IAEA: Iran broke law by not revealing nuclear facility

CNN.com / world

09/30/2009

NEW DELHI, India (CNN) — The head of the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog agency said Iran broke the law by not disclosing sooner its recently revealed uranium enrichment site.

“Iran was supposed to inform us on the day it was decided to construct the facility. They have not done that,” International Atomic Energy Agency’s Mohamed El Baradei told CNN’s sister station, CNN-IBN. “They are saying that this was meant to be a back-up facility in case we were attacked and so they could not tell us earlier on.

“Nonetheless, they have been on the wrong side of the law, you know in so far as informing the agency about the construction and as you have seen it, it has created concern in the international community,” he said.

Last week, Iran wrote a letter to the IAEA revealing the existence of the facility. The admission prompted President Obama and the leaders of Britain and France to publicly chide the Islamic republic and threaten further sanctions.

Iran claims its nuclear enrichment program is intended for peaceful purposes, but the international community accuses the country of continuing to try to develop nuclear weapons capability. Watch uproar over Iran’s nuclear ambitions »

The facility is located on a military base near the city of Qom, about 100 miles (160 kilometers) southwest of Tehran, and is thought to be capable of housing 3,000 centrifuges, according to the officials and the IAEA.

The equipment is not enough to produce nuclear fuel to power a reactor, but sufficient to manufacture bomb-making material, according to a U.S. diplomatic source who read the letter. …

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/09/30/iran.iaea.nuclear/index.html

It might be interesting to discover just how the IAEA decides how to “police” the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Its decisions appears to hinge upon who the target is. Iran and North Korea are not likely to receive the same treatment as Israel.

While focusing on Iraq, Iran and North Korea, the IAEA has virtually ignored Israel’s nuclear program. But now, according to an article in the Washington Times, 150 member nations of the UN is speaking up about Israel’s nuclear program.

Two things appear to be noteworthy about the voices of those 150 United Nations’ members:

1. This is the first time in 18 years that the UN has commented on Israel’s nuclear program.

2. This affirmation of fairness from the UN happened just days before the White Hat guys, their Middle East sidekick and the “TELL AMERICA” PRESS bombarded the world with accusations against Iran.

Why is that?

Why did one act by the United Nations(IAEA) grab headlines while the other act by the United Nations(150 nation nuclear conference) did not? Both were quite newsworthy. Both addressed the Middle East nuclear programs of nations – yet one nation got “bad-mouthed” while the other nation got little press.

Does the “6000000 card” exempt a likely nuclear bearing Zionist nation from the same scrutiny that Arab nations must undergo?

And it is truly strange that once you opt-in to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, you can’t opt-out.

If a country can’t opt-out, that would enable the IAEA to “grab” North Korea.  North Korea opted-out. Opting – in with no option to opt-out is peculiar. That makes one wonder “what other man-made treaty forbade opting out of it”.

I thought I would search the “free news on the Internet” using the search string “irrevocable treaties”. That’s kinda close. That search produced “trading treaties” and the like. I decided to change my search string. I next searched “irrevocable nuclear non-proliferation treaty” and I found the below. Pay close attention to Article X.

Key articles

Article I:^[17] Each nuclear-weapons state (NWS) undertakes not to transfer, to any recipient, nuclear weapons, or other nuclear explosive devices, and not to assist any non-nuclear weapon state to manufacture or acquire such weapons or devices.

Article II: Each non-NWS party undertakes not to receive, from any source, nuclear weapons, or other nuclear explosive devices; not to manufacture or acquire such weapons or devices; and not to receive any assistance in their manufacture.

Article III: Each non-NWS party undertakes to conclude an agreement with the IAEA for the application of its safeguards to all nuclear material in all of the state’s peaceful nuclear activities and to prevent diversion of such material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

Article IV: 1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

Article VI. The states undertake to pursue “negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament”, and towards a “Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control”.

Article X. Establishes the right to withdraw from the Treaty giving 3 months’ notice. It also establishes the duration of the Treaty (25 years before 1995 Extension Initiative).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

So, Article X of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty allows for opting- out by giving a three month notice. And that seems reasonable to allow for opting-out. It seems reasonable that if you voluntarily opt-in you ought to be able to, upon adherence to agreed upon rules, voluntarily opt-out.

