Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) was set up in 1974 by a number of peace and other organisations who were concerned about the growth in the arms trade following the Middle East war of 1973. It is a broad coalition of groups and individuals in the UK working to end the international arms trade. This Trade has a negative effect on humans rights and security as well as on global, regional and local economic development.
In seeking to end it CAAT's priorities are to: CAAT aims

Introduction to Depleted Uranium - the facts on what it does from CADU

Extinction is Forever - Book Mark

Hillary, Hiroshima and US Hubris

US policies and attitudes have shifted from nuclear deterrence with mass destruction and mutual suicide, to nuclear weapon use against any non-nuclear nation named as a US enemy. It's well documented in the Justin Raimondo article that follows. The named enemy is Iran and Bush has invented a number of lies, false accusations and suspicions to demonise Iran to the American people. Bush used the same 'big lie' technique prior to his unprovoked attack on Iraq in 2003. Then he had the alleged 9/11 'terrorist' attack and knowingly concocted lies linking Saddam Hussein to Bin Laden and this attack. Accusations were enough and worked for Bush in spite of mass demonstrations. Although there was lots of evidence these accusations were wrong, Bush's lies - effectively promoted and repeated by the mass media - were sufficient to get public and Congressional support.

Justifying Mass Murder

The anniversary of the U.S. bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is, perhaps, a good time to note that arguments rationalizing and even valorizing the use of nuclear weapons, once considered beyond the pale, are now back in fashion. Here we have yet more evidence of the Bizarro Effect , which, ever since 9/11, has stood everything – especially our traditional concept of morality – on its head, not only repealing the laws of logic and common sense but also ensconcing evil in the place of good.

US Capitalist System Spins Out of Control

The US capitalist system is a sacred religion, a dogma that cannot be questioned, but is out of control and leading to global environmental destruction as Sullivan illustrates. However its offspring - the military-industrial-political complex - is also out of control, breeding wars and new arms races which threaten to destroy the world in the nearer future. The economic system and values of global humanity keep accelerating this self-destructive system. Increasingly the bulk of human resources go into preparing for, and fighting, endless wars based on lies and myths.

Why do we sell them our souls?

It is painfully obvious that America is a land that worships the market economy. Big money is God here. Big money is all powerful, omnipotent. All solutions, as perceived by the captains of business, therefore, must be market based. Moreover, in the moribund perceptions of the ruling elite, the market must be totally unfettered. It must exist beyond the pale of conscience, bearing no responsibility to the people, or to the earth that sustains it. It must answer only to the bottom line and reject all other input—a function that it has executed only too well.

Nuclear Power for NZ? No Thanks

For readers looking for pro-nuclear power arguments, Google has over 70,000 articles on this subject they may like to consider. You will also find on Google that there are 8,720,000 results for anti-nuclear power, almost 125 times as many against. . . .
. . . In our world of recurring wars, any nuclear installation can become a target. That could mean widespread radiation for centuries. It would destroy the country's agricultural export industry. That's butter, milk, meat, etc. Naturally the pro-nuclearists do not mention this factor, or play it down as unlikely, etc. in their propaganda.

As stated in other articles, stationing US missile defence systems on Russian borders, within old USSR satellite states, is a prescription for a new cold war that can quickly heat up and become World War III.
That and the US programme to militarize and dominate space will also start a new arms race.

What is a "unipolar" world?
It is a world in which there is one master, one sovereign--- one center of authority, one center of force, one center of decision-making. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.
It has nothing in common with democracy, which is the power of the majority in respect to the interests and opinions of the minority.

This article by Professor Hossein-zadeh is a masterpiece which illuminates how the military-industrial-political complex works. It shows why it is a far greater threat today than when President Eisenhower warned about it in his farewell speech in 1961. Its short term success depends on the creation of new enemies and threats. These are used to justify wars, increasing military power, arms racing and military spending. In the long run this run-away situation will degrade and may destroy America . So long as this system rules it will gain momentum and strength and be more difficult to reverse. Always new enemies and crisis will be invented to curb popular pressures for change and reform. And the American people can always be fooled into submission by an array of threats, crisis, lies and tricks invented by highly skilled manipulators and propagandists. I think a useful analogy might be to compare the US to a speeding locomotive, out of control with the driver paralysed due to a heart attack. The throttle is jammed in maximum speed position so the locomotive is accelerating. Eventually it goes off the rails or blows up.

How recent U.S. wars of choice, driven largely by war profiteering, are plundering not only defenseless peoples and their resources abroad, but also the overwhelming majority of U.S. citizens and their resources at home.

