Tag Archives: iran

Business/Economics, International, Opinion, U.S.

United Police States of America: More proof that Uncle Sam is THE terrorist Mastermind; FBI behind most “terrorist” plots, it’s another way to round up poor black men for slave labor prisons

“The target, the motive, the ideology and the plot were all led by the FBI.”-Karen Greenberg, FBI tactics specialist, Fordham University

More and more evidence is coming forth, showing that for the past 10 years most “foiled terrorist plots” actually were masterminded by the FBI!  It’s a case of taking entrapment to a whole new level.

“Most of these suspect terrorists had no access to weapons unless the government provided them. I would say that showed they were not the biggest threat to the U.S.”-Mike German, American Civil Liberties Union and former FBI counter terrorism agent

Most of those arrested and convicted of recent terrorist plots were illegal drug users and/or sellers, or illegal immigrants.  Most of them say what happened was they were in dire straights financially and the undercover FBI agents (who’re posing as big time drug dealers) would offer them huge amounts of money to blow something up.  Sometimes they were promised that their debts would be cleared.  Illegal immigrants would be promised legal status.

“Most terrorists have links to foreign terrorist groups and have trained in terrorism training camps. Perhaps FBI resources should be spent finding those guys.”-Mike German, American Civil Liberties Union and former FBI counter terrorism agent

Most recently the FBI tried their drug dealer turned terrorist sting on some Iranians living in Mexico.  The Iranians smelled a rat and tried to get out.  One made it back to Iran, the other was arrested.  The U.S. government tried to present the failed ‘sting’ operation as a sinister plot to assassinate a Saudi Arabian official.  Never mind that it was the FBI who masterminded the sinister assassination plot.

But that’s not the only case the FBI bungled.  For some reason the FBI likes to use former convicted felons as their undercover agents.  In one case the potential ‘terrorists’ became so afraid of the FBI undercover agent that they succeed in getting a court to issue a restraining order against him.  They did not know the guy was an FBI undercover agent, or a former felon.

Bottom line, most of these cases involve poor men, mainly black and mainly Muslim.  There have been cases where they appeal their convictions, yet, even when the judge admits the FBI screwed up, their convictions are upheld.

It sounds to me like this is just another way our Corporate America controlled government is filling up slave labor prisons, especially the for profit Corporate America controlled prisons.  It has nothing to do with terrorists out to get us!

 

 

 

International, U.S.

World War 3: Turkey oppossed to military action against Syria & Iran

“Turkey, as a friend of the neighboring country of Iran, will never accept a measure that would harm Iran under any condition.”-Abdullah Gul, President of Turkey

Despite building up troops on the border between Turkey and Syria, the Turkish President, Abdullah Gul, also says they will not support any military action against Syria: “We are opposed to any attack on Syria. And incidents in Iraq and Libya should not be repeated in this country. Enemies are making attempts to wage a religious war, and regional countries should not fall into this trap.”

However, British media are reporting that the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has made statements supporting war with Syria and Iran: “No doubt, the problems both in Syria and in the Middle East in general are global problems. Therefore, we have to see the tragedy in the area, hear the screams and urgently take measures to stop the bloodshed for the safety of energy supplies as much as global peace and calm.”

Could this be because Turkey finds itself between a rock and a hard place?  Literally, geographically, between the West and the Middle East.

International, U.S.

World War 3: The West alone against Iran; 120 countries issue statement supporting Iran

120 countries, members of the Non Aligned Movement (if you haven’t heard of it you can thank your corporate/government controlled mainstream media) have issued a statement of support for Iran’s nuclear program.

In the statement ‘NAM’ stands of Non Aligned Movement, and ‘Agency’ stands for the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency.

Here it is:

Mr. Chairperson,

1- The Vienna Chapter of the Non-Aligned Movement wishes to thank the Director General, Mr. Yukiya Amano, for his report on the Implementation of the NPT safeguards agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran as contained in document GOVl2011/65.

2- At the same time, NAM wishes to reaffirm the importance of Director General reports being issued in a timely manner. The late issuance of reports results in Member States having to prepare for meetings of the Board of Governors under significant time constraints.