But I then thought that there maybe an “opt-in” for which an “opt-out” may be painful or perhaps impossible – blood oaths.

I attempted to look up a definition of “blood oath” but only found references to people, movies and the like. I found no definition of  “blood oath”. And maybe that’s good.

***

Volcker Says China’s Rise Highlights Relative U.S. Decline

Bloomberg

PRESS

By James Tyson and Michael McKee

Sept. 29 (Bloomberg) — Former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker said the rise of China and other emerging economies has underscored a decline in the comparative economic and intellectual leadership of the U.S.

“I don’t know how we accommodate ourselves to it,” Volcker, an economic adviser to President Barack Obama, said in an interview with PBS’s Charlie Rose taped yesterday in New York. “You cannot be dependent upon these countries for three to four trillion dollars of your debt and think that they’re going to be passive observers of whatever you do.”

The former Fed chairman also said unemployment at 9.7 percent will slow the pace of recovery from the U.S. recession as consumers default on mortgages and consumer loans. Moreover, commercial real estate loans are likely to cause further losses for lenders.

“This recovery will be slower,” he said. “We can’t just pump up consumption and pump up housing again.”

Group of 20 leaders, meeting in Pittsburgh last week, announced plans for more durable economic growth, including reducing U.S. dependence on overseas capital and cutting the reliance of emerging nations such as China on exports.

World leaders decided that the G-20, which includes emerging economies such as China and Brazil, will replace the Group of Eight as the main forum for global economic coordination. The shift illustrates how the excesses that led to the financial crisis have compelled industrial nations to share governance of the world economy. …

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agCGOzW9xVNk

Perhaps America’s neocons stretched America’s economy beyond its “elasticity” limit. It is likely that America’s economy, after the neocons, will not return to its pre-neocon days. The “demolition management” style of the latter-day neocons, has changed the economics of the world. The world’s economy seems to be adapting to a state that attempts to thwart one country from having a life and death impact on the world’s economic system.

Did the G7 format fail? Apparently. Now the world is going to a G20 format. The G7 format failed to stop the latter-day neocons from wrecking the world’s economy. And the world does not want to relive that “near death” experience again. And it appears that China may play a notable role in the strategy of the G20 format.

Actually the latter-day neocons, in their wisdom, gave the world a hint of their respect for the economic power of China some time ago. Some time ago, Mr. George W. Bush’s Space Doctrine claimed outer space. This provoked a neocon – China conflict because Mr. George W. Bush claimed outer space.

That act, by the latter-day neocons set off a flurry of activity within the world community:

The Chinese military shot down one of its aging sattelites, without first getting the approval of Mr. Bush.

Two Russian mini-subs dove to the Arctic ocean’s floor and planted the Russian flag on “tons” of minerals. Quite possibly, some in the world thought it was not good to compare “SPACE ROCKS” to “OCEAN’S FLOOR MINERALS”. The West then sought to avail itself of the United Nations rule of law. Imagine that. Both the space rocks act and the ocean floor’s mineral act were outside the “law” of the United Nations.

joejolly published post sometime ago, referencing the neocons and China. The below list, “War Games Update-III”, comes from one of those posts.

(1) The Bush Team Claimed Outer Space
(2) The Chinese Shot Down One of Its Aging Satellites
(3) Chinese Investments in America Published
(4) Chinese Products Sold in America Found to be Faulty
(5) Chinese Steps Up Military Focus on Taiwan
(6) The Bush Team, Brandishing WWIII, Steps Up Military Focus on The World
(7) Chinese Remarks ( investments to change ) Drive Dollar Lower
(8) U.S. Warships (3) Request Hong Kong Port of Call   *(new)
(9) China Denies Hong Kong Port of Call to US Warships  *(new)

The latter-day neocons did not let a little thing like Chinese investments in America stop its war posturing(neocons love wars). And with respect to the economic destination of the neocons – they’ll know the destination when they get there.