Scott Ritter as a Chief Weapons Inspector in Iraq, was in a position to know how the US and UK subverted the process from the beginning to facilitate their planned war with Iraq. Ritter then shows how the staffing of a future arms control regime under UN control was well advanced, until scrapped by the US and UK who preferred a world at war instead. It is important to realise that the military-industrial complexes of both countries are dependant on a series of wars into the future to maintain the financial health and profits of their armaments research and manufacturing industries. These are fundamental driving elements of Western culture and identity. They cannot maintain their lead in weapons and plans for global domination, without active wars as a catalyst. Scott Ritter opened new doors of understanding and concern with his deep experience of the machiavellian workings of the real policies of the US and UK.

The organization that was at the center of the maelstrom of the Iraqi weapons-of-mass-destruction fiasco, responsible for bringing the world to the brink of war on no fewer than a half-dozen occasions during the 1990s, and then unable to prevent a war in March 2003, has departed the global scene.  It left not with a dramatic flair befitting its former status, but rather with barely a whimper, reduced to nothing more than a historical footnote in the grand tragedy that has become Iraq. 

Scientifically I contemplate the facts, such as:
The 9 arsenals of nuclear weapons with enough fire power to eliminate humanity many times over. Since 1945 famous people and the most informed experts have warned humanity about the nuclear arms race and the many ways it could mean sudden extinction for the human race. That's 62 years of warnings, but nuclear weapons have proliferated and criminal politicians want to use them.
That criminal minds, sociopaths and psychopaths, now control the world's greatest arsenals in the USA, UK and Israel.
... So I contemplate the race toward extinction and wonder “what can I do?”

It's not just the troops that are surging.  War costs are up for American operations in Iraq and Afghanistan* -- way up, more than a third higher than last year.  In the first half of this fiscal year, the Defense Department's "average monthly obligations for contracts and pay is running about $12 billion per month, well above the $8.7 billion in FY2006," says a new report , obtained by DANGER ROOM , from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service.
Additional war costs for the next  10 years could total about $472 billion if troop levels fall to 30,000 by 2010, or $919 billion if troop levels fall to 70,000 by about 2013.  If these estimates are added to already appropriated amounts, total funding about $980 billion to $1.4 trillion by 2017.

US Using Nuclear Weapons in Iraq

DU weapons spread toxic radioactive dust wherever they are used. With a half life of 4 billion years, the poisonous effects are gradually spreading around the world causing death and disease. It is like a slow motion form of nuclear war against all humanity, insidiously and secretly drifting world-wide, infecting millions. The US has slyly introduced a form of nuclear weapon and then lied. They claim DU weapons are harmless. The poisonous effects may manifest years later in the form of cancer, genetic mutations in the children of exposed people and a range of other diseases.
Remember!
Present and increasing DU dust in our global environment can cause mutations in anyone's children, grandchildren and future generations forever. Banning DU weapons and educating others about DU is everyone's responsibility.

POISON DUst

..... Today, half of the 697,000 U.S. Gulf War troops from the 1991 war have reported serious medical problems and a significant increase in birth defects among their newborn children.

Phil Goff's warning to the 20th anniversary meeting in Christchurch June 9 of NZ's nuclear free zone is 100% correct. World survival is threatened by 27,000 nuclear weapons, some on 'hair-trigger' ready-to-launch status and a total of 8 nuclear weapon nations. At any time the world can be destroyed "by nuclear accident, miscalculation or deliberate act of madness" as President Kennedy warned at the UN in 1963. Even worse are new US nuclear weapons and new doctrines allowing the President to wage pre-emptive nuclear war, and also introduce nuclear weapons use into any conflict. This massive threat means everyone should be worried and active helping to stop this nuclear madness. New Zealand 's nuclear free law is more relevant today as Phil Goff says, than in 1984.

Wellington - On the 20th anniversary of New Zealand's anti-nuclear legislation, the country's politicians have called for a southern hemisphere wide nuclear-free zone and for an end to investment in nuclear weapons, according to statements Saturday.
The New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act was passed on June 8, 1987. It resulted in the country being suspended from the Anzus (Australia, New Zealand and Australia) defence pact with the US and Australia.
But Trade and Disarmament Minister Phil Goff told a forum in the South Island city of Christchurch that he wanted the whole of the southern hemisphere to become a nuclear-free zone within 20 years. He also criticized nations' complacency.
'The threat to the world of nuclear weapons grows as more countries acquire possession of them... With the world having lived with nuclear weapons for over sixty years, a key challenge today is international complacency about the threat they pose,' he said in a statement.
A co-leader of New Zealand's left-wing Green party, which is in the government coalition, also demanded the country withdraw NZ$30 million of taxpayer investment in companies involved in nuclear weapons production.

Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control): I move, That this House note that 8 June 2007 is the 20th anniversary of the passing by this House of the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987 and resolve that New Zealand should continue to work for a nuclear weapon – free world; and that, in striving for a world free of nuclear weapons, the House call for: the implementation and strengthening of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the unequivocal undertaking made by nuclear weapon States in 2000 to move towards the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals; the expansion and strengthening of nuclear weapon – free zones and a nuclear weapon – free Southern Hemisphere; the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty; the enactment of a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty; and the universal implementation of nuclear non-proliferation instruments such as the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism and United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540.

This vitally important article in the US Congressional Quarterly is a very important revelation of how close the world came to a major US nuclear war with China . This almost happened because Taiwanese politicians were encouraged by US Defence Department highly-placed necons to declare independence from China. This was clandestinely encouraged by top neocon members of the Bush regime, such as Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Cambora and right wing Republicans in particular. We can thank Colin Powell, and the US State department at that time, for correcting this impression with independence-minded Taiwanese politicians, saying the US may not defend Taiwan if it declares independence.

Defense Officials Tried to Reverse China Policy, Says Powell Aide

The same top Bush administration neoconservatives who leap-frogged Washington's foreign policy establishment to topple Saddam Hussein nearly pulled off a similar coup in U.S.-China relations—creating the potential of a nuclear war over Taiwan, a top aide to former Secretary of State Colin Powell says.

Here are some valuable facts about the US defence expenditures and the rising US arms trade. As Frida Berrigan points out "The US alone spends what the rest of the world combined devotes to military expenditures"
What is the US defence budget? Is it only the $481 billion requested by the Whitehouse? Or should other defence costs be added to this total in order to give a more balanced picture? Such added costs as the US nuclear weapons program -$17 billion. Iraq and Afghanistan wars $ 142 billion. Miscellaneous defence costs $5 billion. Grand total of $647 billion. If you add more invisible costs such as cost impact of Iraq war on global oil prices and lowered consumption of US goods and services by people in other nations, and long-term health care for wounded US veterans the price can rise to between 1 trillion and $2.2 trillion.

They don't call us the sole superpower for nothing. Paul Wolfowitz might be looking for a new job right now, but the term he used to describe the pervasiveness of U.S. might back when he was a mere deputy secretary of defense – hyperpower – still fits the bill.
Face it, the United States is a proud nation of firsts. Among them:
First in Oil Consumption : First in Carbon Dioxide Emissions : First in External Debt : First in Military Expenditures : First in Weapons Sales

Colonel Lankford suggests you use Google to verify any comments he makes. He mentions a number of whistle blowers in government or University that have asked awkward questions or exposed Government lies about 9/11. Many have suffered the consequences of their honesty. A growing number of people who have researched the 9/11 questions, have become convinced that the Bush Administration staged a 'false flag' terrorist attack on the US to create a false 'Pearl Harbour'. The intention was to get public support to make war under the new catch-all slogan of 'war on terrorism'.

.... Are you afraid that you will learn the truth and you can't handle it? I think I know some people in that category. Are you afraid you will draw the attention of thugs who could do the things that were done that day? Do you believe your fellow man is just not capable of that degree of evil? I would not have believed that my country would ever become a torture state and have the Congress arguing with the executive about it. I thought that Habaes Corpus was fundamental to our civil rights, and now I find that it is not. I thought my country stood for honorable dealings with other nations, then watch a jingoistic cheerleading orgy on TV, composed like Oscar night, with the centerpiece a campaign of "Shock and Awe" as our armed forces invade a practically defenseless nation, without provocation, while considerable doubt of the validity of the reasons for that invasion exists.

The Physicists letter, although published in 2006, deserves more consideration. These are the experts who created the bomb and warn of the dire consequences of its use.
If nuclear weapons are used against Iran, there is a danger of an escalation to global war and the use of the 8-9 nuclear weapon arsenals.
There are enough nuclear weapons to equal 200,000 times the power of the Hiroshima bomb. Potentially that is enough to kill 200 billion people.
That's a huge overkill potential, as there are only 6 billion people on the planet. But still governments are spending huge sums to create and refine a variety of evermore powerful nuclear and hydrogen weapons, and now space weapons. Where and when does it end?

