely never run out out of people to take up arms against NATO.

It’s time to say no more war.

The US decided to attack Afghanistan long before 9/11, not because of it.  Because they wanted the pipeline.  The US and Pakistan helped put the Taliban into power in the first place, some years back. The CIA created Al Quada. They created the very enemy we are now fighting. How bazaar?

The new Guy is just and Ex Oil company employee who worked for Unicol Oil. One of the companies who was after the Taliban to build a pipeline back in the nineties.  The US picked him not the people of Afghanistan. So we are not their to give Afghans democracy.

Canadians are not being told the Truth.

Harper lied about how much the war was costing.

They have not told us how many have been injured. Why?

The troops have also been exposed to radiation compliment of the Bunker Buster bombs the US dropped, coincidentally the US stopped using them after there was and Earth Quake in Afghanistan. Could a Bunker Buster cause and Earth Quake. Yes it can. One can only guess how much Depleted Uranium has been used.

This war has nothing to do with 9/11. Usama  Bin Ladin has never been connected to it. They were looking for Saudi Arabians not
Afghans.

This war is over Gas and Oil nothing more nothing less. They want control over the entire Middle East. That is the agenda and has been for many years.  Why are troops fighting for the US agenda?

Troops from any country are to defend their own soil and help others in need. Not to destroy a people or a country for their own agenda.

In Iraq over a million people died and 5 million children are now orphans but let Muntazer al-Zaidi tells you why he Threw the Shoe.

So how many Afghans must die before they stop warmongering?

How many more young military men and women must die?

Hell call or write your MP’s and say no more.

E-mail Stephen Harper at:
pm@pm.gc.ca
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa
K1A 0A2
Fax: 613-941-6900

Call, FAX, E-mail, or send a postcard to your MP. A list of MP’s and their contact info is available on the Parliamentary website.

‘Hush’ over Afghan mission must end

Victims’ families tell their stories following Nato airstrike in Afghanistan

(Afghanistan 9) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Is Osama bin Laden still alive, Seems the answer is no

Has Usama Bin Ladin been dead for seven years – and are the U.S. and Britain covering it up to continue war on terror?

Afghanistan’s hidden toll: Injured Troops

Published in: on September 21, 2009 at 4:19 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

‘Hush’ over Afghan mission must end

‘Hush’ over Afghan mission must end: Kenny
September 20, 2009

Liberal Senator Colin Kenny says politicians are too afraid of offending soldiers and their families by questioning Canada’s role in Afghanistan, but it’s important to have an honest debate about the mission.

“The issue is we’ve got to do something to get Canadians away from the hush,” Kenny said Sunday on CTV’s Question Period.

“There’s a hush in the country and it’s out of respect for the families, it’s out of respect for the soldiers. Nobody wants to say anything that could possibly upset the families or the soldiers, and so we don’t have a debate.”

In a recent op-ed column in the Ottawa Citizen, Kenny called Afghanistan Canada’s Vietnam, a war that lasted for more than a decade and left nearly 60,000 U.S. dead.

Kenny, who is also Chairman of the Senate National Defence Security Committee, says his criticism may seem “offensive,” but Canadians deserve to know what the government hopes to achieve in Afghanistan before the mission ends in 2011.

Violence in Afghanistan’s volatile south has increased in recent weeks, particularly since a U.S. troop surge and a highly contentious presidential election.

Kenny said the increase in violence makes it clear that Canada’s strategy to clear, hold and develop former Taliban strongholds is not working.

“Triple D was the answer to things for a while: defence, diplomacy, development. We hear from the government about different innovations, and after a while you’re saying, ‘I’m sorry, you don’t have any credibility,’” Kenny said. “We don’t have clear goals in Afghanistan. One of the overwhelming things that comes in my mail is people saying, ‘Why doesn’t the government tell us what they want to achieve there?’”

Retired Maj. Gen. Lewis Mackenzie responded to Kenny’s remarks by saying the increase in violence is in fact a sign that Canadian troops are doing valuable work in Afghanistan.

According to Mackenzie, the influx of American soldiers has allowed the Canadians to concentrate on a smaller area in their fight against the Taliban.

“Violence is increasing dramatically in the south for one reason and one reason only,” Mackenzie told Question Period. “That’s because we’re out there kicking a hornet’s nest with additional resources. That’s going to happen.”

He said Canada’s strategy has been hampered by the fact that NATO failed “to provide the resources necessary to take this thing to a proper conclusion early on.”

But Mackenzie said with the American surge and President Barack Obama’s renewed focus on combating the Taliban in Afghanistan, the new commander of the International Security Assistance Force, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, will adopt Canada’s clear, hold and develop strategy.

But Kenny pointed to widespread allegations of voter fraud in last month’s presidential election, a thriving drug trade in Helmand and Kandahar provinces and the recent passage of a law that allows for marital rape as signs that the mission in Afghanistan needs to be reevaluated.

“I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s nothing we can do for the 131 (soldiers) that have died except mourn them, respect them, support their families,” he said. “And there is something we can do for the next 130 and that is have a really good look at whether what we’re doing over there is worthwhile, and maybe get out.”

Source

Well it’s about time someone in Canada woke up?

The Silence has been,  pure neglect as far as I am concerned.

This I am sure many have long forgotten.

by Doug Westerman
May 3, 2006
FIELD STUDY RESULTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

Verifiable statistics for Iraq will remain elusive for some time, but widespread field studies in Afghanistan point to the existence of a large scale public health disaster. In May of 2002, the UMRC (Uranium Medical Research Center) sent a field team to interview and examine residents and internally displaced people in Afghanistan.  The UMRC field team began by first identifying several hundred people suffering from illnesses and medical conditions displaying clinical symptoms which are considered to be characteristic of radiation exposure.  To investigate the possibility that the symptoms were due to radiation sickness, the UMRC team collected urine specimens and soil samples, transporting them to an independent research lab in England.

UMRC’s Field Team found Afghan civilians with acute symptoms of radiation poisoning, along with chronic symptoms of internal uranium contamination, including congenital problems in newborns. Local civilians reported large, dense dust clouds and smoke plumes rising from the point of impact, an acrid smell, followed by burning of the nasal passages, throat and upper respiratory tract. Subjects in all locations presented identical symptom profiles and chronologies. The victims reported symptoms including pain in the cervical column, upper shoulders and basal area of the skull, lower back/kidney pain, joint and muscle weakness, sleeping difficulties, headaches, memory problems and disorientation.

Two additional scientific study teams were sent to Afghanistan. The first arrived in June 2002, concentrating on the Jalalabad region. The second arrived four months later, broadening the study to include the capital Kabul, which has a population of nearly 3.5 million people. The city itself contains the highest recorded number of fixed targets during Operation Enduring Freedom. For the study’s purposes, the vicinity of three major bomb sites were examined. It was predicted that signatures of depleted or enriched uranium would be found in the urine and soil samples taken during the research. The team was unprepared for the shock of its findings, which indicated in both Jalalabad and Kabul, DU was causing the high levels of illness. Tests taken from a number of Jalalabad subjects showed concentrations 400% to 2000% above that for normal populations, amounts which have not been recorded in civilian studies before.

Those in Kabul who were directly exposed to US-British precision bombing showed extreme signs of contamination, consistent with uranium exposure. These included pains in joints, back/kidney pain, muscle weakness, memory problems and confusion and disorientation. Those exposed to the bombing report symptoms of flu-type illnesses, bleeding, runny noses and blood-stained mucous.  How many of these people will suffer a painful and early death from cancer? Even the study team itself complained of similar symptoms during their stay. Most of these symptoms last for days or months.

In August of 2002, UMRC completed its preliminary analysis of the results from Nangarhar.  Without exception, every person donating urine specimens tested positive for uranium contamination. The specific results indicated an astoundingly high level of contamination; concentrations were 100 to 400 times greater than those of the Gulf War Veterans tested in 1999.   A researcher reported. “We took both soil and biological samples, and found considerable presence in urine samples of radioactivity; the heavy concentration astonished us.  They were beyond our wildest imagination.”

In the fall of 2002, the UMRC field team went back to Afghanistan for a broader survey, and revealed a potentially larger exposure than initially anticipated. Approximately 30% of those interviewed in the affected areas displayed symptoms of radiation sickness.  New born babies were among those displaying symptoms, with village elders reporting that over 25% of the infants were inexplicably ill.

How widespread and extensive is the exposure?  A quote from the UMRC field report reads:

“The UMRC field team was shocked by the breadth of public health impacts coincident with the bombing. Without exception, at every bombsite investigated, people are ill. A significant portion of the civilian population presents symptoms consistent with internal contamination by uranium.”

In Afghanistan, unlike Iraq, UMRC lab results indicated high concentrations of NON-DEPLETED URANIUM, with the concentrations being much higher than in DU victims from Iraq. Afghanistan was used as a testing ground for a new generation of “bunker buster” bombs containing high concentrations of other uranium alloys.

“A significant portion of the civilian population”? It appears that by going after a handful of terrorists in Afghanistan we have poisoned a huge number of innocent civilians, with a disproportionate number of them being children.

The military has found depleted uranium in the urine of some soldiers but contends it was not enough to make them seriously ill in most cases. Critics have asked for more sensitive, more expensive testing.

————————————

According to an October 2004  Dispatch from the Italian Military Health Observatory, a total of 109 Italian soldiers have died thus far due to exposure to depleted uranium.  A spokesman at the Military Health Observatory, Domenico Leggiero, states “The total of 109 casualties exceeds the total number of persons dying as a consequence of road accidents. Anyone denying the significance of such data is purely acting out of ill faith, and the truth is that our soldiers are dying out there due to a lack of adequate protection against depleted uranium”. Members of the Observatory have petitioned for an urgent hearing “in order to study effective prevention and safeguard measures aimed at reducing the death-toll amongst our serving soldiers”.

There were only 3,000 Italian soldiers sent to Iraq, and they were there for a short time.  The number of 109 represents about 3.6% of the total.  If the same percentage of Iraqis get a similar exposure, that would amount to 936,000.  As Iraqis are permanently living in the same contaminated environment, their percentage will be higher.

The Pentagon/DoD have interfered with UMRC’s ability to have its studies published by managing, a progressive and persistent misinformation program in the press against UMRC, and through the use of its control of science research grants to refute UMRC’s scientific findings and destroy the reputation of UMRC’s scientific staff, physicians and laboratories. UMRC is the first independent research organization to find Depleted Uranium in the bodies of US, UK and Canadian Gulf War I veterans and has subsequently, following Operation Iraqi Freedom, found Depleted Uranium in the water, soils and atmosphere of Iraq as well as biological samples donated by Iraqi civilians. Yet the first thing that comes up on Internet searches are these supposed “studies repeatedly showing DU to be harmless.”  The technique is to approach the story as a debate between government and independent experts in which public interest is stimulated by polarizing the issues rather than telling the scientific and medical truth. The issues are systematically confused and misinformed by government, UN regulatory agencies (WHO, UNEP, IAEA, CDC, DOE, etc) and defense sector (military and the weapons developers and manufacturers).

Dr. Yuko Fujita, an assistant professor at Keio University, Japan who examined the effects of radioactivity in Iraq from May to June, 2003,  said : “I doubt that Iraq is fabricating data because in fact there are many children suffering from leukemia in hospitals,” Fujita said. “As a result of the Iraq war, the situation will be desperate in some five to 10 years.”

The  March 14, 2004  Tokyo Citizen’s Tribunal that “convicted” President Bush gave the following summation regarding DU weapons: (This court was a citizen’s court with no binding legal authority)

1.   Their use has indiscriminate effects;

2.   Their use is out of proportion with the pursuit of military objectives;

3.   Their use adversely affects the environment in a widespread, long term and severe manner;

4.   Their use causes superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering.

Two years ago, President Bush withdrew the United States as a signatory to the International Criminal Court’s statute, which has been ratified by all other Western democracies. The White House actually seeks to immunize U.S. leaders from war crimes prosecutions entirely. It has also demanded express immunity from ICC prosecution for American nationals.