[After leaving office, the neocons still spend significant time trying to “justify” their management deeds that seem at variance with America’s values. And that has triggered activity from America’s “under-belly”.]

If the neocons aren’t allowed to rule America, then their “hate-laced” rhetoric will attempt to derail anyone else’s rule of America.

***

Russia ‘rethinks’ Iran sanctions

The Russian president has signalled that Moscow might be prepared to soften its opposition to further sanctions against Iran over its nuclear plans.

BBC NEWS

Sept. 24, 2009

Dmitry Medvedev, speaking after talks with US President Obama, said that in some cases sanctions were “inevitable”.

But the Chinese foreign ministry has said that increasing pressure on Iran would not be effective.

“Sanctions and exerting pressure are not the way to solve problems,” said spokeswoman Jiang Yu.

She said sanctions “are not conducive for the current diplomatic efforts on the Iran nuclear issue”.

Iran’s president did not refer directly to the nuclear stand-off in his address to the UN General Assembly in New York. …

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8271990.stm

All manner of American thinking gives a person the right of “self defense”. The United Nations gives nations the right of self defense. But the White Hat guys and their Middle East sidekick would like to take that right away from Iran.

Why?

The answer goes back to 1948 as the sun finally did  set on that Empire that the sun never sat on. The setting sun opened up an “opportunity” to acquire land to resettle the victims of Adolf Hitler’s war. For some reason or another, Adolf Hitler wanted the Jews out of Europe. And the United Nations thought that Palestine would be a fine location for two people with little in common to share. The idea was:

Move the Jews out of Europe and into the Middle East. Arm the Jews to the teeth – so that they anchor themselves in the Middle East.

And of course, the rest is history.

In 1948, Iran failed to ok the theft of Palestinian land. The WHITE HAT guys and their MIDDLE EAST sidekick have never forgiven Iran for its opposition to the 1948 land theft.

Iran, early on, recognized it had the opposition of the United Nations in matters of self-defense. Iran must have decided that to protect its borders, it would need to take its defense into its own hands. Iran must have figured that the United Nations was BIAS driven.

It is ludicrous and/or worse that the West rails about Iran’s nuclear activities while putting a “What Me Worry” face on Israel’s nuclear activity(if Israel has nuclear activity). It appears that “MUMS THE WORD” when it comes to Israel’s nuclear activity(if Israel has nuclear activity).

It is either insane or perhaps just “Western thinking” that some  countries, Iran in particular, have no right to self defense.

***

A Three Part Affair?

First it was:

[Part 1] FRIDAY, September 18, 2009

IAEA conference criticizes Israel’s nuclear program

The Washington Times

By George Jahn ASSOCIATED PRESS

VIENNA, Austria | Overriding Western objections, a 150-nation nuclear conference on Friday passed a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program for the first time in 18 years. Iran hailed the vote as a “glorious moment.”

The result was a setback not only for Israel but also for the United States and other backers of the Jewish state. It also reflected growing tensions between Israel and its backers and Islamic nations, backed by developing countries.

Of delegations present at the International Atomic Energy Agency meeting Friday, 49 voted for the resolution. Forty-five were against and 16 abstained from endorsing or rejecting the document, which “expresses concern about the Israeli nuclear capabilities” and links it to “concern about the threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons for the security and stability of the Middle East.”

In an attempt to sway the assembly before the vote, U.S. chief delegate Glyn Davies spoke out against an “attempt to use this resolution to criticize a single country.”

“Such an approach is highly politicized and does not truly address the complexities at play regarding crucial nuclear-related issues in the Middle East,” he said. …

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/19/iaea-conference-criticizes-israels-nuclear-program/

Followed By:

[Part 2] Saturday, September 26, 2009

Obama warns Iran: ‘Come clean’ on nukes …

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33016209/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

And Continued By:

[Part 3] Sunday, September 27, 2009

US, Allies Seek ‘Unfettered Access’ to Iran Site

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=8679009

Of course, with respect to the announcement of the discovered site, we know when the announcement was made. What we don’t know is WHEN the discovery of Iran’s uranium site was made.

