Am I Wrong?

For me, one of the most poisonous people on the planet is Ex Ambassador John Bolton. Whenever he appears on Fox news and is introduced as Ambassador Bolton they treat him with the sort of reverence that you would only expect to be given to a popular Republican President. His ‘version’ of reality is never questioned. The fact is that quite often what he says is so biased that it goes beyond paranoia and, in my option, passes into the territory of carefully considered, out right deceitful, propaganda. If you were feeling extremely kind you could, perhaps, bring yourself to believe that what other such kind people might term 'his propensity for expressing his extreme paranoia as reality' is an illness and has nothing to do with financial considerations or his involvement with the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs. The fact that he, like Tony Blair, insists that Iran is a serious threat to the West and must abandon its nuclear weapons program (which both seem to forget is assumed by them, alleged by others and proved by no-one) or face the consequence is surely a coincidence and, like the fear mongering over Iraqi WMD, has nothing to do with Israeli fears or American interests in the Middle East. Bolton is an amalgamation of almost all the things that are wrong with America. In my opinion the fact that Fox news is so fond of people like Bolton says more about Fox than anything else… NB I have never seen anyone given the chance to challenge Bolton’s bile, but then, come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve seen Blair challenged on his paranoid premonitions either… unless you include the War in Afghanistan and Iraq of course. "Bolton is currently a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), frequent op-ed contributor to the Wall Street Journal and the National Review, Fox News Channel commentator, and of counsel to the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, in their Washington D.C. office. He is also involved with a broad assortment of other conservative think tanks and policy institutes, including the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), Project for the New American Century (PNAC), Institute of East-West Dynamics, National Rifle Association, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, and the Council for National Policy (CNP). Known for his strong views on foreign policy, often equating diplomacy with weakness and indecisiveness. Bolton is often described as a neoconservative..." "Bolton worked as the undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, sworn in to this position on May 11, 2001. In this role, a key area of his responsibility was the prevention of proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction... Bolton was instrumental in derailing a 2001 biological weapons conference in Geneva convened to endorse a UN proposal to enforce the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. U.S. officials, led by Bolton, argued that the plan would have put U.S. national security at risk by allowing spot inspections of suspected U.S. weapons sites, despite the fact that the U.S. claims not to have carried out any research for offensive purposes since 1969. Bolton also led the Bush administration's opposition on constitutional grounds to the International Criminal Court, negotiating with many countries to sign agreements, called Article 98 agreements, with the U.S. to exempt Americans from prosecution by the court, which is not recognized by the U.S.; more than 100 countries have signed such agreements. Bolton said the decision to pull out of the ICC was the "happiest moment" of his political career to date." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Bolton Since we hear so often about the much alleged but never proved Iranian nuclear weapons program what do we know about the Israeli nuclear weapons program? Not very much - which is no surprise considering this... “BEYOND NUCLEAR: Mordechai Vanunu's FREEDOM of SPEECH Trial and My Life as a Muckraker: 2005-2010” by Eileen Fleming is a new book which chronicles Mordechai Vanunu’s (Whistle Blower of Israel’s WMD Program) Freedom of Speech Trial and tells how an American novelist became the reporter who followed it. “The book also documents Vanunu’s childhood in Morocco, multiple crises of faith, 18 years in jail, and 6 ½ years under restrictions that have denied him the right to leave Israel and speak to foreigners. In 1985, Vanunu shot two rolls of film in top-secret locations in the Dimona, Israel’s seven-story underground nuclear weapons facility in the Negev and he served 18 years in jail for treason and espionage. On January 25, 2006, Mordechai Vanunu’s freedom of speech trial began for speaking to foreign media in 2004. In 2010, he served a sentence of 78 days in solitary confinement. On October 4, 2010, the International League for Human Rights-FIDH/AEDH Germany, announced Vanunu was awarded the 2010 Carl-von-Ossietzky-Medal and an international campaign was launched to assure he be at the Award Ceremony, in Berlin on December 12, 2010. On October 11, 2010, at 1 PM, Vanunu returns to the Supreme Court seeking to rescind the restrictions that have denied him the right to leave Israel since he was released from jail on April 21, 2004” http://www.arabisto.com/article/Blogs/PRNEWS/New_Book_Chronicles_the_Whi... Did he get the medal? “This is my decision. If I am worthy to this award, then they wait 24 years to decide now, I can wait to be free to get it. To get it in Israel prison is to cooperate with this barbaric prison. And to play like Israel is a free democratic state, that I can get the award like I am free man while in fact I am in 24 years prison." http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6769202-2010s-carl-von-ossietz...

