Thursday 22nd of August 2019

the atomic bomb proliferation...



As one example of Israeli determination, Netanyahu cited his efforts in bringing about the cancellation of the Iran nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA. Israel has opposed the arrangement from the beginning, and though he could not stop the US, UK, France, China, Russia and Germany from signing the deal in 2015, Netanyahu has lobbied for the US to abandon it - which eventually happened in May this year.

Now, Netanyahu said, Israel will pursue preventing Iran from establishing a military presence in Syria with equal determination.

“No agreement between Syria and Iran will deter us; neither will any threat deter us,” he said. “Whoever threatens us with destruction puts himself in similar danger, and in any case will not achieve his goal.”

Netanyahu credited Peres for setting up the Negev Nuclear Research Center at Dimona in 1958, as part of a vision of “normalisation between core countries in the Arab world and a strong State of Israel.”

That process is “happening before our very eyes, on a scale that would have been impossible to imagine just a few years ago,” Netanyahu said, likely referring to Israel’s outreach to Gulf Arab states against Iran, which they all consider an enemy.

Israel has not signed the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and neither confirms nor denies having atomic weapons. Estimates put the Israeli atomic arsenal at anywhere between 80 and 400 warheads.


Read more:


Netanyahu credited Peres for setting up the Negev Nuclear Research Center at Dimona in 1958... The story is a bit more complicated... From Thierry Meyssan: 

Elf becomes both the coffers and militant branch of "reserved space". Nuisances are eliminated; for example, Enrico Mattei (director of the rival Italian company, Ente Nazionale Idrocarburi (ENI)) is the victim of a set up – a plane accident on 26 October 1962. But out of respect to its Atlantic protectors, Elf abstains from providing adequate research services and equipment. To exploit oil, the French company makes alliances with US companies conducting research and manufacturing parts.

On the subject of the atom, de Gaulle inherits a very advanced nuclear programme. Since 1954 [7], the US government has been secretly and illegally transferring its atomic secrets to France and Israel [8]. This gift is double-edged. In fact, during the Korean War, the Americans confirm that they could not use the atomic bomb without being exposed to a Soviet response. From then on, the nuclear threat only dissuades major agressions challenging the survival of the USA; it is not introduced during minor conflicts. To use the atomic bomb in a situation where the survival of the United States is not at stake, implies that this bomb is being launched by a peripheral power allied to Washington. It is this peripheral power that is then exposed to a Soviet response instead of the Americans. De Gaulle chooses to broadcast the nuclear programme underway and to present it to the public opinion as the acquisition of a supreme arm that brings France back to the ranks of the great powers, on a par with the US, USSR and the United Kingdom. But de Gaulle hides the fact from the public that France is not the mistress of her own bomb and that the USA is using her as an agent provocateur and a bait. Washington responds to Paris with a very positive attitude, notably because Congress has decided to prohibit nuclear dessmination and therefore, the transfer of this type of technology in progress is illegal. So as not to be required to provide the bomb to the other members of the Nato Alliance, Washington and Paris put on show France’s withdrawal from Nato in 1966, and delay France’s return until the signing of Treaties prohibiting testing in 1995.

On 2 July 1958, Eisenhower manages to secure Congressional amendments to the MacMahon Law. From then on, transfers of nuclear technology are authorized on a reciprocal basis to the Allies, given that substantial progress in this field has already been made. On 4 July, the Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, goes to Paris to finalize, in a tête à tête with “the” General, the continuation of the French nuclear venture and its future withdrawal from Nato. In May 1959, the US officially provides enriched uranium to France to carry out land tests for a prototype nuclear motor for submarines. Then on 13 February 1960, the first French nuclear explosion takes place at Reggane.


[8] French dependence on nuclear material was exposed in an article by David Bruce in Foreign Policy, May 1989. It has been confirmed by the former President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing in his mémoires (Le Pouvoir et la Vie [power and life], Compagnie douze ed., vol. 2, 1991). You will find an exhaustive synthesis of the policy of nuclear dissemination in the Affaires atomiques, Dominique Lorentz, Arènes ed., 2001.