The announcement followed the UN’s interest in Israel’s nuclear program by only eight days. For the first time in 18 years, Israels’ nuclear operation was the interest of the United Nations. That ought to be cause for America’s “TELL AMERICA” press to TELL AMERICA.

Still, what we don’t know, and perhaps will never find out – is WHEN the discovery of Iran’s enrichment processing site was made. Perhaps the “WHEN” is classified?

With the “TELL AMERICA” press  somewhat muted on the United Nations focus on Israel’s nuclear operations and ramped up, loud accusations against Iran by the White Hat guys, one is likely to almost forget the United Nations’ action against Israel. But IF such a situation did exist, one is likely to think of the word  – “DIVERSION“.

It is exceptionally unusual for the United Nations to call Israel to task about its nuclear operations(if Israel …er… has nuclear operations).

How come the White Hat wearers failed to go public with that “first in 18 years admonition of Israel by the United Nations”? Are the White Hat guys BIASED?

***

Bill Clinton: ‘Vast right-wing conspiracy’ as ‘virulent’ as ever

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the…

WASHINGTON (CNN) — The “vast right-wing conspiracy” that attacked him during his presidency has been weakened, but continues to operate against President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton said Sunday.

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Clinton was asked about the term his wife Hillary Clinton, now Secretary of State, famously coined. “Is it still there?” asked host David Gregory.

“Oh, you bet. Sure it is. It’s not as strong as it was, because America’s changed demographically, but it’s as virulent as it was,” said the former president.

“I mean, they’re saying things about him [Obama] — you know, it’s like when they accused me of murder and all that stuff they did,” Clinton said, in an apparent reference to conspiracy theories surrounding the suicide of White House deputy counsel Vince Foster.

He added, “It’s not really good for the Republicans and the country, what’s going on now. I mean, they may be hurting President Obama. They can take his numbers down, they can run his opposition up. But fundamentally, he and his team have a positive agenda for America.”

The nation needs “a credible debate about what’s the right balance between continuing to expand the economy through stimulus and beginning to move back to fiscal balance,” Clinton said. “We need a credible debate about what’s the best way to get to universal [health care] coverage.” …

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/27/bill-clinton-vast-right-wing-conspiracy-as-virulent-as-ever/

The state of America’s economy says America almost contacted a “lethal” dose of neocons. But America, the host, is not dead yet and might still have tons of blood left to suck – might still have millions of dollars left to further enrich the greedy few.

A fool and his country are soon parted!

***

US, Allies Seek ‘Unfettered Access’ to Iran Site

US, allies will demand ‘unfettered access’ to previously secret nuclear facility in Iran

abc NEWS Politics

By JENNIFER LOVEN AP White House Corrospondent

WASHINGTON Sept 26, 2009 (AP)

The U.S. and its five allies trying to stop Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons program plan to tell Tehran in a key meeting on Thursday that it must provide “unfettered access” to its previously secret Qom enrichment facility within weeks, a senior administration official says.

The allies — the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia — also will present in the Oct. 1 meeting a so-called transparency package covering all of Iran’s nuclear activities across the country, said the official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss plans that are not yet ready to be announced.

The allies will demand that Iran prove to the increasingly skeptical group that its intentions with its various sites are peaceful and energy-related, as Iran claims, and not for weapons development, as the West believes, the official said Saturday.

These nations now agree that they are less inclined to listen to suspect arguments or incomplete evidence — viewing it as a stall tactic, the official said. …

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=8679009

A country, without a strong national defense, has no sovereignty unless the powerful countries say so. In this respect, the world is no different today than it was in the days of “Attila the Hun”.

And the strong intend to wash the weak down the water spout. If the slide – down the water spout – is damaging enough, the weak may have to ante-up another 60 years before it can return to its 2009 state. And undoubtedly the Good Guys of the west know:

The itsy-bitsy spider Climbed up the water spout Down came the rain And washed the spider out Out came the sun And dried up all the rain And the itsy-bitsy spider Climbed up the spout again

To prevent that climb up the water spout again, the White Hat guys might consider a solution from the past. There are two examples of the genocide solution – one solution was an annihilating success – the other solution failed. Adolf Hitler failed – the British, in Australia, did not. In Australia, both the land was free and the children of the original land owners were free.