So, what is the state of play regarding Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program? "Presidential candidate Mitt Romney also signed in, saying 'The gravest threat that America and the world faces and faced is a nuclear Iran.'" Is Romney really arguing that Iran is the gravest threat that the world has ever faced? Surely not, but his words, like his principles, are not clear. Searching for clarification I found that he does think that Iran is the greatest threat that the world faces... MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: "The greatest threat that Israel faces and frankly the greatest threat that the world faces is a nuclear Iran." http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1112/29/ltm.01.html It doesn't seem that long ago when Israel was worried about Saddam having rockets that could reach its borders that we were assured that Iraq had WMD that threatened the world... and now... "America’s whipping up hysteria over the Iranian nuclear program, with the same figures that used to accuse Iraq of possessing chemical and nuclear weapons now repeating themselves with frenetic conviction." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gVStJ9zx78 To be fair to McCain I should point out that the Bomb Iran 'joke' was way back in 2007 and not, as suggested, part of the recent ratcheting of tension. Well, we should soon see some light thrown on to the subject as UN inspectors have finally been allowed into Iran again and a six-person IAEA team meets with Iranian officials from today until Tuesday. Back to Israel's nuclear program... Case Study - U.S. Company Faces Penalties for Alleged Nuclear Export Attempts to India and Israel by David Albright, Paul Brannan, and Andrea Stricker July 14, 2010 "The large scale oscilloscope purchases made by Israel bring into question its continued commitment to halting its illicit procurement of equipment for its nuclear program, which it made as a result of U.S. pressure during the 1990s." "However, some U.S. allies also break U.S. or foreign trade control laws to outfit their missile or nuclear weapons programs. Although the BIS did not identify the suspected purchasers of these goods in Israel or India, this case highlights the need for the U.S. government to develop a more formal process to discourage allies from violating U.S. trade control laws. To that end, the United States should obtain formal pledges from its allies, in particular India, Israel, and Pakistan, that they will not seek to violate U.S. laws, or for that matter supplier-country laws, in order to outfit their ballistic missile programs or unsafeguarded nuclear programs." http://isis-online.org/isis-reports/detail/u.s.-company-faces-penalties-...

I must confess to a certain confusion as to why anyone would even consider any of the current crop of Republican hopefuls for President, Chuck. However, the choosing process does have a weird fascination which I find has been multiplied by the advent of the Super PAC. It may well be that neither man is left standing after Romney and Gingrich slug it out in an increasingly brutal grudge match… and a masked avenger might step into the ring to claim the prize ;O) Who ever becomes President I'm certain that the inexplicable mystery of the tail wagging the dog will continue and the only hope for any chance of sanity is the eventual triumph of the Occupy movement... and only then in the unlikely event that they can unite with the Tea Party ;O)

The rich have always fooled the poor, Clive. Toward that end they always have at least one 'enemy of the people' who they can demonize and use as a distraction or an excuse and as a source of paranoia. The real danger to the rich isn't Communism or Terrorism but rather education, information and unemployment...

I understand the desperation Chuck. I just don't understand the choice of people the present process appears to be supporting and the apparent belief that somehow, one of the present grey gladiators will, by some mystical process, emerge from the media battle as a one size fits all shiny superman rather than a limping, punch drunk, no hoper, whose self inflicted wounds are so severe that he doesn’t stand a chance in the final fight with the incumbent champion.