(Translations by Jules Letambour.)
In 1997, Dominique Lorentz published "A war", on the nuclear relations between France and Iran. Assigned to Stock, the manuscript had been refused by the management of Lagardère, in an atmosphere of great tension. Éditions des Arènes were created to publish this book.

In 2000, Dominique Lorentz published "Atomic Affairs", an unprecedented extensive exposé of the whole history of international relations in regard to nuclear agreements. The truth that has emerged had nothing to do with the official history (fake news by governments).

The readers learn among other things that the United States had played a dominant role in the French bomb and Israel's. Israel, the Republic Federal Republic of Germany and France disguised their nuclear agreements under the cover of the South Africa's apartheid (it's compicated: South Africa ended its nuclear weapons programme in 1989. All the SA bombs (six constructed and one under construction) were dismantled as South Africa acceded to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons when South African Ambassador to the United States Harry Schwarz signed the treaty in 1991);

The readers also learn that nuclear proliferation was not a small clandestine traffic but a founding principle of international relations since 1945.

In 2007, Dominique Lorentz published "forbidden subjects", a short, "cruel" and precise story in which she told the scenes of her own extraordinary "intellectual" adventure while doing her research. The nuclear "big game" between nations is decrypted from 1945 to 2000.

The version of Joinville is slightly different but fits in the puzzle. Chief of section 7 in the SDECE, Joinville "oversees" the dispatch of duxes from the top French engineering schools to the US and UK to "learn" how to make atomic bombs without the knowledge of their "hosts". He himself is not in the full loop, where secrecy is paramount and the General de Gaulle keeps his various political "adventures" and agreements compartmented.

more serious issues being swept under the rug...


Extremely Marginal': Noam Chomsky Slams Media Obsession With Russian Meddling


The famous philosopher contended that the US media was focusing on marginal stories and argued that there are much more serious issues being swept under the rug. This comes amid an ongoing FBI investigation into alleged Russian interference in the US presidential election and the Trump campaign's purported collusion with Moscow.

In an interview with non-commercial news program Democracy Now, luminary Noam Chomsky criticized the "overwhelming concern" in the media over alleged Russian meddling in the US presidential election, claiming that Israel's impact on the US has been far bigger.

"Whatever the Russians may have done barely counts or weighs in the balance as compared with what another state does, openly, brazenly, and with enormous support," he said, referring to Israel.


Read more:

the submariners' ball...

During the Cold War a secret battle went on underwater between the captains of Soviet, US and British submarines. Sputnik spoke to Iain Ballantyne, author of a new book on submarine warfare, about how close they came to triggering a nuclear war.

After the Cold War ended the Russian government acknowledged that between 1968 and 1987 there had been seven incidents during which Soviet submarines collided with the enemy.

The US admitted nine such incidents involving their subs between 1965 and 1975.

US Sub Spying On Soviet Port 

Iain Ballantyne, author of The Deadly Trade: The Complete History of Submarine Warfare from Archimedes to the Present Day, said the USS Gudgeon, a Tang class submarine, was hounded by Soviet ships for 30 hours and almost sunk after trying to spy on the port of Vladivostok in the Far East.   

"Gudgeon's encounter with the Soviets off Vladivostok in the late 1950s came during the first circumnavigation of the globe by a submarine — which was well publicized as a great achievement by the USA. Gudgeon being pursued by Russian surface warships was not. Many incidents that were rather serious were deliberately not commented on by either side, in order to avoid inflaming the situation, which was already tense due to the East-West confrontation," Mr. Ballantyne told Sputnik.

The Royal Navy has never confirmed any Cold War submarine collisions but Mr. Ballantyne said they definitely happened.

"I have interviewed submariners who were involved in some tricky situations under the sea during the Cold War, not least the collision between the British nuclear-powered submarine Warspite and an Echo II guided-missile boat of the Soviet Navy in the late 1960s. That encounter could have resulted in either of those vessels on the bottom of the Barents Sea, but fortunately both returned home safely, if a little battered," Mr. Ballantyne told Sputnik.

Two Submarines Sank In Mysterious Circumstances

In 1968 a Soviet and a US submarine both vanished within two months of each other, triggering fears of a tit-for-tat exchange.