The Tasmanians, of Australia, were unable to climb the water spout again. Their fate, said to have been the most complete case of genocide known to man, happened at the hands of the British:

Australia

Main article: Australian genocide debate

The Black War was a period of conflict between the British colonists and Tasmanian Aborigines in Van Diemen’s Land (now Tasmania) in the early years of the 1800s. The conflict resulted in the complete extinction of the Tasmanian Aboriginal population. However, there are presently many thousands of individuals descended from Tasmanian Aborigines.

The Tasmanians, estimated at between 5000 and 8,000 individuals in 1803, were reduced to a population of around 300 by 1833, when the surviving population were relocated to Flinders Island. The remnant population continued to decline until the last surviving Tasmanian Aborigine died in 1876.

Some were killed by introduced diseases,^[38] others at the hands of settlers, either in conflicts over land seizures, or murdered by Europeans who considered the Tasmanian Aborigines to be either a potential threat, or simply an inconvenience best exterminated.^[39]

After the introduction of the word genocide in the 1940s the Black Wars and the extinction of the Tasmanian Aborigines became a text book example of a genocide. However more recent detailed studies of the events surrounding the extinction by historians who specialise in Australian history have raised questions about this interpretation of history.^[40][41] In a chapter describing these developments, Anne Curthoys concludes “It is time for a more robust exchange between genocide and Tasmanian historical scholarship if we are to understand better what did happen in Tasmania in the first half of the nineteenth century, how best to conceptualize it, and how to consider what that historical knowledge might mean for us now, morally and intellectually, in the present.”^{[41] …}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history

The White Hat guys, along with two others are making the United Nations look impotent. That comes after the United Nations’ did the right thing in “calling Israel to task” on ITS nuclear weapons program. The UN was simply trying to make the rule of law universal rather than country specific.

And that UN action could be the reason for the White Hat guys going on a rampage. It would be interesting to know  just when the White Hat guys and their Middle East sidekick found out about the Iranian’s “high-tech” facility for processing uranium. The White Hat guys sure did not carry on like this over the “loss” of those 560 drums of yellowcake -  lost on the high seas long enough ago to now be fully fledged nuclear weapons.

The United States of America, having trouble trying to bounce back from the degradation of the neocon years, now looks almost as aggressive as the NAZI’s.

Not even operating under international law or a sensible attempt at “color of law” the White Hat gang has now become a threat to anything it does not approve of. And that is a breakdown of international  “law and order”.

The neocons, whose influence still seems to weigh on America, may have added one more to their list of “irrelevants” – the United Nations.

Do the five countries, in the stand against Iran, have common interests in their stance? Could Islam extremists be the common interest?

***

The ‘White Hat’ Guys and the IAEA Conference

It appears that the United Nations has come to the attention of the’ White Hat’ guys. A 150 nation nuclear conference is the reason for the ‘White Hat’ guys concern. That conference wants Israel to come under the same rules that the ‘White Hat’ guys wants to apply only to Iran and North Korea. Applying that same rule to Israel might undercut 60 years of arming Israel to the teeth. The ‘White Hat’ guys were unsuccessful at:

IAEA conference criticizes Israel’s nuclear program

The Washington Times

By George Jahn ASSOCIATED PRESS

VIENNA, Austria | Overriding Western objections, a 150-nation nuclear conference on Friday passed a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program for the first time in 18 years. Iran hailed the vote as a “glorious moment.”

The result was a setback not only for Israel but also for the United States and other backers of the Jewish state. It also reflected growing tensions between Israel and its backers and Islamic nations, backed by developing countries.

Of delegations present at the International Atomic Energy Agency meeting Friday, 49 voted for the resolution. Forty-five were against and 16 abstained from endorsing or rejecting the document, which “expresses concern about the Israeli nuclear capabilities” and links it to “concern about the threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons for the security and stability of the Middle East.”

In an attempt to sway the assembly before the vote, U.S. chief delegate Glyn Davies spoke out against an “attempt to use this resolution to criticize a single country.”