"Maybe your shiny Superman is an easy target while your punch drunk no hope'r is the weed that will never die?" I must admit I have wondered if many of those on the Right have simply seen too many 'Rocky' movies and can no longer tell the difference between fantasy and reality, Clive. I have also wondered if the Republicans actually want to win as those whose crumbs they live off must realise that the economic policies of the Right would be suicidal under the present economic climate. Let’s face it the greedy rich realise just as clearly as the Democrats that people like Tim Geithner have to do what they have to do but of course it is difficult for them to say so... ‘“… Geithner should be remembered more for averting financial collapse.“ "We were potentially facing another Great Depression, and that didn't happen," said Nigel Gault, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight. "Whatever happens from now on, that still is part of his achievement."‘ ‘Jay Bryson, global economist at Wells Fargo Securities, said that Geithner's role in preventing economic catastrophe is "underappreciated." "A lot of events since he's been Treasury Secretary have been well beyond his control,"’ ‘Through it all, the Treasury Secretary has defended Obama's efforts to rebuild Wall Street. At an October forum, Geithner said he didn't understand why the financial industry was angry with the president’ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/25/timothy-geithner-resigning_n_12... I don’t think that the financial industry is really angry with Obama… Except, perhaps, for reminding some of them that he was all that stood between them and ‘the pitchforks’. It makes me laugh that canny investors like Warren Buffett (who is widely regarded as one of the most successful investors in the world) have become Fox targets because they are telling the party, who should be supporting them, that their stunningly stupid promise not to increase taxes under any circumstance means not only that they are forced to fight with one economic hand tied behind their backs but also that they are shooting themselves in the foot with the remaining hand. "To me it looks like they're just going through the motions." I agree, Chuck. I think that's because they don't really have a clue what to do beside attack Obama (and each other)... while Fox continues to stir their tea ;O)

For those who don’t see how myopic the Right’s ‘vision’ really is - how much it relies on blaming Obama over jobs because they can’t admit that they could not do any better and might well do worse - you should read this : “That Uncertainty Word -- I Don't Think It Means What You Think It Means” “In numerous posts, I've argued that the evidence doesn't come close to supporting the conservative talking point that what's holding back hiring is Obama-driven regulatory uncertainty.” “My point is not simply to dispense with an erroneous talking point, but to try to stop the key-dangling-look-over-here-not-over-there routine re the major economic problem we still face: inadequate demand.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-bernstein/economic-uncertainty_b_124...

I couldn’t believe my ears as I listened (and watched) Bill Hemmer interview John Bolton earlier today (Monday) on Fox News. This wasn’t the man I had only just painted as a poisonous reptile - maybe Bolton has a twin brother ;O) I didn't seem likely he had 'seen the light' just because I had said some unkind things about him here on ABC but I could not think of any other reason… It wasn’t until later that it occurred to me that the change in personality might be related to what Bolton wanted the perceived 'take' on the Iranian alleged nuclear weapons program to be. Bolton made it clear that U.S. Defence Secretary Leon Panetta had said the day before (Sunday) that he believes Iran is only one year away from producing a nuclear weapon. I don’t think that Bolton added the remainder of the quote "and then possibly another one to two years in order to put it on a deliverable vehicle of some sort in order to deliver that weapon.” http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/panetta-iran-is-one-year-a... So why the change in character from the usual super confident Bolton to the ‘worried’ man who was saying that if Panetta was right it would be up to Israel to do something about it because America wouldn’t? Obviously Bolton had missed the part of Panetta’s interview on ‘60 minutes’ where he made it plain that the US would not allow Iraq to develop a nuclear weapon… "If they proceed and we get intelligence that they're proceeding with developing a nuclear weapon then we will take whatever steps are necessary to stop it," Most of you who have seen the news will have seen the sound bite where Panetta is asked to clarify his statement and he re-emphasises “we will take WHATEVER steps are necessary to stop it!” So there you are Mr Bolton. No need to worry! Take a deep breath. Calm that paranoia. It’s going to be all right! You can take a couple of Vallium and relax safe in the knowledge that your Uncle Sam will take care of you and poor old Israel as always.