The wreck of the USS Scorpion was later found on the North Atlantic seabed, 400 miles from the Azores, but no trace was ever found of the Soviet K-129, which blew up near Hawaii with the loss of 100 men.

Read more:


And... believe it or not, this is still going on... Read from top.

israeli terrorists in syria...

IDF has forced the Jerusalem Post to remove its explosive report on the Israeli military giving weapons to the Syrian rebels, the newspaper’s managing editor confirmed to RT.

“We were told by the army’s military censor to remove that part of the story,” David Brinn, the managing editor of the Jerusalem Post told RT as he replied to a request for comment. The report, ‘IDF confirms: Israel provided light-weapons to Syrian rebels,’ which claimed that the Israeli military acknowledged for the first time that it had provided money, weapons and ammunition to the Syrian militants, was removed just hours after being published without any explanation.

According to Brinn, the story was removed “for security reasons evidently.” The IDF told RT that it would not comment on the issue.

The Jerusalem Post article was removed shortly after being published, but a version of the article can still be read using Google cache

It claimed that regular supplies of light weapons and ammunition to the Syrian militants holding the territories near the Israeli border were part of the Operation Good Neighbor, which Israel portrayed as a humanitarian mission, which was focused on providing Syrians with “food, clothes and fuel.”

Israel has been arming at least seven different armed groups in Syria’s Golan Heights, the report said. It also added that the Israeli military believed that providing weapons to the militants was “the right decision” as they sought to keep Hezbollah and Iran away from Israel’s Golan Heights by such means.

The deleted report comes on the heels of another major disclosure. On Monday, the IDF announced that Israel has carried out more than 200 strikes on Syrian targets in the past year and a half.


Read more:



Israel has opened its borders with Syria in order to provide medical treatment to Nusra Front and al-Qaida fighters wounded in the ongoing civil war, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The prominent American newspaper reported that Nusra Front, the Sunni Muslim al-Qaida offshoot which is currently fighting the Iranian-backed axis of Bashar Assad and Hezbollah, "hasn't bothered Israel since seizing the border area last summer" along the Golan Heights.

While Israel views al-Qaida and its allies as enemies, it is far more disturbed by what it views as an even bigger menace – Iran and its proxies. According to The Wall Street Journal, this attitude has caused tension with the United States, which has also targeted al-Qaida and Nusra Front fighters in Syria.

Amos Yadlin, the former military intelligence chief who is currently in the running to be defense minister should the Zionist Union, led by Isaac Herzog, succeed in defeating incumbent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the elections next week, told the Journal that Hezbollah and Iran "are the major threat to Israel, much more than the radical Sunni Islamists, who are also an enemy."

 “Those Sunni elements who control some two-thirds to 90% of the border on the Golan aren't attacking Israel. This gives you some basis to think that they understand who is their real enemy - maybe it isn’t Israel,” Yadlin is quoted by The Wall Street Journal as saying.

The fact that the Israel-Syria border area along the Golan Heights has remained largely quiet has sparked accusations among supporters of embattled President Bashar Assad that the Sunni Islamist alliance, which includes al-Qaida, is backed by Israel.

“Some in Syria joke: 'How can you say that al-Qaida doesn’t have an air force? They have the Israeli air force',” Assad told Foreign Affairs magazine earlier this year. “They are supporting the rebels in Syria. It is very clear.”

Israel has denied actively aiding al-Qaida, though it makes no secret of its determination to thwart Hezbollah's attempts to establish a foothold near the Golan frontier from whence it could harass the North.


Read more:


another lie from bibi...

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that Iran has a secret “atomic warehouse” in Tehran, which has contained as much as whopping 300 tons of “nuclear-related material.”

Speaking at the UN General Assembly on Thursday, he said that  Israel conducted a raid on Iran's "nuclear atomic archive" and referred to the report on the matter that was subsequently released. Netanyahu went on to reveal a new piece of information.

What I am about to say has not been shared publicly before...I am disclosing for the first time that Iran has another secret facility in Tehran.

Netanyahu showed a photo of the "innocent looking compound" in Tehran, while naming the street that it is located on.