“Such an approach is highly politicized and does not truly address the complexities at play regarding crucial nuclear-related issues in the Middle East,” he said. …

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/19/iaea-conference-criticizes-israels-nuclear-program/

But the ‘White Hat’ guys countered with new ideas on how to get the United Nations to punish Iran for trying to protect its land against Western encroachment. The belligerence was toned down after other major nations were factored in with the BIG THREE ‘White Hat’ guys.

Perhaps a major reason for the ‘White Hat’ guys din was to distract world attention from the United Nations’, first in 18 years, criticism of Israel’s nuclear program. Nixon(Republican President of the United States) was concerned during his long ago administration. But after 1980, the neocons got control of the Republican party and “aiding and abetting” the Middle East problem became the norm.

***

Obama warns Iran: ‘Come clean’ on nukes

Iranian president says underground facility in compliance; agency disagrees

msnbc

World news / Mideast & N. Africa / Iran

Ap Associated Press

PITTSBURGH – Backed by other world powers, President Barack Obama declared Friday that Iran is speeding down a path to confrontation and demanded that Tehran quickly “come clean” on all nuclear efforts and open a newly revealed secret site for close international inspection. He said he would not rule out military action if the Iranians refuse. …

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33016209/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

Bush urges Tehran to COME CLEAN

BBCNEWS | Middle East

US President George W Bush has said that Iran should reveal the full extent ot its nuclear programme, or risk further international isolation.

A US intelligence assessment released on Monday said that Iran had halted a nuclear weapons programme in 2003.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the US report a “great victory” for Iran.

But Mr Bush said Iran still had “more to explain” about its past actions, and that it must cease uranium enrichment.

He said Iran had yet to acknowledge that it had a covert nuclear weapons programme which ran until 2003 – as stated by Monday’s National Intelligence Estimate (NIE).

The report said Iran was keeping its options open, continuing to enrich uranium, which could be used for nuclear weapons in the future. …

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7129307.stm

IAEA conference criticizes Israel’s nuclear program

The Washington Times

By George Jahn ASSOCIATED PRESS

VIENNA, Austria | Overriding Western objections, a 150-nation nuclear conference on Friday passed a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program for the first time in 18 years. Iran hailed the vote as a “glorious moment.”

The result was a setback not only for Israel but also for the United States and other backers of the Jewish state. It also reflected growing tensions between Israel and its backers and Islamic nations, backed by developing countries.

Of delegations present at the International Atomic Energy Agency meeting Friday, 49 voted for the resolution. Forty-five were against and 16 abstained from endorsing or rejecting the document, which “expresses concern about the Israeli nuclear capabilities” and links it to “concern about the threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons for the security and stability of the Middle East.”

In an attempt to sway the assembly before the vote, U.S. chief delegate Glyn Davies spoke out against an “attempt to use this resolution to criticize a single country.”

“Such an approach is highly politicized and does not truly address the complexities at play regarding crucial nuclear-related issues in the Middle East,” he said. …

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/19/iaea-conference-criticizes-israels-nuclear-program/

HIGH SEAS: Uranium: The Israeli Connection

TIME cnn

May 30, 1977

In the foggy dawn of Nov. 17, 1968, the German-built freighter Scheersberg A (gross tonnage: 1,790 tons) chugged out of Antwerp harbor with a Liberian flag flying from its mast and 560 drums of “yellowcake”—a crude concentrate of uranium—packed beneath its decks. The ship never reached its declared destination of Genoa, Italy. Instead, after 15 days at sea it docked at the Turkish port of Iskenderun on Dec. 2, riding high in the water. Its strategic cargo—200 tons of uranium, worth $3.7 million, that could potentially be used for nuclear weapons—had vanished. The disappearance of the uranium was first disclosed last month by Paul Leventhal, a former counsel to the Senate Committee on Government Operations, at a conference in Salzburg, and the report was confirmed later by European Community officials.