I sometimes wonder if it isn’t the biblical Armageddon that many Americans fear. Certainly that is predicted to start in Israel. I have to admit that wouldn’t explain a Mormon like Romney claiming that Iran was the most dangerous threat the world faces but then Romney is probably just reading the lines he’s handed :O) People have pointed out before the irony of the only people to ever use nuclear weapons in anger being, effectively, the ones declaring themselves the ones who should decides who else is allowed to have such weapons. I can never get the reason that the world seems to pick on Iran but not Israel (or Pakistan, or India etc.) - perhaps they are working on country name length and the five letter countries like India and Israel are next on the list… I do remember hearing some vague excuse that Iran signed up to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), but Israel didn’t. Made me wonder why Iran doesn’t just ‘unsign’ and carry on regardless like Israel. :O) So, what is the state of play? India, Pakistan and Israel have been "threshold" countries in terms of the international non-proliferation regime. They possess or are quickly capable of assembling one or more nuclear weapons. They have remained outside the 1970 NPT. They are thus largely excluded from trade in nuclear plant or materials, except for safety-related devices for a few safeguarded facilities. In the case of Iran… “In 2005, the IAEA Board of Governors voted in a rare non-consensus decision to find Iran in non-compliance with its NPT Safeguards Agreement and to report that non-compliance to the UN Security Council In response, the UN Security Council passed a series of resolutions citing concerns about the program. Iran's representative to the UN argues sanctions compel Iran to abandon its rights under the Nuclear Non proliferation Treaty to peaceful nuclear technology. Iran says its uranium enrichment program is exclusively for peaceful purposes and it has enriched uranium to "less than 5 percent," consistent with fuel for a nuclear power plant and significantly below the purity of WEU (around 90%) typically used in a weapons program.” In the case of Israel. “The inspectors eventually informed the U.S. government that their inspections were useless due to Israeli restrictions on what areas of the facility they could inspect. In 1969, the United States terminated the inspections. In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician at the Dimona plant, revealed to the media some evidence of Israel's nuclear program. Israeli agents arrested him from Italy, drugged him and transported him to Israel, and an Israeli court then tried him in secret on charges of treason and espionage and sentenced him to eighteen years imprisonment. He was freed on 21 April 2004, but was severely limited by the Israeli government. He was arrested again on 11 November 2004, though formal charges were not immediately filed. Comments on photographs taken by Mordechai Vanunu inside the Negev Nuclear Research Center have been made by prominent scientists. British nuclear weapons scientist Frank Barnaby, who questioned Vanunu over several days, estimated Israel had enough plutonium for about 150 weapons. Ted Taylor, a bomb designer employed by the United States of America has confirmed the several hundred warhead estimate based on Vanunu's photographs.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_proliferation#Iran I'm not sure how up to date this information is because I'm fairly sure that Iran is now capable of much higher than 5% enrichment...