Israeli leader claimed that that the Iranians have been trying to vacate the warehouse after Tel Aviv’s raid on the “archive” and urged nations with satellite capabilities to keep close eye on the location, as such activity might grow after his statement.


Read more:


Bibi is a well-known liar. He even was exposed by another idiot once called Sarkozy...


See also:




BMDs badaboom...


From Franklin C. “Chuck” Spinney — a mechanical engineer and analyst who worked as a civilian and military officer in the Pentagon for 31 years, beginning in 1968. He has spent the last several decades as a Pentagon reformer, watchdog, and writer.


President Donald Trump’s plan to escalate efforts in Ballistic Missile Defense (BDM), including the introduction of space-based weapons, should not be viewed in isolation.

It comes on top of the Defense Department’s plan to execute an across-the-board modernization of all our nuclear strike forces. It comes on top of the expansion of NATO under three presidents, despite earlier promises (here and here) to the contrary. It comes on top of the unilateral decision by President George W. Bush to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in June 2002, on top of Trump’s threat to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and on top of Trump’s publication of a more aggressive Nuclear Posture Review. To argue that such a massive effort is directed at deterring Iran or North Korea is ludicrous. Russia and China know who these programs and policies are aimed at.

Viewed through the lens of the precautionary principle, any sensible strategic planner in Russia and China would have no choice but to see these efforts as being a consistent, integrated plan to harden the U.S. nuclear shield while sharpening the U.S. nuclear sword.

Consider that the makeup of the offensive modernization program—i.e., the nuclear sword—includes:

1) increased precision guidance;

2) improved command and control systems;

3) dial-a-yield warheads on nuclear gravity bombs;

4) new families of nuclear warheads for ballistic and cruise missiles;

5) new ICBMs;

6) new air launched cruise missiles;

7) new bombers;

8) new missile-launching submarines;

9) modernized SLBMs;

10) new sea-launched cruise missiles; and

11) new space-based C4ISR systems with the possibility of ASAT capabilities.


Taking all of this into account, it is quite obvious that Russian and Chinese war planners will have no choice but to assume the worse about U.S. intentions. Russian and Chinese planners will be forced to assume that Washington is returning to the thoroughly discredited 1970s-era nuclear war-fighting theory of graduated nuclear escalation via the use of a series limited nuclear options, punctuated perhaps by diplomatic signaling. Application of the precautionary principle by Russian and Chinese nuclear war planners would force them to conclude that the U.S. believes it can fight and win a nuclear war regardless of any U.S. protestations about its sword-shield modernization plan being a defensive application of deterrence theory.

Perhaps more importantly, savvy Russian and Chinese political advisors will understand how the flood of money pouring into these sword/shield modernization efforts will paralyze the patronage-addicted U.S. decision-making system. The fact that the multi-billion dollar, failure-prone BMD program continued unabated after the end of the Cold War illustrates the paralyzing staying power of patronage addiction.

The flood of dollars to every congressional district will increase sharply, creating an even more powerful web of political patronage in the form of jobs, corporate profits, and domestic political power. This web will, like its predecessors, lock in the continued funding of these programs for reasons of domestic politics that have nothing to do with the needs of foreign policy. Future political leaders in the United States will be handcuffed into continuing these programs for the reasons President Dwight D. Eisenhower outlined in his Farewell Address—only this time, our future will be Eisenhower’s nightmare on steroids.

Even if Trump has the best of intentions, he and his successors will find it impossible to convince Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, or their successors, that the U.S. political system does not want—or more accurately, does not need—a new Cold War. Given the current chaos in U.S. politics, our adversaries (and perhaps even our allies) may well think that hyping the domestic politics of pervasive unreasoning fear by starting and maintaining a new Cold War is the only way the U.S. political elite can bring order to the increasingly corrupt, chaotic, and dysfunctional political system of their own making.

And in such circumstances, it is hard to see how Trump could convince Putin and Xi that he really wants better relations, when his own government is unleashing uncontrollable domestic patronage forces that will shape U.S. foreign policy for the next 30 to 50 years.



Read more:




Read from top.