CONCLUSIONS:

If terrorists succeeded in spreading something throughout the U.S. that ended up causing hundreds of thousands of cancer cases and birth defects over a period of many years, they would be guilty of a crime against humanity that far surpasses the Sept. 11th attacks in scope and severity. Although not deliberate, with our military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, we have done just that.  If the physical environment is so unsafe and unhealthy that one cannot safely breath, then the outer trappings of democracy have little meaning. At least under Saddam, the Iraqi people could stay healthy and conceive normal children. Few Americans are aware that in getting rid of Saddam, we left something much worse in his place.

There is more information on Iraq at the link below as well.

Source

Related Articles

Pipelines in the Middle East Afghanistan included/ Maps as well

Afghanistan’s hidden toll: Injured Troops/Statistics

Afghanistan: Troops Guarding the Poppy Fields

Victims’ families tell their stories following Nato airstrike in Afghanistan

Has Usama Bin Ladin been dead for seven years – and are the U.S. and Britain covering it up to continue war on terror?

Troops

(Afghanistan 9) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 8 ) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 7) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Civilians

(Afghanistan 6) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 5) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 4) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 3) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 2) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

(Afghanistan 1) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Published in: on September 20, 2009 at 11:30 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

CIGNA Insurance Refuses Dawn Smith Treatment For Tumour: Statement of support

Dawn lives in Atlanta. She’s an aspiring playwright. And four years ago, she was diagnosed with a rare, but treatable brain tumor.

Dawn’s doctors are ready to treat the tumor, but they can’t. CIGNA, her insurer, refuses to pay for the care she needs because the only hospitals qualified to treat her are out-of-network.  And after years of fighting, Dawn just received her final denial letter.

The scariest thing about Dawn’s story is that it could happen to any of us—to a friend of yours, or someone in your family. After all, Dawn has insurance. But as long as private insurers are the only game in town, they’ll continue to have the power to deny Americans the care they need.

Dawn is fighting back. And while CIGNA may be able to ignore Dawn, they won’t be able to ignore millions of us standing together with her. I’m joining Dawn’s fight to shine a light on Big Insurance’s abusive tactics, get Dawn the care she needs, and make sure they don’t do this to anyone ever again. Will you join me by signing a statement of support?
The statement says,I stand with Dawn Smith. CIGNA must provide the treatment she needs and stop rejecting legitimate care for all the others who are suffering.

Unfortunately, Dawn’s story isn’t unique—she’s one of the millions of Americans who are suffering—but what she’s doing about her situation is.  Instead of suffering in silence, she’s sharing her painful, powerful story so that, as she says, “no one else has to go through what I have. “I’ve been really moved by Dawn’s strength, given everything she’s going through. She has terrible pain and sudden seizures that can knock her off her feet. She’s had to move back in with her mom so she can have constant care. But through all that, she’s kept her spirits up.
The heart-breaking part is that her condition is treatable. But CIGNA’s refusal to treat her has brought her to “the end of my rope,” as she puts it. CIGNA gladly accepts Dawn’s premium payments, but when she needed care, they refused to pay for it, coming up with new reasons as they went.

Dawn’s story is a symptom of a much bigger problem. But if we all rally behind her, we can help not just her, but everyone else who’s suffering under our broken system, too. Together, we have the power to make Dawn’s story different, and in the process, to remind Congress and the American people why we so desperately need health care reform.

Clicking below will add your name: http://pol.moveon.org/dawnsmith/

Please share this with your friends. Insurance companies have been doing this to people for years. This must be stopped.  Thousands die each year because Insurance companies refuse the treatment they need. The life you save may be your own.

Or they refuse to insure them at all. Health Insurance Abuses

Muntazer al-Zaidi tells us why he Threw the Shoe

Why I Threw the Shoe

I am no hero. I just acted as an Iraqi who witnessed the pain and bloodshed of too many innocents

By Muntazer al-Zaidi

September 19, 2009

I am free. But my country is still a prisoner of war. There has been a lot of talk about the action and about the person who took it, and about the hero and the heroic act, and the symbol and the symbolic act. But, simply, I answer: what compelled me to act is the injustice that befell my people, and how the occupation wanted to humiliate my homeland by putting it under its boot.

Over recent years, more than a million martyrs have fallen by the bullets of the occupation and Iraq is now filled with more than five million orphans, a million widows and hundreds of thousands of maimed. Many millions are homeless inside and outside the country.

We used to be a nation in which the Arab would share with the Turkman and the Kurd and the Assyrian and the Sabean and the Yazid his daily bread. And the Shia would pray with the Sunni in one line. And the Muslim would celebrate with the Christian the birthday of Christ. This despite the fact that we shared hunger under sanctions for more than a decade.

Our patience and our solidarity did not make us forget the oppression. But the invasion divided brother from brother, neighbour from neighbour. It turned our homes into funeral tents.

I am not a hero. But I have a point of view. I have a stance. It humiliated me to see my country humiliated; and to see my Baghdad burned, my people killed. Thousands of tragic pictures remained in my head, pushing me towards the path of confrontation. The scandal of Abu Ghraib. The massacre of Falluja, Najaf, Haditha, Sadr City, Basra, Diyala, Mosul, Tal Afar, and every inch of our wounded land. I travelled through my burning land and saw with my own eyes the pain of the victims, and heard with my own ears the screams of the orphans and the bereaved. And a feeling of shame haunted me like an ugly name because I was powerless.

As soon as I finished my professional duties in reporting the daily tragedies, while I washed away the remains of the debris of the ruined Iraqi houses, or the blood that stained my clothes, I would clench my teeth and make a pledge to our victims, a pledge of vengeance.

The opportunity came, and I took it.

I took it out of loyalty to every drop of innocent blood that has been shed through the occupation or because of it, every scream of a bereaved mother, every moan of an orphan, the sorrow of a rape victim, the teardrop of an orphan.

I say to those who reproach me: do you know how many broken homes that shoe which I threw had entered? How many times it had trodden over the blood of innocent victims? Maybe that shoe was the appropriate response when all values were violated.

When I threw the shoe in the face of the criminal, George Bush, I wanted to express my rejection of his lies, his occupation of my country, my rejection of his killing my people. My rejection of his plundering the wealth of my country, and destroying its infrastructure. And casting out its sons into a diaspora.

If I have wronged journalism without intention, because of the professional embarrassment I caused the establishment, I apologise. All that I meant to do was express with a living conscience the feelings of a citizen who sees his homeland desecrated every day. The professionalism mourned by some under the auspices of the occupation should not have a voice louder than the voice of patriotism. And if patriotism needs to speak out, then professionalism should be allied with it.

I didn’t do this so my name would enter history or for material gains. All I wanted was to defend my country.

Source

Population of Iraq in 2008  28,221,181

Year Unemployment rate (%)
2005 25
2006 25
2007 25
2008 18
Year Oil – proved reserves (bbl)
2003 113800000000
2004 113800000000
2005 112500000000
2006 112500000000
2007 112500000000
2008 115000000000
Year Natural gas – proved reserves (cubic meters)
2003 3149000000000
2004 3149000000000
2005 3149000000000
2006 3115000000000
2007 3115000000000
2008 3170000000000

No one can say  Bush and company wanted a war for any reason other then oil and gas.

The US should pay retribution to Iraq for all the damage that has been done in the name of theft, greed, control and profiteering.

The homeless need homes, the orphans need care. The maimed need support. The list goes on and on.

For the million who have died. And those who were tortured.

Prison is where Bush and company should be.

Over a million have died, that is a Crime against humanity.

That is genocide.

That is a war crime.

The war is illegal based on lies, propaganda and fraud. There were no weapons of mass destruction.

Just the WMD the US used on the Iraqis.  They used things like White Phosphorus, Napalm, 240,000 cluster bombs, 10,000  unguided munitions, 20.000  precision bombs and missiles were dropped and I am pretty sure they also used Bunker Busters (type of nuclear bomb),  all by May 1, 2003.

That is definitely overkill. Excessive use of force against a country that had been under sanctions for about a decade. The US loves to attack the defenseless and weak.

Since then the killing has continued. The war wasn’t over as Bush declared, again he lied.  Bush is a criminal.

For that the criminals should be held responsible, to do less would be a crime against all of us.

  • Genocide
  • War crimes
  • Crimes against humanity
  • Crimes of aggression

The rest of the world cannot sit by and allow anything this horrendous to go unpunished.

It’s time for the US and other forces to get the hell out of their country.

Spanish judge resumes torture case against six senior Bush lawyers

UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection

September 19 2009

Israel pressured on nuclear sites

The UN nuclear assembly has called for Israel to open its nuclear facilities to UN inspection and sign up to the non-proliferation treaty.

The resolution, which was passed narrowly on Friday, marked a surprise victory for Arab states and others who have pushed for the move for the last 18 years.

The non-binding resolution voiced concern about “Israeli nuclear capabilities” and urged the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog, to tackle the issue.

Israel vowed it would not co-operate, saying the measure singled it out while many of its neighbours remained hostile to its existence.

“Israel will not co-operate in any matter with this resolution which is only aiming at reinforcing political hostilities and lines of division in the Middle East region,” said David Danieli, the chief Israeli delegate.

‘Glorious moment’

Israel is one of only three countries worldwide – along with India and Pakistan – outside the Non-proliferation treaty (NPT) and is widely assumed to have the Middle East’s only atomic arsenal.

(Ratified by countries in (alphabetical order)

It has never confirmed nor denied that it has nuclear weapons.

Ali Asghar Soltanieh, the Iranian ambassador, whose country’s disputed nuclear programme is under IAEA investigation, said the vote was a “glorious moment” and “a triumph for the oppressed nation of Palestine”.

Speaking later to Al Jazeera, Soltanieh said: “All like-minded, peace-loving countries have always called for a resolution to take measures to push Israel to stop their nuclear weapon programme and adhere to the NPT and put every nuclear installation under the IAEA.

“All countries in the Middle East are party to the NPT – the only non-party is Israel … the resolution was addressed to the only non-participatory [state] in the Middle East.

Tehran was one of the 21 countries sponsoring the measure.

Iran absorbed a setback later when its bid to make legally binding a 1991 resolution banning attacks on nuclear sites failed to win a consensus from the bloc of Non-Aligned Movement developing nations and so was not brought up for a vote.

UN Security Council members Russia and China backed the Israel resolution, passed by a 49-45 margin by the IAEA’s annual member states gathering. There were 16 abstentions.

Western states said it was unfair and counterproductive to isolate one member state and that an IAEA resolution passed on Thursday, which urged all Middle East nations including Israel to foreswear atomic bombs, made Friday’s proposal unnecessary.

Western backing

Before the vote, Glyn Davies, the US ambassador, said the resolution was “redundant … such an approach is highly politicised and does not address the complexities at play regarding crucial nuclear-related issues in the Middle East”.

Canada tried to block a vote on the floor with a “no-action motion”, a procedural manoeuvre that prevailed in 2007 and 2008, but lost by an eight-vote margin.

Diplomats from the non-aligned movement of developing nations said times had changed with the advent of the US administration of Barack Obama, the US president.

“People and countries are bolder now, willing to call a spade a spade. You cannot hide or ignore the truth, the double standards, of Israel’s nuclear capability forever,” the Reuters news agency quoted one diplomat as saying.

“The new US administration has certainly helped this thinking with its commitment to universal nuclear disarmament and nuclear weapons-free zones.”

The non-binding measure was last voted on in 1991, when IAEA membership was much smaller, and passed by 39-31.

Source

John F. Kennedy wanted inspectors to go into Israel as well.