It struck me that this thread is going off on a tangent and a post I made to a different thread might actually serve to bring it back. If you consider what it is that supports Fox 'News' then you might be drawn to the conclusion that Fox is a vehicle used by the rich to drive home the wonder of the American Dream... to hold up as examples those very few who have actually managed to find a way from rags to riches, or, more likely, from rich to richer and lead the viewer into dreaming that he or she can do the same... In fact it might well be that the simplest way to get rich is to sell the American Dream to poor dreamers. Hence people like ex-presidential candidate Herman Cain can offer advice to the poor to 'get rich like me' and the poor idiots don't realise that 'rich' is a relative term that relies on a large number of poor and the best way to get rich is to write books telling the poor how to get rich so that they can make you richer. I coined the ‘word’ “dreamocracy” the other day to mean the dream that Democracy will somehow solve all a country’s problem once it is implemented and, in theory, people finally have a say in their own future. In my opinion this ‘dreamocracy’ will be the cause of immense disappointment to those who do not realize that implementing Democracy is only the first step in solving a country’s problems. I’m not sure how much of the recent football riot in Egypt was caused by Mubarak supporters but I suspect it was negligible. Still, now Egypt has a shiny new Democracy whatever is wrong with the country must be a legacy from the past if you want to keep the dream. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not arguing that Western Democracy isn’t a dreamocracy too. You only have to look at the difference fifteen million dollars in ‘attackverts’ made to the Republican presidential candidate placings where Newt Gingrich lost (I would estimate) some 30% of his support due to Romney’s 1,200 TV Ats (attackverts). So, does it really matter what you stand for if you can use your money and influence to brainwash enough people? Iraq has a shiny new Democracy, Afghanistan has a shiny new Democracy so are they truly better off now? Could it be that Democracies require people who have been trained in the art of obedience? Could it be that Democracies are only a reflection of the peoples' wishes at election time? Could it be that many modern two party Democracies are simply the tyranny of the majority where a miniscule number of votes can sway the political landscape for the next 4 or 5 years? Could it be that despite all the grandstanding and political shenanigans that it is money and not policies that decide elections and so, if you are not already rich then you’ve already lost…

A few posts back I asked the question : "So why the change in character from the usual super confident Bolton to the ‘worried’ man who was saying that if Panetta was right it would be up to Israel to do something about it because America wouldn’t?" I added : "Obviously Bolton had missed the part of Panetta’s interview on ‘60 minutes’ where he made it plain that the US would not allow Iraq to develop a nuclear weapon…" Now it seems that Bolton's 'change in character' was simply a ploy to try and make the case for Israel to attack Iran... no surprise there then! "United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta believes there is a growing possibility Israel will attack Iran as early as April" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9058443/Panet... Let's hope it is simply a bluff to put further pressure on the Iranians to allow IAEA inspectors full access to their nuclear facilities because if it isn’t then we could be on the verge of Armageddon! Panetta made it very clear that Iran would not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon but that there was no evidence that Iran was developing such a weapon... "If they proceed and we get intelligence that they're proceeding with developing a nuclear weapon then we will take whatever steps are necessary to stop it" When asked to clarify his statement he re-emphasises “we will take WHATEVER steps are necessary to stop it!” Israel knows that Uncle Sam will take care of it as always - so why risk increasing tensions with China and Russia? Someone is playing a very dangerous game and, in my opinion... it is a game we could all lose!