3- Before expressing its comments on the Director General’s Report, NAM would like to reiterate its principled positions on the matter:
a. NAM reaffirms the basic and inalienable right of all states to the development, research, production and use of atomic energy for peaceful purposes, without any discrimination and in conformity with their respective legal obligations. Therefore, nothing should be interpreted in a way as inhibiting or restricting the right of states to develop atomic energy for peaceful purposes. States’ choices and decisions, including those of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in the field of peaceful uses of nuclear technology and its fuel cycle policies must be respected.
b. NAM recognizes the IAEA as the sole competent authority for verification of the respective safeguards obligations of Member States and stresses that there should be no undue pressure or interference in the Agency’s activities, specially its verification process, which would jeopardize the efficiency and credibility of the Agency.
c. NAM emphasizes the fundamental distinction between the legal obligations of states in accordance with their respective safeguards agreements, as opposed to any confidence building measures undertaken voluntarily and that do not constitute a legal safeguards obligation.
d. NAM considers the establishment of a nuclear- weapons-free-zone (NWFZ) in the Middle East as a positive step towards attaining the objective of global nuclear disarmament and reiterates its support for the establishment of such a zone in accordance with relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions.
e. NAM reaffirms the inviolability of peaceful nuclear activities and that any attack or threat of attack against peaceful nuclear facilities -operational or under construction -poses a serious danger to human beings and the environment, and constitutes a grave violation of international law, of the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, and of regulations of the IAEA. NAM recognizes the need for a comprehensive multilaterally negotiated instrument prohibiting attacks, or threat of attacks on nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
f. NAM strongly believes that all safeguards and verification issues, including those related to Iran, should be resolved within the IAEA framework, and be based on sound technical and legal grounds. NAM further emphasizes that the Agency should continue its work to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue within its mandate under the Statute of the IAEA.
g. NAM stresses that diplomacy and dialogue through peaceful means as well as substantive negotiations without any preconditions amongst the concerned parties must remain the means whereby a comprehensive and lasting solution to the Iranian nuclear issue is found.

4- NAM stresses that the issue of non-proliferation should be resolved through political and diplomatic means and that measures and initiatives taken in this regard should be within the framework of international law, relevant, conventions and the United Nations Charter.

5- NAM takes note that the Director General has stated once again that the Agency has been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran at nuclear facilities and locations outside facilities where nuclear material is customarily used (LOFs) as declared by Iran under its Safeguards Agreement.

6- NAM welcomes the clear distinction made by the Director General between obligations emanating from Iran’s Safeguards Agreement and other requests by the United Nations Security Council. In this regard, NAM notes that the Director General has stated in his report that “Iran is not implementing a number of its obligations” emanating from relevant provisions of the United Nations Security Council resolutions. NAM recalls that the Director General has previously reported Iran’s assertion that some of the Agency’s requests “had no legal basis since they are not falling within Iran’s Safeguards Agreement”, an assertion elaborated by Iran in Document INFCIRC/810 as well. NAM encourages Iran to enhance its cooperation with the Agency to provide credible assurances regarding the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran in accordance with international law.

7- NAM encourages the Secretariat to continue to refrain from including extensive technical details pertaining to sensitive proprietary information in the report of the Director General.

8- NAM welcomes the continued cooperation between the Agency and Iran as elaborated in the latest report of the Director General, and in this regard, notes the following:
a. That Iran has declared to the Agency under its Safeguards Agreement, 15 nuclear facilities and 9 LOFs, and that the Agency continues to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material at these facilities and LOFs.
b. That the activities of production of nuclear material, particularly those related to enrichment, continue to remain under the Agency’s containment and surveillance and that to date, the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) in Natanz and Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP)have been operating as declared.
c. That the Agency has confirmed that the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP) corresponded with the design information provided by Iran, that the facility was at an advanced stage of construction, and that Iran and the Agency agreed on a safeguards approach for FFEP. The results of the environmental samples taken at FFEP up to 27 April 2011 did not indicate the presence of enriched uranium.
d. That the Agency has continued to monitor the use and construction of hot cells at the relevant nuclear facilities in Iran, and confirmed that Iran is not conducting reprocessing activities in any of the facilities declared under its Safeguards Agreement.
e. That Iran has provided the Agency with access to the IR-40 heavy water reactor at Arak, at which time the Agency was able to carry out a design information verification (DIV). The Agency verified that the construction of the facility was ongoing, and that the coolant heat exchangers had been installed. According to Iran, the operation of the IR-40 Reactor is planned to commence by the end of 2013.
f. That the Agency also carried out an inspection and a DIV at the Fuel Manufacturing Plant (FMP), and confirmed that Iran has started to install some equipment for the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) fuel fabrication.