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human Experiments  and WMD

Iran Proposes Control System Aimed at Eliminating Nuclear Weapons

Afghanistan’s hidden toll: Injured Troops

Afghanistan’s hidden toll: Troops invalided out triple in three years

Unpublished figures show thousands of ex-soldiers have sought financial help – many suffering with stress disorders. Brian Brady and Nina Lakhani report

Sunday, 30 August 2009

The numbers of ‘post-service’ claims has risen by a factor of almost 100, from 15 to 1,455 since 2005

At its bloodiest, the fighting around Sangin in Afghanistan’s Helmand Province, has been likened to Rorke’s Drift, the 1879 battle portrayed in the film Zulu. The military discourage the comparison but as one officer puts it: “The only difference is there are no Zulus at Sangin.”

The town has seen some of the deadliest fighting of the campaign. More British soldiers have been killed there and more medals won than anywhere else in Afghanistan. But the benefits the British troops have brought are seized on by officials, including decreased opium production and more Afghans being educated. But the benefits have come at a price, not all of which are as obvious as the monuments to the fallen British soldiers erected by their comrades.

Shortages of helicopters and surveillance equipment mean troops are only as safe as far as they can see with their rifle sights or binoculars. The Taliban also know it and are careful to lay their lethal mines and improvised explosive devices just out of sight. Soldiers work on the basis that every time they patrol there is a one in four chance one of them will die. Privately, senior British officers say they currently work on the assumption at least a “limb a day” will be lost.

The tally of dead currently stands at 208, but some senior officers believe this could rise sharply. The numbers of those wounded and maimed have soared by 300 per cent in the past three years as the increasingly bloody struggle to maintain order has intensified. New figures obtained by The Independent on Sunday also show that the numbers claiming compensation for injuries sustained in Iraq and Afghanistan are more than 12 times higher than the total in 2005.

Unpublished figures from the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) reveal in disturbing detail the “hidden costs” of the military action, with soaring numbers being forced out by wounds. The number of soldiers applying to the AFCS for financial assistance after being medically discharged rose from 200 in 2005-06, when the scheme opened, to 845 last year. Troops claiming for injuries suffered in service rose from 240 to 3,255 during the same period.

The disclosures follow revelations last week that service chiefs expect the number wounded in Afghanistan to have doubled by the end of the year. The total to the end of July was 299 – compared to 245 in the whole of 2008.

The figures also show that the numbers of “post-service” claims has risen by a factor of almost 100, from 15 to 1,455 since 2005. A Ministry of Defence spokesman admitted the heavy toll is due to the number of people experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after leaving the services.

PTSD sufferers tell of how traumatic memories come back regularly and involuntarily, resulting in chronic anxiety and hyper-alertness. The numbers affected are contentious, but conservative estimates say that tens of thousands of British troops who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq are suffering.

The MoD’s latest assessment of psychiatric health problems within UK forces, completed late last month, showed there were 3,181 new cases of “mental disorder” in 2008 – 16 cases for every 1,000 personnel. Troops who had been deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq showed high rates of “neurotic disorders”, including PTSD, with the Royal Marines affected more than all the other services.

The MoD acknowledges the high rates of mental health problems caused by military operations. In documents, seen by the IoS, officials concede that “some personnel returned from operations with psychological problems particularly when tour lengths exceeded expectations”. The MoD has appealed for increased “X factor” payments, which recognise the extra difficulties faced by service personnel.

Critics insist it is too little, too late, and fails to acknowledge the scale of the problem. Lord Guthrie, the former head of the Army, said the authorities had been slow to recognise the problem’s scale and extent. “When we go to war, we just don’t have the wherewithal to look after the physical and mental needs of our service people. You have to make sure that when you go to war, you are prepared to look after people, and that hasn’t happened.

“Successive governments have had a very poor record and have cut, cut and cut again the care for our service people. Having to rely on the NHS is not good enough. It has no capacity to deal with the extra people who need medical attention, and all this has been compounded by the reluctance of the MoD to admit how big the problem is.

“We hear a lot about the dead, but rather less about the wounded. We haven’t been able to see the proper figures,” he said.

Problems grow once soldiers have gone home, Lord Guthrie said: “You no longer have people to talk to. Support is very hard to come by. The Government has woken up much too late to this. Ideally, you need a network of military people throughout the NHS, but how do you pay for that?”

James Saunders, 39, served in the first Gulf War in the Royal Artillery. Looking back, he was suffering from PTSD when discharged in 1993, but he believes the Army was glad to close the door on him and his problems.

“When I asked to get out, I’d already been AWOL for six months, totally off-track, so they were glad to get rid of me. I’d see guys who’d been in Northern Ireland, drinking and getting into fights, but they were never punished. I realise now that the sergeants knew it was because they were suffering mentally, but rather than talk about it, they just ignored it.”

Former SAS trooper Bob Paxman, 41, said veterans’ problems are exacerbated when they leave the forces and are “out of the family”. His GP “didn’t have a clue” where to send him and specialised counselling failed. He suffered a total breakdown in 2006.

“I was on a dangerous job in Africa. I was a total wreck, at rock bottom. If I was left alone for more than five minutes, the flashbacks would come big style. So I self-medicated and filled myself with as much booze as possible. One night, I sank a bottle of whisky and put my 9mm pistol in my mouth but I couldn’t pull the trigger,” he said.

After his experiences Mr Paxman helped set up the charity talking2minds to help others with similar problems. Combat Stress is another charity which has stepped into the vacuum created by the MoD and the NHS. It is helping around 4,000 ex-servicemen and women with combat-related mental health problems.

It takes, on average, 14 years after discharge for a veteran suffering problems to approach them. Most current patients were on active duty
in the Falklands, Northern Ireland and the first Gulf War; less than 10 per cent have served in Iraq or Afghanistan. Hundreds more are treated in private hospitals ever year, paid for by the NHS.

David Hill, Combat Stress’s chief executive, said: “The scale and size of the problem is not known and is not adequately mapped in the UK – unlike the US and Australia. We are currently seeing an unprecedented increase in demand. Since 2005, there has been a 66 per cent increase in referrals and we are already providing support for 316 veterans of recent conflicts.” He says the NHS has no accurate figures on its veteran patients, and without such figures, no effective planning can be done.

In contrast, in Scotland, veterans are more involved in planning mental health services. They work in collaboration with NHS and voluntary services to ensure they get the services they need. “This is a very good model, and one that we could all learn from,” said Mr Hill. “There is a real drive in Scotland to understand more about the size and scale of the problem, and the services required to properly meet the current and future needs of veterans.”

The looming extent of problems created by Afghanistan has prompted the US to act. Earlier this month, it announced controversial plans to train all 1.1 million of its soldiers in emotional resilience. The training, the first of its kind for any military, hopes to prevent mental health problems from developing by helping soldiers to recognise and cope better with stressful situations in combat and civilian life. The $117m (£72m) scheme, to be rolled out by next summer, is unproven but the rising rates of suicide, PTSD and substance misuse has convinced military commanders to try it.

British experts aren’t convinced it is the correct route to take. Professor Simon Wessely, director of military health research at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, said: “I don’t think, to be honest, that there is a great call for this, I doubt it will be well received by the armed forces themselves anyway, and any benefits are likely to be slim… so no, I wouldn’t be pushing this. But if the US funds the research and show a significant benefit, then I am happy to be persuaded.”

Evidence strongly suggests that attempts to prevent PTSD work poorly, he said. “We have established and successful treatments;, the problem is acceptability and delivery.”

War wounds: ‘I was on a self-destruct train. There was no help’

James Saunders, 39, from Hampshire, joined the Army aged 17. Three years later, he flew to Iraq and spent six months fighting in the first Gulf War where he was involved in a terrifying friendly fire incident that injured five soldiers. On his return, his life spiralled out on control and he sought, and got, a discharge in 1993. It took another 12 years for him to find the psychological help he needed.

“We would drive down Basra Road, looking at the carnage left behind by allied air forces. It was like a slow motion film with body parts everywhere, sitting in cars. These images were burnt into my memory.

“When we flew home, a sergeant handed us all a piece of paper which said that we might experience problems with relationships. I was 21; I laughed and threw it in the bin. Eighteen months later, my son was stillborn and that sped up the self-destruct train. I ruined my relationship; cut myself off from family; I was taking every drug you can think of; went awol for months and eventually ended up in prison. I met at least six other army guys inside, all with similar problems, but there was no help.

“It wasn’t until a friend told me about Combat Stress four years ago that like so many guys, I realised I had PTSD.

“If I’d told anyone in the Army about the nightmares or how I felt I’d have been considered unreliable. That’s the way the military was, and still is. They train you physically but not mentally, which means good people are lost unnecessarily. If I’d had help back then, I’d still be in the Army now, coming up to my 22nd year of service.”
Source

Symptoms of mental illnesses.

  • PTSD
  • Clinical depression
  • Anxiety states
  • Adjustment disorders
  • Phobic disorders
  • Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
  • Bi-polar illness (manic depression)
  • Issues relating to past and present substance abuse/dependence (drug and alcohol)
  • Psychotic conditions in a non-acute phase
  • Issues relating to anger

Operation Enduring Freedom

Casualties of Troops By Country

More times then not, someone is watching their comrades dieing. That leaves a long term memory of sorrow and loss.

They may even be holding them in their arms as they die.

To September 18 2009

Country Total
Australia 11
Belgium 1
Canada 131
Czech 3
Denmark 24
Estonia 6
Finland 1
France 31
Germany 33
Hungary 2
Italy 21
Latvia 3
Lithuania 1
Netherlands 21
Norway 4
Poland 13
Portugal 2
Romania 11
South Korea 1
Spain 25
Sweden 2
Turkey 2
UK 216
US 838
Total 1403

Coalition Military Fatalities By Year

To September 18 2009

Year Total
2001 12
2002 69
2003 57
2004 59
2005 131
2006 191
2007 232
2008 294
2009 358
Total 1403

Source

Names of soldier,  dates  of deaths, cause of death

Each year the number of casualties are risisng.

The spin doctors try to make us believe things are getting better in Afghanistan, when in fact they are deteriorating.

Population of Afghanistan: In 2008  32,738,376

They are helping Afghanistan are they? Well I don’t see any improvements.

What you don’t hear much about in the News Media.

Unemployment rate In Afghanistan: No improvement there?

Year Unemployment rate (%)
2000 8
2006 40
2007 40
2008 40

Infant Mortality Rate is Rising: No improvement there?

Year Infant mortality rate (deaths/1,000 live births)
2000 149.28
2001 147.02
2002 144.76
2003 142.48
2004 165.96
2005 163.07
2006 160.23
2007 157.43
2008 154.67

Literacy Rate is Declining: Improved a bit for 5 years and is now below the 2000, 15% . No improvement there?

Year Literacy (%)
2000 15
2001 15
2002 21
2003 21
2004 21
2005 21
2006 21
2007 12.6
2008 12.6

Afghan Poverty rates are rising: No improvement there?

Year Population below poverty line (%)
2004 23
2005 53
2006 53
2007 53
2008 53

Afghans fit for Military Service: So one has to wonder, how many may decide to fight against NATO forces? They are seeing their friends and family die at the hands of NATO.

Year Manpower fit for military service
2000 3,432,236
2001 3,561,957
2002 3,696,379
2003 3,837,646
2004 3,642,659
2005 2,662,946
2006 2,508,574
2007 2,508,574
2008 3,946,685

Source

There have been over 56,000 Afghan Civilians injured and over 8,000 who have died because if the war.  They to suffer from all the same things soldiers suffer from as well.  The numbers on both side are growing.

The number of civilians killed in fighting between the Taliban and foreign forces in Afghanistan is rising.

March 9, 2009

The United Nations says the toll in 2008 was 40 per cent more than in the previous year, and things could get worse with the arrival of more US troops.

Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr reports from Kabul.

Within the first 6 months of 2009 over 1,000 Civilians were killed.

Since then many, many more have died.

Things have escalated in Afghanistan since the arrival of the troops from the US. The US is not wanted there.