I’ve had my doubts and suspicions about President Obama but I’ve given him the benefit of the doubt. Yes, his team of financial advisors has consisted of much the same people who ‘advised’ Bush. Yes, he did seem to back off his promises to bring in strong legislation to control Wall Street. Okay, so Guantanamo isn’t closed yet but the peace prize winning President has brought home most of the ‘boys’ from Iraq and seems to be in the process of winding down in Afghanistan… But is that mostly just to save money? He did get his peace prize before he actually did anything. Many will have noticed that when Israel gets ’scared’ then it is the US that is expected to take action. So it was that when it looked like Saddam could threaten Israel with a long range missile (he couldn’t really and Hans Blix decommissioned all the missiles that it might have been possible to modify to reach Israel) the world was told that it was in danger of Iraqi WMD and America and its allies started a war. It turns out that the ‘probabilities’ were wrong and the war was founded on ‘evidence’ which was from a lying scoundrel code named ‘curveball’ who has recently admitted that he made it all up - some say for the Mercedes cars, the house etc. Here we go again, or here we go again if we’ve learned nothing and let history repeat itself! So, Israel is ‘scared’ again and the same kind of ‘probabilities’ are being used as an excuse to threaten Iran and to try and destroy its economy. Iranian scientists are being assassinated and now it appears that Israel is arguing that unless America does something soon then it may well be forced to attack Iran. Is it just me that sees this as downright frightening? It’s a sin for Iran to want to have domestic nuclear power but it is alright for Israel (which has nuclear weapons) to threaten to attack Iran on the strength of yet another rumour spread, no doubt, as an excuse to attack Iran. Let’s say that the worst comes to the worst and Panetta is right that Iran does have nuclear weapon ambitions. Okay, Panetta says that it would take Iran 2 to 3 years to actually manufacture such a weapon that could be small enough to fit in a missile. Israel agrees but argues that action must be taken very soon before Iran has the technology to create a nuclear weapon. Clever, since that way Israel can argue that there is no evidence of a nuclear weapon because its action stopped Iran from getting that far. Now, the US has been talking long and loud about a SDI (strategic defence initative) and other plans for shooting down enemy missiles which threaten its allies. In fact there have been angry arguments about where such sites should be stationed as Russia for one, doesn’t like the idea of any on its doorstep. The reason I mention this is that both the US and Israel agree that if Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon it only has enough high grade material for one device - so, are we to believe that neither the US nor Israel could shoot down one single missile launched from Iran? Are we really expected to believe that Iran is crazy enough to commit suicide by firing such a missile at Israel. In a piece I posted quite a while ago titled ‘Let It Be’ I added a quote from Alan Watts : “ As Robert Oppenheimer said a short while before he died, (regarding Nuclear proliferation) - 'It is perfectly obvious that the whole world is going to hell. The only possible chance that it might not is that we do not attempt to prevent it from doing so.' You see, many of the troubles going on in the world right now are being supervised by people with very good intentions whose attempts are to keep things in order, to clean things up, to forbid this, and to prevent that. The more we try to put everything to rights, the more we make fantastic messes. Maybe that is the way it has got to be. Maybe I should not say anything at all about the folly of trying to put things to right but simply, on the principle of Blake, let the fool persist in his folly so that he will become wise.” “Let the fool persist in his folly so that he will become wise…” might be a reasonable philosophy if only the future of the fool is at stake but it should NOT be an option when the future of the planet is at stake! It's a strange old world isn't it. "Curveball" lies and helps cause all the deaths and destruction and dispair resulting from the Iraq war and gets rewarded! Defector admits to WMD lies that triggered Iraq war. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-ira... Whereas today's news reveals : "Alleged Wikileaks suspect Bradley Manning is finally to face a court martial". After 18 months in solitary confinement Manning, who is accused of telling the truth to Wikileaks, is finally to get his day in court... although no actual date has yet been set for his trial. If he is found guilty he faces a life in prison. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-16884082

BBC's Jane Little, in Washington, reports 'that behind the scenes Washington is deeply alarmed by reports that Israel may strike Iran as early as April - in a move that would drive up tensions in the Middle East as well as oil prices, which would threaten the global economy and Mr Obama's re-election chances.' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16900705 If Israel can go around attacking anyone it pleases without a care to the consequences why doesn't it attack Assad's palace - where most Syrian observers seem to believe that all the military orders come from... Israel might actually make a few friends for a change :O) "We are sickened by the images of hundreds of innocent Syrians slaughtered or brutally injured by Assad’s death squads or the barrage targeting their homes. The death toll is expected to rise after more dead civilians are taken out of the rubble and buried under constant shelling and sniping. The Assad media arm is propagating that the initiator of this new offensive is the Christian minister of defense, General Daoud Rajha, who was appointed to his current position last March when the revolution started, albeit all outside observers know that in Syria, the military orders come straight from Assad’s palace." http://syrian-christian.org/scd-press-release-04022012-stop-assad-now/