9- NAM notes the standing requests by the Secretariat for further information regarding the design and scheduling of the construction of new nuclear facilities, and continues to encourage Iran to provide design information regarding its nuclear facilities in accordance with its full-scope safeguards agreement with the Agency.

10- NAM notes that the Director General mentioned in his report that he reiterated to Iran his position regarding the need to take steps towards the full implementation of its Safeguards Agreement and its other relevant obligations, in order to establish international confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program. NAM recalls that Iran responded by extending an invitation to the Deputy Director General for Safeguards to visit its nuclear facilities and that the question of the possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program was discussed during that visit. NAM welcomes such invitations, and that Iran as a confidence building measure, has provided the Agency during the visit with access to:
a. An installation where research and development (R & D) on advanced centrifuges was taking place, as well as extensive information on its current and future R & D work on advanced centrifuges.
b. The Heavy Water Production Plant (HWPP) for the first time since 2005, at which time the Agency observed that the HWPP was operating.

11- While noting the DG’s concern regarding the issue of possible military dimension to Iran’s nuclear program, NAM also notes that Iran has still not received the documents relating to the “alleged studies”. In this context, NAM fully supports the previous requests of the Director General to those Members States that have provided the Secretariat information related to the “alleged studies” to agree that the Agency provides all related documents to Iran. NAM expresses once again its concerns on the creation of obstacles in this regard, which hinder the Agency’s verification process. NAM recalls that the Director General previously reported in document GOV/2009/55 that:
a. The Agency has limited means to authenticate independently the documentation that forms the basis of the alleged studies.
b. The constraints placed by some Member States on the availability of information to Iran are making it more difficult for the Agency to conduct detailed discussions with Iran on this matter.

12- In light of the aforementioned obstacles, NAM requests further clarification on the methodology adopted by the Agency in arriving at its assessment as contained in paragraph 42 of the report.

13- NAM welcomes the will of Iran “to remove ambiguities, if any”, as well as its suggestion that the Deputy Director General for Safeguards (DDG-SG) should visit Iran for discussions aiming at the resolution of matters. NAM notes the reply by the Director General, indicating his preparedness to send the DDG-SG to “discuss the issues identified” in his report to the Board of Governors. In this context, NAM welcomes the continuation of this positive dialogue and cooperation between Iran and the Agency.

14- NAM requests clarification from the Agency for not incorporating Iran’s comments on all the new information in this report prior to its official release.

15- Bearing in mind the Agency’s responsibility in protecting safeguards confidential information, NAM remains concerned by recurring incidents of leakage of such information that, in the absence of adequate corrective measures by the Agency, calls into question the credibility of its regime for the protection of safeguards confidential information.

16- NAM welcomes Iran’s resolve to continue cooperating with the Agency, and still looks forward to the safeguards implementation in Iran being conducted in a routine manner. In this context, NAM encourages the Agency and Iran to continue engaging substantively without delay for the purpose of providing clarifications regarding the issues identified in the report, with a view to the prompt resolution of these issues in accordance with the Work Plan on “Understanding of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Agency on the Modalities of resolution of the Outstanding Issues” (INFCIRC/711).

17- NAM reiterates its principled position that diplomacy and dialogue are the only way for a long term solution of Iran’s nuclear issue. NAM encourages all Member States to contribute positively to that effect.

18- Before concluding, NAM wishes to express its deep concern and dissatisfaction at the selective circulation of the Director General’s report, or parts thereof, to certain Member States prior to its official release to all Member States. This runs counter to the principle of the sovereign equality of all Member States enshrined in the IAEA Statute and should not be repeated in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

 

International, U.S.

World War 3: Iran increases anti-aircraft drills, U.S. to give ‘green light’ to Israeli airstrikes

Israeli media claims Iran’s Revolutionary Guards are stepping up anti-aircraft training.  The report comes immediately after the UN’s IAEA passed a resolution against Iran.

Despite Israeli media’s claim, there’s no detailed info about such action on any Iranian media site, so far.