The number of soldiers who die and get injured have risen as well.

Even the recent election was fraudulent.

So what are the soldiers dieing for?  Certainly not for “democracy” that is just a sham.  Something the spin doctors like to feed the public.

“We are making progress” something else the spin doctors like to feed the public.

The spin doctors tell us “Our soldiers die for a noble cause”. What a crock.

They actually want to control the middle east and it’s people. They want to control the resources of gas and oil.

That is really why men, women and  children  are dieing or becoming severely injured, civilian or military makes little difference.

Lost arms, lost legs, lost eyesight, mental health problems are just a few of the injuries that occur.  Permanent  injures that last for the rest of their lives.

On both sides there are thousands upon thousands of victims who will suffer for the rest of their lives.

Where do we draw the line? When do we say enough.

Usama Bin Ladin has never been connected to 9/11.

Has Usama Bin Ladin been dead for seven years – and are the U.S. and Britain covering it up to continue war on terror? FBI never linked him to 9/11

So why is NATO in Afghanistan?

More than half of British public against UK mission in Afghanistan

(Afghanistan 9) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Elusive threats boost PTSD risk in Afghanistan

Traumatic brain injuries the signature wound of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq

British officer leaked 8,000 Civilians killed in Afghanistan

Call for murder charges to be brought over Trafigura’s toxic dumping

Petition filed in Dutch court claims Trafigura knew waste that maimed thousands in Ivory Coast was hazardous

By Cahal Milmo

September 18 2009

Trafigura, the oil-trading company at the centre of the scandal caused by the dumping of tons of toxic waste in one of the world’s poorest countries, could be prosecuted for murder after a dossier of evidence was submitted to a court in the Netherlands yesterday, alleging that the sludge caused deaths and serious injuries. A complaint filed by Greenpeace Netherlands calls for a Dutch prosecution arising from Trafigura’s actions in July 2006 – when a chartered tanker carrying the contaminated waste arrived in Amsterdam – to be widened to include events in Ivory Coast a month later which caused thousands of people to fall ill after tons of the foul-smelling slurry was dumped in the port of Abidjan. The campaigning group wants Dutch courts to order public prosecutors to bring charges of murder, manslaughter, negligence and conspiracy against the London-based commodities giant, which has vigorously denied any knowledge of the fly-tipping of the waste by an Ivorian sub-contractor in August 2006.

Emails between Trafigura employees submitted to the court in The Hague are claimed by Greenpeace to show that the company knew the waste – described in one internal memo as “the shit” – was potentially hazardous and could not be exported outside the European Union. Trafigura insists that its managers sought at all times to dispose lawfully of the “slops” on board its chartered tanker, the Probo Koala.

Trafigura, which last year had a turnover of $73bn (£44bn, equivalent to twice the GDP of Ivory Coast), has agreed to a multimillion-pound payout to settle Britain’s largest group lawsuit, brought by 30,000 Abidjan residents who fell ill after breathing in fumes from the sludge.

The settlement of the High Court case, expected to be finalised within weeks, concerns claims by victims who suffered short-term illnesses. But it does not apply to allegations, which will now not be tested in the British courts, that the dumped waste caused more serious problems, including deaths, miscarriages and birth defects.

Trafigura has fought a three-year battle, engaging PR consultants and libel lawyers to dispute critical reporting of the incident, and insists that the waste could not have caused the serious injuries alleged. A United Nations report this week stated that there seemed to be “prima facie evidence” that up to a dozen deaths in Abidjan were linked to the sludge.

The oil trader, the third-largest of its kind in the world, is already being prosecuted in the Netherlands over claims that it breached Dutch and European laws by misdeclaring the nature of the sludge on the Probo Koala when it arrived in Amsterdam, and by subsequently taking the waste outside EU borders. A Greenpeace spokesman said: “The emails show that Trafigura employees knew the waste would be difficult to deal with and were desperate to find someone who would take it off their hands.

“There are now no legal proceedings which will test the claims that as well as making thousands of people in Ivory Coast sick, the waste was also responsible for deaths and other serious injuries of innocent people. We are asking the Dutch courts to change that.”

The contaminated sludge – its composition is disputed by Trafigura and opponents – was the by-product of deals struck by the company’s traders in 2005 and 2006 to buy a cheap and dirty oil known as “coker naptha” from a Mexican refinery and extract clean fuel from it by adding a mixture of caustic soda and a catalyst. Emails show Trafigura expected to make a profit of $7m (£4m) from each cargo, despite the fact that “caustic washes are banned in most countries due to the hazardous nature of the waste”. This do-it-yourself process was performed in or about April 2006 on board the Probo Koala while it was anchored off Gibraltar. The resulting waste arrived in Abidjan on 19 August 2006 and was unloaded from the tanker into trucks hired by Compagnie Tommy, the sub-contractor employed by Trafigura’s shipping agent.

It was then dumped at 18 sites, including drains and lagoons, around the sprawling city, leading to a flood of victims complaining of symptoms including sickness, diarrhoea and breathing difficulties. Autopsy reports included in the Greenpeace dossier suggest that the bodies of 12 people who died in Abidjan showed high levels of hydrogen sulphide, a poisonous gas which campaigners claim was present in the waste. Trafigura insists the gas could not have been emitted by the sludge.

In a statement, the company accused Greenpeace of a “wholly selective interpretation” of a small number of emails containing “trader-speak” which could not be taken literally. It added: “More importantly, on a proper analysis of all the material and of what in fact happened, it is clear that the responsible individuals at Trafigura sought at all times to ensure that the slops were disposed of lawfully.

“Greenpeace Netherlands’ unfounded accusations are utterly rejected by Trafigura. It is deeply regrettable that Greenpeace has chosen to make a number of serious and unfounded remarks, without any regard to the available scientific evidence or to statements made by Trafigura based on detailed analysis by independent experts.”

Source

The toxic price paid by the poor in processing our waste

The Trafigura episode is part of a far wider scandal
The saga of Trafigura and the poisoning of Abidjan is, first and foremost, the tale of a single company’s grotesque – and possibly criminal – irresponsibility. But this episode is also a lurid illustration of the wider scandal of Western companies and nations dumping their harmful waste on vulnerable communities around the world.

It was probably sheer accident that Trafigura’s activities in 2006 came to public attention. The local Ivory Coast trucking firm which Trafigura paid to get rid of the toxic contents of its tanks dumped all the waste around a single city, thus precipitating a mass poisoning. If they had been less lazy and spread the material over a larger area it is entirely possible the crime would never have been detected, or at least not traced back to Trafigura.

There is likely to be a great deal more of this sort of illegal dumping going on in benighted parts of the world where environmental controls are weak and there are poor and unscrupulous locals willing to despoil their surroundings for a relatively cheap fee.

It is not just toxic chemicals which poison communities. Earlier this year an investigation in which this newspaper took part uncovered that British waste subcontractors are sending “e-waste” (defunct televisions, computers and assorted electronic gadgets) collected from UK council dumps, to Africa.

British law says such potentially hazardous items must be dismantled, or recycled, by specialist firms. But there is evidence that subcontractors are ignoring that law and simply dispatching the refuse to countries such as Nigeria and Ghana. Here the items are stripped of their raw metals by poor Africans working on poisoned waste dumps.

And it is not just Africa which is suffering from the manner in which our societies dispose of our waste. Streams and trees in southern China have been found clogged with plastic bags and other non-degradable rubbish that originated in Britain.

This pollution is the by-product of an entirely legal trade. European Union regulations prevent member states from dumping garbage overseas. But what they are allowed to do is send waste for recycling abroad. This is what happens with much British refuse. The problem is that the sorting often ends up taking place in places such as southern China where health risks and pollution are a low priority for local authorities.

The effects of such activities might not be as dramatic as Trafigura’s mass dumping of hazardous chemicals. But they can be just as damaging to the health of the people who live in the areas where this waste ends up. And the turning of a blind eye by Western interests (some of them public servants) who are looking to save some money is no less shameful.

Trafigura must be held fully to account for what it has done, not least to send a powerful message to other firms around the world who are using similarly unscrupulous waste disposal methods. But we delude ourselves if we imagine this was an isolated case of bad behaviour in Western waste disposal.

The globalisation of trade has brought many benefits to rich and poor alike around the world. But the manner in which we have imposed the toxic cost of disposing of our refuse on those with the weakest defences shows its dark side. We cannot continue to wash our hands – and our consciences – of the consequences.

Source

For Trafigura Emails go to below link.

How UK oil company Trafigura tried to cover up African pollution disaster

How UK oil company Trafigura tried to cover up African pollution disaster

By David Leigh

September 18 2009

• Trafigura offers payout to 31,000 victims of toxic dumping
• Secret email trail exposes truth behind £100m legal battle
Read the emails here

Waste-removal-experts-in--001

Waste removal experts clear hazardous material from a site in Abidjan, Ivory Coast in November 2006. Photograph: AP

The Guardian can reveal evidence today of a massive cover-up by the British oil trader Trafigura, in one of the worst pollution disasters in recent history.

Internal emails show that Trafigura, which yesterday suddenly announced an offer to pay compensation to 31,000 west African victims, was fully aware that its waste dumped in Ivory Coast was so toxic that it was banned in Europe.

Thousands of west Africans besieged local hospitals in 2006, and a number died, after the dumping of hundreds of tonnes of highly toxic oil waste around the country’s capital, Abidjan. Official local autopsy reports on 12 alleged victims appeared to show fatal levels of the poisonous gas hydrogen sulphide, one of the waste’s lethal byproducts.

Trafigura has been publicly insisting for three years that its waste was routine and harmless. It claims it was “absolutely not dangerous”.

David Leigh: ‘They claimed the injuries were all imaginary’Link to this audio

It has until now denied compensation claims, and its lawyers repeatedly threatened anyone worldwide who sought to contradict its version. It launched a libel case against BBC Newsnight, forced an alleged correction from the Times, demanded the Guardian delete articles, and yesterday tried to gag journalists in the Netherlands and Norway with legal threats.

But the dozens of damning internal Trafigura emails which have now come to light reveal how traders were told in advance that their planned chemical operation, a cheap and dirty process called “caustic washing”, generated such dangerous wastes that it was widely outlawed in the west.

The documents reveal that the London-based traders hoped to make profits of $7m a time by buying up what they called “bloody cheap” cargoes of sulphur-contaminated Mexican gasoline. They decided to try to process the fuel on board a tanker anchored offshore, creating toxic waste they called “slops”.

One trader wrote on 10 March 2006: “I don’t know how we dispose of the slops and I don’t imply we would dump them, but for sure, there must be some way to pay someone to take them.” The resulting black, stinking, slurry was eventually dumped around landfills in Abidjan, after Trafigura paid an unqualified local man to take it away in tanker trucks at a cheap rate.

Trafigura’s libel lawyers, Carter-Ruck, recently demanded the Guardian deleted published articles, saying it was “gravely defamatory” and “untrue” to say Trafigura’s waste had been dumped cheaply and could have caused deaths and serious injuries. The Dutch paper Volkskrant and Norwegian TV said they were yesterday also threatened with gagging actions Trafigura also launched a libel action against the BBC’s Newsnight, complaining it had been wrongly accused of causing deaths, disfigurement and miscarriages, and had “suffered serious damage to their reputation”. The BBC filed a fighting defence this week, accusing Trafigura of knowing its chemicals were “highly toxic, potentially lethal and posed a serious risk to public health”. The broadcaster also alleged a cover-up, saying Trafigura’s denials “lack credibility and candour”.

The UN human rights special rapporteur, Professor Okechukwu Ibeanu, criticised Trafigura for potentially “stifling independent reporting and public criticism” in a report the oil trader tried and failed to prevent being published in Geneva this week.

He wrote: “According to official estimates, there were 15 deaths, 69 persons hospitalised and more than 108,000 medical consultations … there seems to be strong prima facie evidence that the reported deaths and adverse health consequences are related to the dumping.”