I do think that Iran is being attacked unfairly - especially the latest sanctions which don't just block Iranian transactions but now freeze their assets too. In effect this means that Iran's imports are also frozen because much needed food etc can't be paid for and so isn't delivered! So, as usual it is the people who suffer and they suffer for what? A rumour, an assumption? I can't see why it is okay for those who have not signed the NTP to do whatever they like but Iran is penalised for signing it. I mean to say that other countries have developed nuclear weapons but because they did not sign the NPT ( Non-Proliferation Treaty) a blind eye is/was turned to them and the only sanction that seems to be used is to limit the availability of certain equipment that would facilitate nuclear weapons manufacture - you will note as documented above that such sanctions are not actually being strictly enforced and restricted equipment is still being bought by Israel, Pakistan and India. NB. In 1969 - after the IAEA inspectors informed the U.S. government that their inspections were useless due to Israeli restrictions on what areas of the facility they could inspect - the United States terminated the inspections! Why? “Comments on photographs taken by Mordechai Vanunu inside the Negev Nuclear Research Centre have been made by prominent scientists. British nuclear weapons scientist Frank Barnaby, who questioned Vanunu over several days, estimated Israel had enough plutonium for about 150 weapons. Ted Taylor, a bomb designer employed by the United States of America has confirmed the several hundred warhead estimate based on Vanunu's photographs.” So Israel had enough plutonium for about 150 weapons in 1986 - what do they have now? How can Israel suggest attacking Iran because it might be making a nuclear device when there is little doubt that Israel itself has very many? How many? Well of course we have no idea since the United States terminated the inspections in 1969! As for the second half of your question Chuck… “You seem totally opposed to Assad who actually has quite a bit of support among Syrians. How do you feel about the Russian/Chinese UN veto?” You can’t help watching the footage from Syria that you see on TV without getting angry but I don’t really claim to know exactly what is going on there and so, that’s probably why you can't quite figure out where I stand… I’m not sure yet. You tell me that Assad actually has quite a bit of support among Syrians… It may well be that you are right Chuck. It seems that you know more about the situation there than I do. So what are your feelings about the Russian/Chinese UN veto? A long answer with links will be fine ;O) Whatever else, I have to say that I do admire the fire and passion of Susan Rice.

Thanks for the info Chuck I'm still trying to get my head around it... lots more going off than I'd imagined. Mind you it connects a lot of dots! I really think Susan Rice is sincere and has the courage of her convictions - but then there is obviously an added dimension to what is going on in the Middle East that I suspect very few are privy to... as with Colin Powell you tell your pawns what you want them to believe and then they don't need to fake sincerity.