On Russian media sites, they’re claiming the U.S. has just threatened Iran.  U.S. officials have asked Iran to suspend all nuclear activities until the spring of 2012. If Iran does not, then the United States will give Israel the green light for air strikes.  Again, I can’t find any info about this on U.S., or Israeli media sites.

International, Technology, U.S.

World War 3: IAEA approves resolution against Iran, Russia & China resist the resoluton

“But this is the magic of diplomacy. If you want to get everyone on board you have to sacrifice something. I hope it will lay the ground for future (UN Security Council) resolutions … I really hope so.”-Ehud Azoulay, Israeli envoy

November 18, the International Atomic Energy Agency has passed a resolution against Iran.  However, no details were included in the resolution, as to exactly what action is to be taken, this was the only way the IAEA could get Russia and China to vote for it.

Out of the 35 countries voting on the resolution, 32 voted for it. Cuba and Ecuador voted against.  Indonesia abstained.

 

Business/Economics, International, U.S.

World War 3, What Economic Recovery? U.S. Defense Secretary says war with Iran will destroy World economy, yet Israeli officials say the World should attack Iran anyway

“I have to tell you… there are going to be economic consequences to that, that could impact not just on our economy but the world economy.”-Leon Panetta, Defense Secretary of the United States

Despite the warmongering rhetoric coming from the White House, and Capitol Hill, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is warning of an economic Armageddon scenario if the ‘West’ attacks Iran.

Panetta made the remarks a day before going to Canada, to discuss the very plan to attack Iran with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

Meanwhile, Ehud Barak is trying to fan the flames of warmongering by claiming that Iran’s alleged, and unproven, nuclear weapons program is targeting the whole world: “In order to do this we must convince world leaders and the public that the Iranian nuclear program is not only targeting Israel, but the foundations of the entire world order as well.”


 

International, U.S.

Internet Incompetence: Sites on the internet are incorrectly reporting that 85% of U.S. citizens are against war with Iran

A few international news sites have reported that CBS News conducted a poll that showed 85% of people in the United States are against war with Iran.  Blog sites have been picking up that ball and running with it.  The problem is that it’s not true.

I looked at the CBS News Poll, and it’s not quite what’s being reported by other  internet sites. The results were 55% who thought diplomacy was enough, 17% who said Iran was no threat, and 15% who wanted to go to war NOW!  I didn’t see any “85% against war with Iran”.

The CBS News Poll has a lot of other interesting responses about U.S. policy in the Middle East, North Africa, China and North Korea, but, like many polls, the number of respondents are just to small to accurately represent the whole of the U.S. population.

International, Opinion, U.S.

World War 3: U.S. sells first strike bunker buster bombs to United Arab Emirates, proof that we’re going to war against Iran

According to the Commonwealth controlled (British Empire, via Rupert Murdoch) Wall Street Journal, warmonger U.S. President Barack Obama is about to sign off on a deal to provide the UAE with bunker buster bombs.

The WSJ article claims that the UAE is about to buy 4,900 JDAMs.  These are not necessarily bunker busters, but could be configured as such.  JDAM stands for Joint Direct Attack Munitions.  Basically it’s an advanced smart bomb that can be set up with a variety of explosive material, depending on what the target is.

The UAE deal is part of a trend. In recent months the United States has already sold thousands of JDAMs to Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Bunker buster bombs are not defensive weapons, they are first strike weapons, used when you invade a country.  This is why the sale of these weapons to Middle Eastern countries, who don’t like Iran, is a sign of a coming attack on Iran.

Russian media say the UAE arms deal also includes Hellfire anti-tank missiles.  Iran has the largest tank force in the Middle East.

Regarding the WSJ, as well as most U.S. media sources, being controlled by the British Empire; a clue is that many times they use Commonwealth English grammar rules. In their article about the JDAM sale to the UAE they punctuate the abbreviation for UN, and UAE.  That’s incorrect for U.S. English grammar rules: “In American English, U.S. (with periods) is more common as the standard abbreviation for United States, although The Chicago Manual of Style now deprecates the use of the periods (16th ed.). US (without periods) is generally accepted in most other national forms [such as British English] of English. In longer abbreviations incorporating the country’s initials (USN, USAF), periods are not used.”-Wikipedea: Manual of Style

I had a college professor try to clarify the rules; he said only abbreviations for country names, and proper names for people get punctuated in U.S. grammar rules.  Organizations and business names do not. The UN is an organization, not a country.