Trafigura’s lobbyists, Bell Pottinger, claimed to be “appalled” by the report, saying it was “premature”, “inaccurate”, “potentially damaging”, “poorly researched”, and “deeply flawed”.

Yesterday Greenpeace launched a legal action in Amsterdam calling for the oil firm to be prosecuted there for homicide or grievous bodily harm. It said: “This intentional pollution … has caused many people to suffer serious injuries and has even led to death.”

Trafigura said it “utterly rejected” claims of a cover-up. “Every statement that has been made … has been made in good faith”. The firm said the autopsy reports were unreliable and that hydrogen sulphide in the waste was only there in “potential” form. It had never actually been released. It said the emails contained “crude and distasteful” language, but had been taken “out of context” and should “not be taken literally”.

It repeated denials that the slops could have caused death or serious injury, and were highly toxic. It denied lying about the composition of the slops.

A sudden public announcement about the settlement offer in the compensation case followed legal attempts yesterday to prevent publication of Trafigura documents. The compensation deal is likely to be confirmed imminently, according to Martyn Day, a senior partner at the British law firm Leigh Day, which has brought one of the biggest group actions in legal history, seeking damages of £100m.

He said today in Abidjan, where he has been negotiating the settlement: “The claimants are very pleased.”

Trafigura said the deal – for an undisclosed amount – was likely to be acceptable to most if not all of the claimants. It was based on an acceptance that the company had no liability for the most serious deaths and injuries alleged in the dumping scandal. Trafigura says it is the world’s third-biggest private oil trader, and declared a $440m profit last year. Its 200 traders are reported to receive annual bonuses of up to $1m each.

Source

Trafigura should be charged with murder. Man slaughter and a few other assorted things. Blackmail may even be a potential case.

Someone or a few should be doing jail time. This was a deliberate act on their part. This was no accident.

They shouldn’t be dumping their toxic slop.

Trafigura is behaving like a temper, tantrum, throwing, brat, that got caught doing something horrible. I suppose they think they are above the law.

The reporters were just doing their job.  Digging up dirt.

That is their job. Seeking the truth.

Call for murder charges to be brought over Trafigura’s toxic dumping


UN inquiry finds Gaza war crimes

A United Nations investigation into Israel’s war on Gaza has found evidence that both sides committed war crimes during the three-week conflict.

Judge Richard Goldstone, who led the inquiry, said he found evidence of Israeli war crimes in the assault, which started on December 27, 2008, and killed more than 1,400 Palestinians.

His report also suggested that Palestinian rocket fire into Israel may constitute a crime against humanity.

The report, which comes at the end of a six-month inquiry and will be presented to the UN Human Rights Council later this month, said Israel had violated international humanitarian law and used disproportionate force.

The report said Israel deliberately attacked civilians, failed to take precautions to minimise loss of civilian life and cited strong evidence that Israeli forces committed “grave breaches” of the Geneva Convention.

In video

UN inquiry finds Israel guilty of Gaza war crimes

Judge Goldstone, a former South African judge, said: “The mission concluded that actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly in some respects crimes against humanity, were committed by the Israel Defence Force.”The investigators recommended that the UN Security Council should call on Israel and Palestinian authorities to launch their own credible investigations into the conflict within three months.

If either side failed to do that, the council should refer the matter to the International Criminal Court prosecutor in the Hague within six months, the report said.

Palestinian violations

The report “concludes there is also evidence that Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity,” by firing rockets into southern Israel.

“The rocket and mortar attacks have caused terror in the affected communities of southern Israel, causing loss of life and physical and mental injury to civilians, as well as damage to buildings and property,” it said.

But only four paragraphs of a seven-page summary of the report were devoted to Palestinian violations, and Goldstone’s team was more sharply critical of Israel.

The report said there were “numerous instances of deliberate attacks on civilians” and civilian objects in Gaza.The firing of white phosphorous shells and the use of high explosive artillery shells were listed as “violations of humanitarian law”.

Al Jazeera’s Sherine Tadros, reporting from Gaza, said: “The theme that runs through this new UN report is the idea of excessive force being used [by Israel] and deliberate targeting of civilians.

“There was nothing to warn civilians that there were incoming rockets.

“The Israelis say they provided leaflets and made thousands of calls to Gazan citizens, but after they called them and dropped leaflets, they didn’t give them any option of where to go.

“Even the United Nations shelter was hit.”

Our correspondent said Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza were studying what Goldstone had said and would comment on it in due course.

Israeli response

Israel immediately dismissed the report as one-sided.

“Both the mandate of the mission and the resolution establishing it prejudged the outcome,” the foreign ministry said.

Israel said its military had opened more than 100 inquiries into allegations of alleged wrongdoing by its forces, but had closed most of them because the accusations were found to be baseless.

Israel had refused to co-operate with the UN investigation, saying the UN Human Rights Council that ordered it was biased against Israel, something Goldstone and the three other members of the team deny.

Goldstone, the former chief prosecutor of the international courts for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, headed the fact-finding mission which conducted dozens of interviews and investigations.

About 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed during the war and about 5,500 people were wounded, the overwhelming majority of them in Gaza.

Source

Israel commits crimes every day against those in Gaza and the West Bank. They always have an excuse of some sort and they deny everything.

Israel’s ‘Numbers Cemetaries’: PLO Calls for Repatriation of Prisoner/ MIA Corpses

Israel’s war on Gaza killed 252 children, report claims

Not one penny has reached Gaza to rebuild

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human Experiments  and WMD

Why Not Crippling Sanctions for Israel and the US?

Gaza (1): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (2): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (3): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (4): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (6) A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Gaza (5): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

There a other numerous stories about Gaza War Especially in December and  January Archives.

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Victims’ families tell their stories following Nato airstrike in Afghanistan

By Ghaith Abdul-Ahad in Kunduz
September 11 2009

Fazel-Muhamad

Fazel Muhamad, 48, holding pictures of family members who were killed in the attack. Photograph: Ghaith Abdul-Ahad

At first light last Friday, in the Chardarah district of Kunduz province in northern Afghanistan, the villagers gathered around the twisted wreckage of two fuel tankers that had been hit by a Nato airstrike. They picked their way through a heap of almost a hundred charred bodies and mangled limbs which were mixed with ash, mud and the melted plastic of jerry cans, looking for their brothers, sons and cousins. They called out their names but received no answers. By this time, everyone was dead.

What followed is one of the more macabre scenes of this or any war. The grief-stricken relatives began to argue and fight over the remains of the men and boys who a few hours earlier had greedily sought the tanker’s fuel. Poor people in one of the world’s poorest countries, they had been trying to hoard as much as they could for the coming winter.

“We didn’t recognise any of the dead when we arrived,” said Omar Khan, the turbaned village chief of Eissa Khail. “It was like a chemical bomb had gone off, everything was burned. The bodies were like this,” he brought his two hands together, his fingers curling like claws. “There were like burned tree logs, like charcoal.

“The villagers were fighting over the corpses. People were saying this is my brother, this is my cousin, and no one could identify anyone.”

So the elders stepped in. They collected all the bodies they could and asked the people to tell them how many relatives each family had lost.

A queue formed. One by one the bereaved gave the names of missing brothers, cousins, sons and nephews, and each in turn received their quota of corpses. It didn’t matter who was who, everyone was mangled beyond recognition anyway. All that mattered was that they had a body to bury and perform prayers upon.

“A man comes and says, ‘I lost my brother and cousin’, so we gave him two bodies,” said Omar Khan. “Another says I lost five relatives, so we gave him five bodies to take home and bury. When we had run out of bodies we started giving them limbs, legs, arms, torsos.” In the end only five families went away without anything. “Their sons are still missing.”

Omar Khan’s small eyes narrowed and his mouth formed a disgusted circle. “The smell was so bad. For three days I smelled of burned meat and fuel.”

Omar Khan was one of 11 villagers the Guardian interviewed about the airstrike. We arrived in the region early this week with the intention of visiting the site of the attack, but the kidnapping of a New York Times journalist and the firefight that preceded his rescue, leaving four people dead, meant the journey there was too difficult. Instead the villagers came into the city to tell us their stories.

We sat around a table in the basement of a hotel, and one by one their accounts of the airstrike – which killed 70-100 people, making it one of the most devastating of the war – spilled out. The villagers said the Taliban had hijacked the fuel tankers at 7pm on Thursday evening and driven them off the main road to Kabul, through Ali Abad district, into their stronghold of Chardarah, to the south-west of Kunduz.

To reach Chardarah they had to ford a shallow river to avoid a bridge garrisoned by the Afghan army. But when they drove the trucks into the water they became stuck, so the Taliban summoned the people in the nearby villages to help.

Jamaludin, a 45-year-old farmer, had been praying in the mosque when he heard the sound of a tractor. “I went home and found that three of my brothers and my nephew had left with my tractor,” he said. “I called my brother to ask him where they had gone. He said the Taliban had asked him to bring the tractor and help them pull a tanker.” Jamaluddin was alarmed. “I asked him what tanker? It wasn’t our business, let the Taliban bring their own tractors. I called him back an hour later. He said they couldn’t get the trucks out and the Taiban wouldn’t let him leave, so I went back to sleep.”

Realising the tankers were stuck, the Taliban decided to siphon off the fuel and asked people to come and help themselves to the ghanima, the spoils of war. There would be free fuel for everyone.

Assadullah, a thin 19-year-old with a wisp of black hair falling on his forehead, got a call from a friend who said the Taliban were distributing free fuel.

“I took two fuel cans with me, I called my brother and a friend and we went. There was a full moon and we could see very clearly. There were a lot of people already there. They were pushing and shoving, trying to reach the tap to fill their jerry cans. We are poor people, and we all wanted to get some fuel for the winter.

“I filled my cans and moved away while my brother was pushing to fill his. I walked for a hundred, maybe two hundred metres.”

It was about 1am on Friday that the aircraft attacked and incinerated the stolen fuel tankers. “There was a big light in the sky and then an explosion,” Assadullah said. “I fell on my face. When I came to, there was thick smoke and I couldn’t see anything. I called, I shouted for my brother but he didn’t answer. I couldn’t see him. There was fire everywhere and silence and bodies were burning.”

He pulled up his long shirt to show me four small shrapnel bruises and two burns on his neck.

Jamaludin woke up at about 1am to start making food. It was Ramadan, and he had to prepare Sehur, the last meal before sunrise. “I called my brother again and told him I could hear lots of aeroplanes in the sky, why wasn’t he back? He said he was bringing some fuel and would be home soon. I hung up and went into the courtyard, and then there was a big fire, like a big lamp in the middle of the sky. I called my brother again and his phone was off. I left home and ran towards the river. The smell of smoke was coming from there.

“When I got there I couldn’t see my brother.I shouted for him. I saw some people carrying injured on their shoulders, then I went back home to pray and wait for the light.”

Jan Mohammad, an old man with a white beard and green eyes, said angrily: “I ran, I ran to find my son because nobody would give me a lift. I couldn’t find him.”

He dropped his head on his palm that was resting on the table, and started banging his head against his white mottled hand. When he raised his head his eyes were red and tears were rolling down his cheek: “I couldn’t find my son, so I took a piece of flesh with me home and I called it my son. I told my wife we had him, but I didn’t let his children or anyone see. We buried the flesh as it if was my son.”

He broke off, then shouted at the young Assadullah, who had knocked at the old man’s house and told his son to come with them there was free fuel for everyone, “You destroyed my home”, Assadu-llah turned his head and looked at the wall. “You destroyed my home,” he shouted again. Jan Mohammad dropped his head again on his palm and rolled it left and right, his big gray turban moving like a huge pendulum, “Taouba [forgiveness],” he hissed. “People lost their fathers and sons for a little bit of fuel. Forgiveness.”

Omar Khan, the village chief, was crying now and looking at the ceiling.