The Hidden Dimension. “You have to do something NOW BoB!” Petraeus almost screamed down the phone. “Calm, calm, DH.” replied the President “What’s the crisis?” “’Yahu is threatening to explode every single nuclear weapon that Israel has!” “What’s the time limit?” “Fourty two minutes…” “What about the aliens?” “They say that they have evacuated ‘off planet’ all the people that they really care about and that the rest of us can blow ourselves to smithereens if we want to.” “I thought they came here to save the planet?” “They say that everything needed to restore the planet should survive in the Southern Hemisphere, protected by the Coriolis effect, and once the worst of the nuclear Winter has subsided in the Northern Hemisphere then they have the technology to extract all the radioactivity and terraform where necessary.” “God, who would have ever thought that the Earth would need terraforming? What is it that you think I can do?” “Well we can’t do an air strike on Israel they would just push the button as soon as they detected anything threatening heading toward their air space. You know Yahu, he won’t back down - better to die and take your enemies with you than to let them win - so our only chance is getting help from the aliens.” “Doesn’t Yahu realise that it will not be just his enemies but virtually everyone on the planet except maybe those in Southern Australia and New Zealand?” “Of course he does, but his paranoia is so strong now that Yahu thinks everyone on the planet, outside his supporters, is his enemy!” “Okay David, I’ll do what I can… you do what you can…” ‘How on Earth did we get into such a mess?’ wondered the President. ‘If only we had left that damn Ark buried in Iraq then maybe the aliens would have left us alone…’ --------------------------------------------------------------------- I admit that my projection of how things will come to a head in the Middle East is quite theatrical… purposely so... It is essential to highlight the Extreme Dangers associated with the Ark and the astronomical act of irresponsibility on behalf of the Bush administration in allowing the Ark to be returned to Israel after its recovery from Iraq. Many of the things I would like to say are very controversial and my initial plan was to present them in a theatrical fashion so that readers would be able to see the dangers without being bogged down by the detail. However, once we get to Roswell it is very hard to avoid a very controversial view of history involving a version of events that would probably offend everyone somewhere along the line. So, to avoid problems I have decided to present the bare bones of the history of the Ark without explaining how events unfolded. It may well be that if there is any interest in the full story that I might post it as a Science Fiction piece restricted to 18’s and over. --------------------------------------------------------------------- On June 20, 1945, the U.S. Secretary of State had approved the transfer of von Braun and his specialists to America and with the exception of von Braun, the men were transferred to Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland... Ostensibly to sort out the Peenemünde documents, enabling the scientists to continue their 'rocketry' experiments. Ludwig Roth who had been the head of the Peenemünde Future Projects Office - which designed the Wasserfall and created the A9/A10 ICBM - was also brought in to work on the 'project' under Operation Paperclip. Roth arrived in New York on November 16, 1945 on the SS Argentina and served at Fort Bliss and Huntsville, Alabama. Roswell, 1947... It is difficult to pinpoint exactly when Van Braun and his team first attempted 'contact' but it must have been sometime fairly early in the year of 47... They had constructed a device based on the 'artifacts' which had been tracked down and appropriated while the team was working for the SS. Certainly the 'sudden appearance' of the ‘alien craft’ was a direct consequence of the attempted ‘contact’ but it seems fairly clear that the initial contact was with the Ark and it was the Ark itself that contacted the ‘alien craft’. On May 15, 1948, Syria invaded the State of Israel and found the Ark in the Sea of Galilee. Oct 7, 1959 after a failed Ba‘thist coup attempt on Qasim in Iraq 78 Ba‘thists were tried, one of them, Saddam Hussein, escaped to Syria and then on to Egypt. It is believed that it was at this time that Saddam first heard about the Ark. July 16, 1979 Saddam Hussein replaced Ahmad Hasan Bakr as President of Iraq and blamed Syria for plotting a coup. Probably sometime in July of 1982, while Iran was seeking to take Basra, in desperation, Saddam decided to steal the Ark… and he succeeded... Iran failed in its bid to take Basra and Mandali. In 1987 reports of chemical warfare attacks on Kurdish villages and guerrilla fighters became more frequent and detailed... Clinical evidence as well as soil samples, confirmed the use of mustard gas and the nerve agent tabun against the Kurdish population. It is around this time that it is believed that Saddam was almost completely under the control of the Ark! ---------------------------------------------------------------------

It strikes me that the simplest solution to making sure that the scenario depicted in the theatrical projection never happens is for the world to unite against nuclear weapons in the Middle East. This would require the IAEA to inspect all the Middle East nations, regardless of their membership of the NPT, and to itemise and remove any nuclear weapons and any equipment for making them. Not only would this be the safest solution but it would probably be the fairest. Domestic nuclear power programs would be assisted for any nation that wished - which would not only save oil but also create a new avenue for trade and interdependency. I can only think that Israel would be delighted to decommission its nuclear weapons if it guaranteed that those whom it might feel were ‘unsympathetic to its long term interests’ could never have them either. Of course the devil would be in the detail - how to guarantee to all parties that no nuclear weapons could be manufactured or stored in secret, or smuggled in... If that can be achieved then maybe, eventually, the whole world might see the madness of having nuclear arsenals and do the same… and, finally, the planet could be free of the curse of nuclear weapons and the threat of global annihilation. Don't get me wrong - I don't think there is a cat in Hells chance of a nuclear weapon ban in the Middle East - but it would be very instructive to hear the reasons given against the proposal by the various players. Ban smoking in public places for health reasons but not nuclear bombs in secret locations for any reason... Why have them if they will never be used?