In fact, even military vehicles used in UN peacekeeping operations do not punctuate the “UN” painted on their vehicles.  The U.S. military stopped punctuating their abbreviations in the late 1940s, when the new standardized U.S. grammar rules were finally adopted.  USAF=United States Air Force, USN=United States Navy, USMC=United States Marine Corps and USA (without punctuations)=United States Army.  So the next time you see a product labeled “Made in USA” (no punctuations) does it mean it was made by the United States Army, or that the company is ignorant of U.S. grammar rules?

What about the UAE (United Arab Emirates)?  The UAE is actually a confederation of seven smaller emirates. Despite many sources calling the UAE a federation, it can not be, because each ruler of each emirate maintains supreme authority within their emirate.  Therefore the UAE is not a “country”, but an loose organization of smaller countries.  This is the case with the failed Confederate States of America.  In fact being a loose confederation was a primary reason for their losing the Civil War (War Between the States) in the 1860s.

The same can be said for the Commonwealth of Independent States, or CIS.  This is a confederation of countries lead by Russia, and includes many former members of the Soviet Union.

However, even Wikipedia: Manual of Style confuses the issue: “For consistency in an article, if the abbreviated form for the United States appears alongside other abbreviated country names, avoid periods throughout; never add full stops to the other abbreviations (the US, the UK, and the PRC, not the U.S., the U.K., and the P.R.C.).”

In the case of the WSJ article, it’s interesting that they punctuate U.S. and UN (the article was written by three people).

Did I distract you enough from the preparations for war with Iran?

International, Technology, U.S.

World War 3: British government officials leak info about invasion of Iran; Merry Xmas

“We’re expecting something as early as Christmas, or very early in the New Year.”-unnamed British Foreign Office source

The British media outlet Daily Mail has been publishing what they claim are leaked details of the coming attack on Iran, by Israel, United Kingdom and the United States.

On November 2 they published an article that says the U.K. and the U.S. are working on the details of a joint military operation against Iran.  It said that President Barack Obama wants vengeance for a supposed plot to assassinate a Saudi Arabian official (which in reality was a failed DEA/FBI sting operation), and that Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron are using the latest IAEA report as justification.

The Daily Mail says the invasion of Iran will be made by British and U.S. forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as from the Persian Gulf.  Israel will use its air force (including its growing arsenal of ballistic missiles) against Iran.

Whitehall (a term referring to the British royal family “Her Majesty’s Government” which oversees the operation of the U.K. government, the Queen is the c in c of British forces) officials claim that Iran has suddenly appeared “newly aggressive, and we are not quite sure why.”

The Daily Mail also said that Obama does not want a new war before the 2012 elections, but is being pressured by Israel.

The British newspaper Guardian also published similar articles.

On November 10, the Daily Mail published an article that said Israel would launch air strikes against Iran by the end of December. That report came from British intelligence officials.

British Ministry of Defense officials said their concern about Iran getting the bomb, is that other middle eastern countries will follow suit:  “The bigger concern is it will be impossible to stop Saudi Arabia and Turkey from developing their own weapons.”

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak continues to imply a possible Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear program: “We continue to recommend to our friends in the world and to ourselves, not to take any option off the table.”

.

 

International, Technology, U.S.

World War 3: Russia blasts IAEA, backs Iran

“Russia is gravely disappointed and bewildered that the report is being turned into a source adding to the tensions over the problems connected to the Iranian nuclear program.”-Russian Foreign Ministry

Russia has doubts concerning the IAEA report on Iran’s nuclear program.  One clue is that the report wasn’t supposed to be made public until November 17/18.  It seems IAEA boss Yukiya Amano intentionally ‘leaked’ the report on November 8: “We have serious doubts about the justification for steps to reveal contents of the report to a broad public, primarily because it is precisely now that certain chances for the renewal of dialogue between the ‘sextet’ (P5+1) of international mediators and Tehran have begun to appear.”-Russian Foreign Ministry

Russian officials say this is an intentional move made behind the scenes by the United States: “The analysis must take place in a calm atmosphere, since it is important to determine whether some new, reliable evidence strengthening suspicions of a military element in Iran’s nuclear program has really appeared, or whether we are talking about an intentional, and counterproductive, whipping up of emotions.”