Who had the uranium? And how did they get it? After several weeks of investigation by a team of correspondents, TIME has learned that the Scheersberg As voyage from Antwerp was part of a complex plot concocted by Israeli intelligence agents. Its purpose: to disguise a secret Israeli purchase of much-needed uranium for its French-built nuclear reactor at Dimona in the Negev Desert; an overt purchase might have pushed the Soviet Union into supplying nuclear arms to the Arab states. The Scheersberg A, which is still in service as a tramp steamer under the name Kerkyra, was secretly owned at the time of the uranium caper by the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad. …

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,914952,00.html

Nuclear Weapons

FAS

Israel has not confirmed that it has nuclear weapons and officially maintains that it will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the Middle East. Yet the existence of Israeli nuclear weapons is a “public secret” by now due to the declassification of large numbers of formerly highly classified US government documents which show that the United States by 1975 was convinced that Israel had nuclear weapons.

History

Israel began actively investigating the nuclear option from its earliest days. In 1949, HEMED GIMMEL a special unit of the IDF’s Science Corps, began a two-year geological survey of the Negev desert with an eye toward the discovery of uranium reserves. Although no significant sources of uranium were found, recoverable amounts were located in phosphate deposits.

The program took another step forward with the creation of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) in 1952. Its chairman, Ernst David Bergmann, had long advocated an Israeli bomb as the best way to ensure “that we shall never again be led as lambs to the slaughter.” Bergmann was also head of the Ministry of Defense’s Research and Infrastructure Division (known by its Hebrew acronym, EMET), which had taken over the HEMED research centers (HEMED GIMMEL among them, now renamed Machon 4) as part of a reorganization. Under Bergmann, the line between the IAEC and EMET blurred to the point that Machon 4 functioned essentially as the chief laboratory for the IAEC. By 1953, Machon 4 had not only perfected a process for extracting the uranium found in the Negev, but had also developed a new method of producing heavy water, providing Israel with an indigenous capability to produce some of the most important nuclear materials.

For reactor design and construction, Israel sought the assistance of France. Nuclear cooperation between the two nations dates back as far as early 1950′s, when construction began on France’s 40MWt heavy water reactor and a chemical reprocessing plant at Marcoule. France was a natural partner for Israel and both governments saw an independent nuclear option as a means by which they could maintain a degree of autonomy in the bipolar environment of the cold war.

In the fall of 1956, France agreed to provide Israel with an 18 MWt research reactor. However, the onset of the Suez Crisis a few weeks later changed the situation dramatically. Following Egypt’s closure of the Suez Canal in July, France and Britain had agreed with Israel that the latter should provoke a war with Egypt to provide the European nations with the pretext to send in their troops as peacekeepers to occupy and reopen the canal zone. In the wake of the Suez Crisis, the Soviet Union made a thinly veiled threat against the three nations. This episode not only enhanced the Israeli view that an independent nuclear capability was needed to prevent reliance on potentially unreliable allies, but also led to a sense of debt among French leaders that they had failed to fulfill commitments made to a partner. French premier Guy Mollet is even quoted as saying privately that France “owed” the bomb to Israel.

On 3 October 1957, France and Israel signed a revised agreement calling for France to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste facilities were designed to handle three times that power) and, in protocols that were not committed to paper, a chemical reprocessing plant. This complex was constructed in secret, and outside the IAEA inspection regime, by French and Israeli technicians at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col. Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps. …

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/

Carter says Israel has arsenal of 150 nuclear weapons

HAARETZ.com

By Haaretz Service

05/26/2008

Carter also condemned Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip as “one of the greatest human rights crimes now existing on Earth,” according to the Agence France-Presse news agency.

Carter said in reference to the situation of Palestinians in Gaza that, “There is no reason to treat these people this way.”

The 83-year-old was subjected to criticism on a recent visit to Israel for his meetings with officials from Palestinian militant group Hamas as well as his trip to Syria where he met with Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hamas leader Khaled Meshal.

He has also in the past branded a “crime and an atrocity” the Israeli blockade of Gaza, imposed in response to ongoing rocket attacks launched from the territory. …

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/987158.html

But only Iran should come clean? Why? Because three nuclear armed nations said so?