Fazel Muhamad a 48-year-old farmer with seven deep lines creasing his forehead and a white prayers cap, threw two colour passport pictures in front of me, one of a thickly bearded man and the other a young boy. “My cousin and his son,” he said. “Around 10pm, my cousin told me the Taliban were distributing fuel to the people and he was going to get some for the winter. I asked him to stay and not go, there were planes and it was dangerous at night, but he went anyway.

“At one or two in the morning we heard a big explosion and I saw fire coming form the sky. My cousin’s wife came running, she said go look for your cousin, but I waited until I had finished my dawn prayers, no one could eat anything.

“I arrived there and I saw dead bodies, some were in the middle of the river, I walked around looking for him and his son but I couldn’t find him. I went back home and his wife asked me did you see him, is he dead, where is he? I said I couldn’t find him. She was wailing and crying.

“I went again looking for him. There was light now, I picked through the bodies, the Arbabs [village elders] were distributing the flesh, but I didn’t go there. I looked through the ground and I could only see his two feet and his son’s feet. I recognised them because he and his son had henna on their toes.”

Islamu-ldin, a 20-year-old from Issa khail village with tufts of hair sprouting from his cheek, took his turn to speak. He said he ran for three hours to get to the riverbed to look for his brother.

“Our village is far from the river, I searched a lot through the dead, and I found my brother. I recognized him from his clothes. But we only found his upper body, maybe someone took the legs, maybe it just burned to ashes.”

Omar Khan was weeping openly now. A few other men resisted, but their eyes were as red as those of Jan Muhamad, who was babbling and shouting at the young Assadullah again and again.

Saleh Muhamad, a 25-year-old man with thick beard, wanted to get some fuel but no one would give him a lift. His brother and brother-in-law went and he went to sleep, then he heard the explosion. “I waited till darkness ended, then went there. I didn’t find anyone I knew, so I waited for the elders. They gave me two bodies, they looked like my relatives and I came back with them.”

Another village elder said that at least a dozen of the dead were from the Taliban. Although most of them had already left when the explosion happened, the rest stayed trying to keep some order while the villagers shoved and pushed.

“At midnight my brother and nephew went to get fuel. I also wanted to go but I didn’t have a car,” said Saleh Muhamad.

“At one in the morning I went to bed. When I heard the explosion I called my brother but his phone was off … when I arrived at 3am there were dead everywhereI was searching for my brother and nephew but I couldn’t find anyone.

“I had a torch with me and I could see well, but I still couldn’t recognise anyone.” His eyes looked straight through me as he said: “I found one body and took it home and we buried it. It was a full body, with arms and legs. We buried it well.”

Source

There are few words to describe how these people must feel.

They are the innocent  who must suffer the deaths of those they love.

The despair they feel is unimaginable.

So this how the so called, civilized, world helps them?

Below are pictures of some of the injured.

(Afghanistan 5) A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Has Usama Bin Ladin been dead for seven years – and are the U.S. and Britain covering it up to continue war on terror?

Published in: on September 15, 2009 at 8:03 am  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Shoe-thrower Muntazer al-Zaidi was tortured while in jail, brother says

By Richard Kerbaj in Baghdad

September 15, 2009

Prison doctors repeatedly injected “unknown substances” into the reporter who threw his shoes at the former US President George Bush, his family claimed yesterday.

The Iraqi was also allegedly tortured with cigarettes and had his nose and ribs broken.

Muntazer al-Zaidi, who became a hero in the Arab world for attacking Mr Bush, is scheduled to be flown to Greece for treatment on his expected release from prison today.

His eldest brother, Uday, told The Times that hospital specialists in Greece were expecting the reporter’s arrival after his visa was recently approved.

“We decided as a family for him to go for physical and psychological treatment in Greece,” Uday said at his brother’s flat in central Baghdad. One of Mr al-Zaidi’s three brothers will accompany him.

Mr al-Zaidi, 30, who was convicted in March of assault after hurling his shoes at Mr Bush at a press conference last December, was expected to be released yesterday. His release was postponed by a day after officials cited a delay in processing his paperwork.

Uday alleged that his brother, a television journalist, was given injections by prison staff against his will. He said that doctors told his brother that they were treating him for migraines and stress.

“They injected him with substances but he had no idea what they were,” he said. “Every time he tried to refuse having the injections, the doctors would say, ‘You don’t know our job better than we do’.”

Mr al-Zaidi was imprisoned at an Iraqi military compound at the former Al-Muthana Airport in Baghdad. Uday said that his brother was burned with “cigarettes behind his ears, had his ribs and nose broken”. He said that the torture was the result of Mr al-Zaidi’s refusal to write and sign a letter of apology to Mr Bush and to the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, who was standing next to the President during the incident.“When Muntazer called me this morning he sounded very broken because the prison guards would not let him call us for ten days,” Uday said.

Mr al-Zaidi plans to set up a human rights group, his brother said. He will not return to journalism despite receiving a salary from Al-Baghdadia Television while in prison. Nor will he venture into politics.

“He will not go into politics, contrary to what has been said in the past. He wants to do something to help the Iraqi people,” Uday said.

“And he has done more to help Iraqi people with his defiance than any politician has.”

Mr al-Zaidi’s three-year sentence was cut to one year on appeal because he had no criminal record. He is expected to be released three months early for good behaviour.

Source

Iraqi shoe thrower Muntadhar al-Zeidi to be released from jail

Switzerland’s explosive war effort threatens environmental disaster

Deformed fish are being landed and served as sightseers flock to view toxic Second World War munitions raised from the floor of Lake Thun

By Tony Paterson
September 13 2009
Down at the bottom of Switzerland’s deepest lake is one of the country’s murkiest secrets. For here is disturbing evidence of Switzerland’s little-known Second World War defence effort. It poses a potentially devastating threat to the Alpine nation, 70 years after the conflict.

The placid waters of Lake Thun spread out for 11 miles beneath Faulensee village. Some 700 feet beneath the surface more than 9,000 tons of Swiss army munitions lie dumped on its watery floor. The ordnance includes artillery shells, hand grenades, and explosives that were meant to defend Switzerland against a Nazi invasion that never happened. After the war, the army began a 20-year process of getting rid of its vast munitions stockpile by dumping most of it into four Alpine lakes, all of which are used to supply drinking water to the surrounding population. Lake Thun, in the central Swiss canton of Bern, took the brunt of the disposal programme, which ended in 1964.

The huge pile of underwater ordnance remained out of sight and minds until about a decade ago when local fishermen began to notice abnormalities in the reproductive organs of the lake’s whitefish – one of their chief sources of income. More recently the fishermen, who have seen their catches diminish by some 80 per cent over the past three decades, have been pulling bits of dumped munitions out of the lake with the few fish they still manage to net. Last month a rusting hand grenade was hauled to the surface.

Today, a tiny part of this underwater arms dump has been raised to the surface and is, of all things, a tourist attraction. The huge and immaculately polished Second World War guns would fit a battleship, yet they are hidden behind the walls of four innocent looking barns in an idyllic mountain village. As secret weapons they once formed part of the Swiss Army’s elaborate wartime defence system. This summer, however, the massive 10.5cm guns, the barns that camouflage their presence, and the network of tunnels linking them underneath Faulensee have been developed as a tourist attraction and thrown open to the public. “The Faulensee artillery battery is of national and historic importance,” says the brochure advertising the site as a “unique” Second World War experience.

Yet the promotional leaflet makes no mention of the rest of the arms. Switzerland’s environmentalist Green Party, which holds only a handful of seats in a national parliament dominated by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party, is appalled that nothing has been done to remove the munitions: “It is scandalous that this potentially lethal rubbish is still there,” said Christine Haesler, the leader of the Greens in Bern Canton. “We have been fighting a fruitless battle with the Swiss military for years to try to get the munitions removed, but the army insists that the remains are not dangerous and that their disposal would be too expensive,” she added.

The Swiss are not the only people with an underwater munitions problem. The countries surrounding the Baltic are still trying to deal with the threat posed by 300,000 tons of German wartime munitions that Britain the United States and the then Soviet Union dumped in the sea after the Second World War. Tengis Borisov, a Russian environmental researcher recently warned that the munitions meant that the Baltic faced a disaster “on a scale comparable with Chernobyl”.

In Switzerland, however, controversy over the issue of dumped ordnance appears to have been studiously avoided. Four years ago, Ursula Haller, a Thun MP and member of the country’s small citizens’ democratic party BDP, tabled a parliamentary motion calling for the munitions to be removed from the lakes. She argued that as the ordnance was bound to corrode, toxic substances would leak into the lake and pollute, the water supply and the fish. However, the Swiss defence ministry examined the problem and decided that it would not only be too costly but also too dangerous to attempt to remove the ordnance by the preferred method, which involves freezing the munitions and raising them sealed in block of ice.

Various studies were conducted, by the Swiss water board and the country’s fisheries department. Yet all of them insisted that there was no evidence that the dumped munitions were leaking toxins. One study even concluded that the sediment covering the munitions was sealing them off more and more each year and that the threat posed was diminishing as a result.

A fisheries department study found that Lake Thun’s plankton was the cause of the deformed gonads in the lake’s whitefish. However the study was unable to establish what was affecting the plankton and suggested that further investigation was necessary. Meanwhile fishermen and restaurant owners around Lake Thun argue that the whitefish are quite edible because they have been scientifically tested and because those who eat them don’t in any case consume the deformed intestines.

A special commission from Switzerland’s parliament rejected Mrs Haller’s motion by seven votes to five in 2006. Although the Swiss water board argues that the lake waters must be kept under regular observation and that more studies need to be carried out, the issue now appears to have been quietly forgotten by all but the country’s Green Party.

Source

See links below for more on War pollution

The world’s worst radiation hotspot

War “Pollution” Equals Millions of Deaths

Iraq: Merc Contractor above the law says US Judges

Justice as Usual for Iraqis Suing Merc Contractor

by Sherwood Ross

September 13, 2009

The federal Appeals Court decision to toss a lawsuit claiming contractors tortured detainees in Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison is what you’d expect from a tyranny.

The new ruling brushes off the charges by 212 Iraqis who said they or their late husbands were abused by U.S. personnel at Abu Ghraib. The suit charged private security firm CACI International Inc., of Arlington, Va., of crimes inside the Baghdad hellhole. But in a 2-1 ruling, the D.C. Court of Appeals said CACI “is protected by laws barring suits filed as the result of military activities during a time of war,” the Associated Press reported. This opinion was written by Judge Laurence Silberman, a Reagan appointee,  and supported by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a Bush appointee.

“During wartime, where a private service contractor is integrated into combatant activities over which the military retains command authority, a tort claim arising out of the contractor’s engagement in such activities shall be pre-empted,” Silberman wrote. If so, with about as many U.S.-led contract mercenaries as regular army involved in the Iraq conflict, this decision preposterously exempts some 150,000 fighters from legal action for any crimes they commit. It gives a shoot-to-kill pass to privateers such as Blackwater, whose operatives on one occasion are said to have gunned down 17 unarmed Iraqi civilians.

“This abuse and torture of these prisoners detained during war time constituted war crimes and torture in violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the U.S. War Crimes Act, the Convention against Torture, and the U.S. Federal Anti-torture Statute—felonies, punishable by death if death results as a violation thereof,” said Francis Boyle, an international law authority at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana.

“Judges Silberman and Kavanaugh have now become Accessories After the Fact to torture, war crimes and felonies in violation of United States federal law and international criminal law,” Boyle asserted. (See if they are ever prosecuted!)

Dissenter Judge Merrick Garland, appointed by President Bill Clinton, argued the law does not protect independent contractors, particularly when they are accused of acting outside the rules or instructions of their military overseers. But where Silberman said most of the claims were limited to “abuse” or “harm,” not war crimes or torture, according to Courthouse News Service, Garland “found the claims much more alarming.”