Who is kidding whom about “coming clean”? There is a ton of dirt spread throughout the Middle East nuclear community. But the West, for reasons it does not want to share, only sees a need for Iran to “come clean”.

Is it  a matter of trying to keep stolen land stolen(1948)? And who knows, perhaps the ‘Western front’ extends all the way to Zionist Israel?

***

‘Israel + Nuclear Weapons + IAEA’

Perhaps it was an oversight on my part but I had never seen any effort by the United Nations’ IAEA to reference Israel and nuclear weapons. That has now changed.

I used Google to search the Internet using this search string, “Israel + Nuclear Weapons + IAEA” and I saw what I “least” expected to see in a news source that I “least” expected to see it in. I found a string match in the Washington Times:

IAEA conference criticizes Israel’s nuclear program

By George Jahn ASSOCIATED PRESS

Sep. 19, 2009

VIENNA, Austria | Overriding Western objections, a 150-nation nuclear conference on Friday passed a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program for the first time in 18 years. Iran hailed the vote as a “glorious moment.”

The result was a setback not only for Israel but also for the United States and other backers of the Jewish state. It also reflected growing tensions between Israel and its backers and Islamic nations, backed by developing countries.

Of delegations present at the International Atomic Energy Agency meeting Friday, 49 voted for the resolution. Forty-five were against and 16 abstained from endorsing or rejecting the document, which “expresses concern about the Israeli nuclear capabilities” and links it to “concern about the threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons for the security and stability of the Middle East.”

In an attempt to sway the assembly before the vote, U.S. chief delegate Glyn Davies spoke out against an “attempt to use this resolution to criticize a single country.” …

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/19/iaea-conference-criticizes-israels-nuclear-program/

The post is dated September 19th. I should have seen this post in the news sources that I regularly read – but if it was there, I missed it. I do have somewhat of an understanding of America’s press. I have seen the press “TELL AMERICA” and fail to “TELL AMERICA”. The “TELL AMERICA press did not talk much about Iraq’s refuges.

Lets look again at the first paragraph:

VIENNA, Austria | Overriding Western objections, a 150-nation nuclear conference on Friday passed a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program for the first time in 18 years. Iran hailed the vote as a “glorious moment.”

What part of the world OBJECTED to the resolution????? Just as you might expect – the West. Imagine the White Hat guys of the West not wanting to apply the same rules to Israel as to Iran and North Korea. It’s a nuclear bias that the White Hat guys wanted to peddle.

And this was the first time in 18 years that such a resolution has been passed. Could this revelation be the reason why the White Hats guys are in such a Middle East nuclear tizzy? You don’t make the world work using the methods of the White Hat guys. You don’t make the world work using the methods of the neocons.

We are looking at “one small step for the United Nations – one giant leap for world fairness”. A community of nations – biased against a few – is more like a gang of nations forcing their will on the community.

***

Sister of American Lockerbie victim visits Gadhafi

“ I welcomed him to America,” Gibson told CNN

CNN.com /world

By Joe Sterling

CNN

(CNN) – Lisa Gibson — who lost her brother in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing — sat down the other day with the man many blame for the notorious attack: Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi.

The 39-year-old Colorado Springs lawyer said she and another relative of a Lockerbie victim went to see the controversial figure in New York on Wednesday, the same day he delivered a rambling speech to the U.N. General Assembly.

Calling herself an “ambassador of reconciliation,” she views the encounter as the latest step in a journey to build bridges between Libyans and Americans — a mission energized by her strong Christian faith.

“I wanted him to know there were some people out there who’ve lost loved ones who have a different vision and different heart,” she said. “He warmly received us.”

Gadhafi mentioned this encounter during an interview for CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS show. The Libyan leader is reviled by many relatives of the victims of Pan Am Flight 103, which blew up in a terror attack over Lockerbie, Scotland, in December 1988. …

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/09/25/gadhafi.meeting/index.html

America is not bankrupt of civilized behavior. Although America has been “town hall-ed” and “you lied” by “loud mouth” discourteous Americans, America is still not in the smelly  “muck” yet.

Still the folks who are attempting to lead the way to “Hades” have not given up yet.

***