“The plaintiffs in these cases allege they were beaten, electrocuted, raped, subjected to attacks by dogs, and otherwise abused by private contractors working as interpreters and interrogators at Abu Ghraib prison,” Garland said.

“No act of Congress and no judicial precedent bars the plaintiffs from suing the private contractors—who were neither soldiers nor civilian government employees,” he wrote.

“Neither President Obama nor President Bush nor any other Executive Branch official has suggested that subjecting the contractors to tort liability for the conduct at issue here would interfere with the nation’s foreign policy or the Executive’s
ability to wage war,” Garland pointed out.

“To the contrary, the Department of Defense has repeatedly stated that employees of private contractors accompanying the Armed Forces in the field are not within the military’s chain of command, and that such contractors are subject to civil liability,” he wrote.

Judge Silberman was named to the Federal bench in 1985 by President Ronald Reagan and in 2008 received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian award, from (surprise!) President George W. Bush, the man who launched the Afghan and Iraq aggressions.

Silverman was supported in his opinion by Kavanaugh, a former legal aide to President Bush who was later appointed by Bush
to the Federal bench. In July, 2007, Senators Patrick Leahy(D-Vt.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) accused Kavanaugh of “misleading” the Senate during his nomination.

In a statement issued at the time opposing the appointment, Sen. Durbin prophesied, “By every indication, Brett Kavanaugh will make this judgeship a gift that keeps on giving to his political patrons who have rewarded him richly with a nomination coveted by lawyers all over America.” And that, of course, is exactly what happened. Here’s what aroused Durbin’s concern:

“For example, he (Kavanaugh) would not tell us his views on some of the most controversial policy decisions of the Bush administration — like the issues of torture and warrantless wiretapping. He would not comment. He would not tell us whether he regretted the role he played in supporting the nomination of some judicial nominees who wanted to permit torture as part of American foreign policy… It would have been so refreshing and reassuring if Brett Kavanaugh could have distanced himself from their extreme views. But a loyal White House counsel is not going to do that. And that is how he came to this nomination.” And that is how he came to dismiss the torture charges against contractor CACI. Surely, Kavanaugh’s decision in the CACI case is proof he misled the Senate and merits impeachment.

In Jan., 2005, The New York Times reported testimony suggesting that guards and/or interrogators at Abu Ghraib were urinating on detainees, pouring phosphoric acid on them, sodomizing them with a baton, tying ropes to their penises and dragging them across the floor, and jumping on their wounds. Some prisoners were hung with their hands tied behind their back until they died. It should be remembered that the Abu Ghraib inmates were suspects, imprisoned without due process or trials. Abu Ghraib’s commanding officer Brig. General Janis Karpinski estimated that 90 percent of them were innocent.

According to an article by Jeffrey Toobin in the September 21 issue of The New Yorker, President Obama already has the chance to
nominate judges for 21 seats on the federal appellate bench—more than 10 percent of the 179 judges on those courts, and at least half a dozen more seats should open in the next few months.

In a Detroit speech, Obama said the role of our courts “is to protect people who don’t have a voice…the vulnerable, the minority, the outcast, the person with the unpopular idea, the journalist who is shaking things up…And if somebody doesn’t appreciate that role, then I don’t think they are going to make a very good justice.”

Surely, hundreds of foreign prisoners tortured in an illegal war made by the U.S., or their survivors, are supplicants entitled to a fair hearing, not non-persons to be brushed aside as judges Silberman and Kavanaugh have done this past week. Their ruling that, essentially, injured parties cannot sue the Warfare State and its contractors, drives a tank through the Constitution. Americans had better pray Obama’s judicial choices will aspire to a higher standard.

Source

No one should be above the law.

War crimes with no consequences, is just wrong.

How sick is that?

Laws are suppose to protect people, not give anyone license to torture or kill.

All War Criminals should be punished. No exceptions.

Has Usama Bin Ladin been dead for seven years – and are the U.S. and Britain covering it up to continue war on terror?

Report: Blackwater Guard Saw Iraqi Killings as 9/11 Revenge

Indexed List of all Stories in Archives

Outpouring Of Concern For Homeless Children From HuffPost Community

September 11. 2009

By Matthew Palevksy

On Wednesday, Arianna wrote about the human cost of the millions of foreclosures taking place across America. She focused on the surge in school children whose families have been evicted from their homes – and are struggling to learn while dealing with the instability and inherent distress of homelessness.

Inspired by Erik Eckholm’s reporting in the New York Times, Arianna tore up a speech she had prepared for a big education conference and instead talked to the gathered dignitaries about the crisis of homeless school kids.

Arianna’s post elicited an outpouring of concern and empathy from the Huffpost community.

“I actually cried while reading this article,” wrote BabeLush. “So much of us take for granted what we have. Being a victim of Hurricane Katrina I know how quickly your life can be turned upside down.”

And BabeLush was not alone. Dozens of people said the story moved them to tears while others were enraged by the absence of social justice. A commenter by the name PlainsWoman wrote:

“The effect of homelessness/poverty on our children is not only devastating to their academic achievement, it is also a civil rights issue. While the CEO’s get richer, we have children going without food and shelter every day.”

“To paraphrase a quote that has been attributed to Marcus Borg: ‘Charity is about helping victims, justice is about asking why there are victims.’ Where is the justice for these children and families?”

Among the outpouring of empathy, some have also contributed their own stories of homeless children in their community. Commenter Eilish wrote:

“My daughter-in-law had nine homeless students in her 1st grade class. The school was in chaos, feeding dozens of students free breakfast – that they hadn’t expected. These children slept at their desks, some cried because they were afraid their parents wouldn’t be able to find them after school. Some had head lice; some asked if they could wash in the bathroom. More than one sneaked some lunch into a napkin, and if noticed were extremely anxious…”

“Call a school near you and find out if they need help. Call your governor and ask where you can volunteer (that’ll get ‘em thinking). There are food banks & shelters that are desperate for donations of food and money.”

“We’ve been offering our RV as a temporary stopgap for families who need time to get to a point where they have a secure place to go.”

Eilish was not alone in calling for action. As Arianna mentions in her blog, there are steps that the government can and should take to mitigate foreclosures and provide assistance to homeless school children. But we also have an individual responsibility to help our neighbors. Many have expressed an eagerness to aid children like Cody and Charity, but don’t know how to volunteer or which organization deserves their contribution. It seems that it’s too often the case that once you read a story about hardship, the inspiration to affect change is stymied by a lack of information about how best to lend a hand.

The Huffington Post wants to break down this barrier to getting involved. In early October, we are launching a new section called Impact in partnership with Causecast.org that will empower people concerned about social ills like child homelessness to make a difference. Impact will offer the community ways to take action, contribute and get involved.

We would like to hear from you. How do you think people can be part of the solution to the pressing issues of our day? If you have a story that you would like to share on the Huffington Post, or have tips on how people can get involved, write to us at impact@huffingtonpost.com.

If you are one of the many readers who saw Arianna’s post on homeless school children and thought, “How can I help?” sign up below to join the Impact mailing list. You will be kept up to date on ways you can contribute on both a local and national level:

Impact: Homeless School Children

In early October we will be launching a new feature called “Impact” in partnership with Causecast.org. Impact will empower people concerned about social ills like child homelessness to make a difference. Sign up now to get involved!

Source

This should be everyone’s concern. Anyone can become homeless.

Spending less on war and more on people would be a wonderful idea don’t you think?

There are over  one million schoolchildren who are homeless.

There are many children who are not in school who are also homeless.

I wonder how many there are all together?

New USDA Statistics Highlight Growing Hunger Crisis in the U.S.

200,000 War Veterans homeless in US

Low-Wage Workers Are Often Cheated, Study Says

Published in: on September 13, 2009 at 6:12 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Iraqi shoe thrower Muntadhar al-Zeidi to be released from jail

The Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at George W. Bush last December will be getting out of jail on Monday, his family says.

Muntadhar al-Zeidi hurled two shoes at the then-U.S. president during a joint news conference with the Iraqi prime minister in Baghdad.

Television cameras captured the scene as Bush ducked twice and was unhurt.

“This is your farewell kiss, you dog,” al-Zeidi shouted. “This is for the widows and orphans of Iraq.”

Al-Zeidi, 30, was sentenced to three years in prison, but the sentence was reduced on appeal.

His release will be celebrated by fellow Iraqis who feel his act of protest helped to express their own bitterness over the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of their country, which began in March 2003.

Excited flag-waving family members have posted al-Zeidi’s picture and balloons on the walls of his apartment in central Baghdad, to welcome him home.

His former employer has bought him a new four-bedroom house and a car.

There are reports that al-Baghdadiya TV has kept his job available to him and believes he will return to work there.

However, his brother, Dargham, told The Associated Press the reporter is interested in working in a humanitarian or human-rights organization.

Source

To Muntadhar al-Zeidi: Good Luck in all your future endeavors.

May the sun smile upon you.

You are truly blessed.

Throwing shoes is more effective then dropping bombs.

Your message has been sent to the ends of the earth.

I among millions of others appreciate what you have done.

Millions feel the same way you do.

Thank You.

To the rest of the world: When is Bush and company going to be tried for their war crimes?

Published in: on September 13, 2009 at 4:32 pm  Comments Off  
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Israel’s ‘Numbers Cemetaries’: PLO Calls for Repatriation of Prisoner/ MIA Corpses

September 12 2009

Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) launched an appeal for help on freeing bodies of Palestinian prisoners who died in Israeli prisons and others who were killed by Israeli troops.

Department of National and International Relations of the PLO called on the international community and friends of the Palestinian people to collect its’ voices to bring a united front to pressure Israel to make it let the bodies of dead Palestinians free.

PLO demanded that Israel adhere to the international conventions and to release hundreds of dead bodies of Palestinian and Arab detainees buried  in the  “Numbers Cemeteries”.

PLO called on Israel to reveal the fate of dozens of missing Palestinians too.
The PLO said in an appeal launched to the Friends and supporters of the Palestinian people, in various parts of the world, that Israel is holding about 300 bodies of Palestinian and Arab militants in special cemeteries known as “Numbers Cemeteries.”
The Numbers Cemeteries are located within the borders of 1948.
Israeli courts have sentenced dozens of Palestinian martyrs after their death preventing their families from receiving their bodies for burial according to religious law and national traditions, according to the PLO appeal.

Israel punishes the Palestinian families even after the death of loved once.

“This is a sever violation of humanity. It’s contrary to all laws and international norms,” the PLO appeal stated.
PLO condemned Israel as the only country in the world to hold judicial official measures against dead bodies.Finally, the PLO appeal stressed on the necessity to hold an international investigation for every organ harvesting case claimed by Palestinian families.
Seems to me if Israel is keeping the bodies they have something to hide,
All bodies should be exhumed and autopsied then returned to the families for proper burial. An international investigation  and autopsies should be performed.
Seems to me Israel is trying to bury their crimes.

From the Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center

July 6, 2009

They Have a Right for a Decent Burial

The Israeli government withholds unknown numbers of bodies of Palestinian and Arab war victims, killed throughout the years of struggle, confrontation, and opposition. For this purpose, the Israeli Authorities created, in addition to morgues, cemeteries called the “Cemetery of Numbers”. Only four of them have been identified to date.

These secret cemeteries are formed with bare graves surrounded by stones. A mere metal plate with a number for identification, instead of a name, figures on top of each grave. Grave stones are non-existent. Files, which are organized to each number and contains personal information of the buried victim, has been covert by the Israeli Army.

In the last few years, Israeli and international investigative journalists have found evidence on the existence of four such cemeteries:

01. A cemetery located near the Banat Yacoub Bridge in a military area bordering Israel, Lebanon, and Syria. Allegedly it contains approximately 500 graves of Palestinians and Lebanese killed in 1982 and onward.
02. A cemetery located in a closed military area between Jericho and Adam Bridge on the Jordan River. It is surrounded by a wall with an iron gate and a billboard inscribed “A Cemetery for the Dead of the Enemy”. It contains more than one hundred graves bearing numbers from 5003 to 5007. It is unknown whether they are serial numbers assigned to individuals or, as Israel claims, administrative codes unrelated to the real number of buried bodies.
03. The Cemetery of Refedeem in the Jordan Valley. Details unavailable.
04. The Cemetery of Shuheitar, located near Wadi Al Hamam, a village north of Galilee between Mount Ariel and the Lake of Galilee. Most of the bodies in this cemetery belongs to war victims killed in the Jordan Valley battles in the years 1965 to 1975. In the north side of this cemetery, 30 graves are divided between two rows, while the remaining 20 are situated in the central area. Shamefully, all these graves are sandy and shallow, which when exposed to rain, allows bodies to be vulnerable and dragged by stray animals.

The Cemetery of Numbers are a slur to the dignity of mankind for both the dead and the living. Their existence contravenes international humanitarian laws. It is a loud cry calling for an intervention from the international public opinion. The bodies of the innocent must be retrieved, and their families must be granted the right to give their family members and loved ones a decent burial in line with national traditions and religious rites.


Demands renewed for Israel to return Palestinian corpses
September 9 2009
Bethlehem
The controversy over Swedish media accusations that Israel harvested organs from Palestinian detainees unearthed the issue of the Cemeteries of Numbers, where unidentified Palestinian prisoners remain buried in Israeli military cemeteries.

Palestinian officials said hundreds of Palestinians killed by Israeli forces are now buried in the secret cemeteries, inside Green Line Israel. The issue is the subject of a new Palestinian Authority-backed campaign to demand that the bodies be returned to their families and given a proper burial.

Palestinian Minister of Prisoners’ Affairs Issa Qaraqe said on Tuesday, “There are 300 martyrs registered and known, 18 of which are from Bethlehem. Why is Israel still keeping the corpses? What possible benefit could there be? Unless it does not want to reveal other things that it does to the corpses.”

Qaraqe was speaking on the Ma’an Network talk show Hard Questions. His accusations were refuted by another guest on the show, Israeli Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Yitzhak Ivanov, who admitted that Israel is still holding Palestinian corpses but denied that the bodies were mistreated.

“We keep the bodies with dignity,” Ivanov said. “These are claims we have become accustomed to and Israel does not accept them. If there is anyone who is sensitive to the dead, it is the Jewish people. These allegations are unacceptable.”

Earlier on Tuesday, Qaraqe spoke at a demonstration in the West Bank city of Nablus calling on Israel to return the bodies of the dead.

“Apart from the fact that the Cemeteries of Numbers are cruel and inhumane, they are also vulnerable to landslides. There were some reports about the disappearance of bodies because some animals can enter the cemetery and desecrate the corpses,” Qaraqe told the demonstrators.

The protest was organized as a part of a national campaign by the PA to seek the return of the corpses. The march started in the city centre and headed to the Federation of Trade Unions headquarters. The demonstrators stopped to pray for the souls of the departed at the city’s cemetery.

In addition to Qaraqe, the demonstration was attended by Minister of Social Affairs Majida al-Masri, President of the Palestinian Federation of Trade Unions Shaher Sa’ad, the official of the national campaign in the West Bank Salem Khelleh, Nablus Mayor Adli Ya’eesh, former imprisoned lawmaker Hussam Khader, and hundreds of members of the families of those whose bodies are still missing.

The official in charge of the national campaign to return the bodies in the West Bank, Salem Khelleh, said, “The most basic human right is to honor the martyrs for religious, national and humanitarian reasons. It is the right of every mother and sister to have a grave for her martyr to cry on and to tell him that he did not die in vain, but that he contributed to the establishment the State of Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital.”

Mohammad Barakah, a Palestinian member of the Israeli Knesset, said, “In the last few weeks we have seen Israel’s hypersensitivity after the report the Swedish newspaper published earlier about the facts that the occupation for years has been stealing organs from the bodies of the Palestinian martyrs.

“Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has been asking the Swedish government to apologize. But the Swedish government refused to apologize and asked Israel to respond to what has been published,” he added.

“We know that Israel’s alibi is weak and it is not surprising that they have committed such crimes,” Barakah continued. “The detention of the bodies of martyr’s since 1967 raises a number of questions. As we see it, Israel is hiding something and doesn’t want the martyrs’ families to know, so as not to reveal its crimes. If they deny these accusations, they should provide proof.”

Barakah added that the issue of the detained bodies is not an internal Palestinian issue, and should not be linked to political negotiations. Rather, he said, Israel should restore the bodies unconditionally.

Iran Proposes Control System Aimed at Eliminating Nuclear Weapons

Iran Proposes Control System Aimed at Eliminating Nuclear Weapons
By Thomas Erdbrink

September 11, 2009
TEHRAN,

Iran is not prepared to discuss halting its uranium enrichment program in response to Western demands but is proposing instead a worldwide control system aimed at eliminating nuclear weapons, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s top political aide said in an interview Thursday.

The Web site ProPublica obtained a copy of the set of proposals handed to the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany on Wednesday, in which Iran also offered cooperation in solving problems in Afghanistan and fighting terrorism, as well as collaboration on oil and gas projects, Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi said. A longtime confidant of Ahmadinejad, Samareh Hashemi is considered the president’s closest aide and is reportedly under consideration for appointment as first vice president, a key post in Ahmadinejad’s new government.

As described by Samareh Hashemi, Iran’s offer is similar to a call by President Obama in April to eliminate the world’s nuclear weapons. At the upcoming United Nations General Assembly meeting later this month, Obama is scheduled to chair a special U.N. session aimed at seeking broad consensus on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons rather than on targeting individual nations such as Iran and North Korea. Ahmadinejad is also scheduled to attend the U.N. meeting and has said he is ready to debate Obama in front of the world media.

“It’s not really responsive to our greatest concern, which is obviously Iran’s nuclear program,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said of Tehran’s package of proposals. “Iran reiterated its view that as far as it is concerned, its nuclear file is closed. . . . That is certainly not the case. There are many outstanding issues.”

But Crowley did not shut the door completely. He said the United States was consulting with its other negotiating partners: Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany. “We’ll be looking to see how ready Iran is to actually engage, and we will be testing that willingness to engage in the next few weeks,” he said.

France said Thursday it is studying the proposals along with the other P5-plus-one members. Russia said it hopes negotiations with Iran will resume in the near future.

The negotiating group, known as the P5-plus-one because it includes the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany, has sought unsuccessfully since 2006 to reach a deal with Iran on its nuclear program. The group wants Iran to abandon its program to enrich uranium, which Iran insists it needs to ensure an independent source of fuel for nuclear power plants. Highly enriched uranium can also be used in nuclear weapons, however, leading the United States and other Western nations to suspect that Iran secretly plans to divert the material to a weapons program.

Earlier this year, the group offered to provide economic and security benefits to Iran in return for suspension of Tehran’s enrichment activity and international oversight. The proposals delivered Wednesday amounted to Iran’s counteroffer.

In the interview, Samareh Hashemi called Washington’s Iran policy a “paradox” and said it was influenced by “Zionists.” He refused to confirm or deny that the Obama administration has sent two secret letters to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, saying only that he would “respond later” to questions about the matter.

The top presidential aide said the United States has not submitted any request to open a consular office or interests section in Tehran, an idea that was floated in Washington last year. “If such a request comes, we will study it positively,” he said.

He said Iran has given the United States “practical proposals” in the past to improve relations, including a request for direct airline flights between Tehran and New York. “But the Americans gave no response,” he said.

Samareh Hashemi also called on the United States to apologize for “interfering in Iran’s election and other instances of meddling,” attacked America’s two-party political system and denounced “liberal democracy” in Western nations. “Both the internal and external signs of this Western liberal democracy show that it’s approaching defeat and collapse,” he said.

Ahmadinejad began a second presidential term last month after his government effectively crushed opposition protests over his disputed reelection in June. He has accused the West of orchestrating the protests.

Addressing the nuclear issue, Samareh Hashemi strongly rejected a senior U.S. diplomat’s accusation Wednesday that Iran “is now either very near or in possession” of enough low-enriched uranium to produce one nuclear weapon. The diplomat, Glyn Davies, Washington’s chief envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, said in a speech, “We have serious concerns that Iran is deliberately attempting, at a minimum, to preserve a nuclear weapons option.” He charged that Iran’s continuing enrichment activity, in defiance of three U.N. Security Council resolutions, “moves Iran closer to a dangerous and destabilizing possible breakout capacity.”

Samareh Hashemi charged in reply that the United States is allowing its position on the issue to be dictated by Israel. “These are not the words of the Americans,” he said. “This is the Israelis speaking. It’s better that the Americans give their own opinion.”

“Iran not only does not want to make nuclear weapons, but is actually intensely against nuclear weapons,” said the aide, who managed Ahmadinejad’s reelection campaign and has held key positions in the Iranian Foreign and Interior ministries. “In all truth, Iran is trying to establish a new regime to prevent nuclear weapons worldwide.” He said the threat from nuclear weapons today comes from the countries that possess them, not from Iran.

Asked whether Iran’s proposal contains any mention of suspending its uranium enrichment program, Samareh Hashemi said that “methods of preventing development of nuclear weapons and a widespread system for preventing . . . the proliferation of nuclear weapons are a part of the package.”

He added: “Since nuclear weapons are an international threat, with the cooperation of all countries we can design an international framework that, basically, prevents research, production, multiplying and keeping nuclear weapons and also moves toward destruction of present nuclear weapons. Iran is ready in this path to offer any and every kind of cooperation and effort. No country must be exempt from this international framework against nuclear weapons. “

Iran maintains that its archenemy, Israel, possesses nuclear weapons, and it has often accused the West of having a double standard regarding Israel’s nuclear arsenal.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has said it has no conclusive evidence that Iran is trying to militarize its nuclear program, which Iran says is meant solely to generate electricity. But on Wednesday the agency said it was in a “logjam” with Iran and that there were still outstanding questions over the nature of its atomic program.

With the new package it is proposing, Iran wants to remove those doubts by establishing a broad international system that would force not only Iran but countries that have not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, such as Israel, India and Pakistan, to be completely open about their nuclear intentions, Samareh Hashemi explained.

Giving up uranium enrichment, a key demand by the P5-plus-one group, is not necessary for Iran, he said. He argued that Iran’s nuclear activities are within the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and abide by agreements and contracts made with the International Atomic Energy Agency. He said that signatories of the treaty, such as Iran, are entitled to enrich uranium. “It is very obvious that legal and lawful activities are the right of every nation,” Samareh Hashemi said.

It is Western countries that should change their ways, he said. “In fact, they divide the world into two groups: first-degree and second-degree humans,” he said.

Samareh Hashemi, who often goes on foreign missions for Ahmadinejad, announced an Iranian diplomatic offensive to reform the world’s power structures, which he said are promoting ” injustice.”

He called for the structure of the U.N. Security Council, with its “veto privilege for the permanent members,” to be changed to reflect what he described as new realities in the world.
The United States and other Western nations “are too irresponsible to run the world,” Samareh Hashemi said. “Naturally, everything needs to be changed.”

Staff writer Glenn Kessler in Washington and special correspondent Kay Armin Serjoie in Tehran contributed to this report.

Source

Iran is not at war with anyone. If anything they are the only peaceful country, when you consider what the rest of them are doing they make Iran look like a saint.

Those who are ordering about Iran are more dangerous. Especially Israel who apparently has about 300 nuclear bombs.

So who is going to protect Iran from Israel?

I think those who are complaining about Iran, should take a look in their own back yard.

Some should definitely practice what they preach.

“Exterminate all the Brutes”: Gaza 2009

Army rabbi ‘gave out hate leaflet to troops’,Israel: ’We Could Destroy All European Capitals’

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 273 other followers