Thirteen of the nation's most prominent physicists have written a letter to President Bush, calling U.S. plans to reportedly use nuclear weapons against Iran "gravely irresponsible" and warning that such action would have "disastrous consequences for the security of the United States and the world."
The physicists include five Nobel laureates, a recipient of the National Medal of Science and three past presidents of the American Physical Society, the nation's preeminent professional society for physicists.

As the effects of global warming increasingly effect the planet, there will be more wars over shrinking food resources and a changed, less hospitable environment. That's the finding of those who study the climate trends and make predictions as indicated below. Climate change has finally become a common public concern. But it has not yet resulted in the big changes needed in human behaviour.

A new report warns that conflicts over water and food could intensify as the climate changes.
For years, the debate over global warming has focused on the three big "E's": environment, energy, and economic impact. This week it officially entered the realm of national security threats and avoiding wars as well.

Placing US anti-missile defence systems in European countries is a multi-message to Russia, and another indication that the US is restarting the international arms race and a new cold war. If the US launches a pre-emptive nuclear war on Iran, as much expert testimony indicates, and it looks like it may go global, they may implement global pre-emptive nuclear strikes against some other nuclear weapon states. Bush, as Commander In Chief of US military forces, has the legal right (made law by Congress) to launch pre-emptive nuclear war. He may also introduce nuclear weapons into conventional weapon wars.

... It all sounds like the speech made by Colin Powell during his tenure as U.S. Secretary of State at a meeting of the U.N. General Assembly. In it, he argued Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and the world community was obliged to stop their proliferation and use. The upshot of all that is well known: Such weapons were never found anywhere in Mesopotamia.

Here is a UPI article that shows German enthusiasm for a US missile defence system. As might be expected, the German conservatives welcome a new arms race and cold war in Europe. By embracing Bush's and the media lies about an alleged threat from Iran, they have the flimsy excuse. In the short term they may hope for new opportunities for profits. In the long run it can lead to crippling wars, if not nuclear war. I would think that the lessons of history and the potential for far greater wars than World War II, would have taught the Germans some useful lessons. Apparently not.

Iran's latest claim that it is capable of enriching uranium on an industrial level has encouraged proponents of U.S. plans for a missile shield in Eastern Europe, but Moscow is still not amused. After Tehran's nuclear threats, members of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives even said more countries in Europe should think about participating in the U.S. anti-missile system.

This article by Gorbachev is the most comprehensive article on the subject of US attempts to sell missile defence to European countries. I am amazed that they seem to be buying this expensive and dangerous fraud. It means less independence for Europe, huge expenditure,  more US domination and agenda, and an increase in the likelihood of crippling wars. How could Europeans accept American lies and propaganda and do such a self-destructive act as install missile defence systems? It makes no sense particularly after they have had the example of US lying to justify their illegal war on Iraq with over 600,000 people killed

KALININGRAD, April 12 (RIA Novosti) - Deployment of U.S. missile-defense bases in Poland and the Czech Republic is an attempt by the U.S. to control Europe, the former Soviet president said Thursday. "It is all about influence and domination in Europe," Mikhail Gorbachev said. "I believe it is wrong that America did not even bother to consult its NATO allies."

Here is the fourth authoritative article showing how the US is starting a new cold war in Europe by installing missile defence systems in European nations.
Allegedly against Iran, the missile shields are aimed at Russia and are designed to frustrate a Russian missile response to a US pre-emptive nuclear strike...
We must recognise and confront these disastrous, very threatening developments and try to help stop the Bush Administration before it is too late.

Much of Europe is arguing over a Washington proposal to plant in Poland fewer than a dozen antimissile missiles that might not work, to guard against an Iranian threat that may not exist.

737 US Bases in 103 countries and a defence budget larger than that of all other nations in the world. That's the US Empire.
The mission is building the US Empire through imperial conquest, using "9/11 and the war on terror" as their mantra, war cry and justification.
US Military Historian Chalmers Johnson dissects this imperial military industrial complex and predicts calamites for what may be next.
" If there weren't terrorists, Bush and Cheney would have had to invent them? " asks Karlin.

I believe that we're close to a tipping point right now. What happened to the Soviet Union between 1989 and 1991 could easily be happening to us for essentially the same reasons. Imperial overreach, inability to reform, rigid economic ideology. ... The world's balance of power didn't change one iota on September 11, 2001. The only way we could lose the power and influence we had at that time was through our own actions, and that's what we did. -- Chalmers Johnson, author of Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic
Has our "leadership" traded democracy for empire? Have their over-bloated egos convinced them that they are the world's newly crowned colonial kings? Author Chalmers Johnson is certainly not given to wearing rose-colored glasses. As he concludes in his newest book, Nemesis: "... my country is launched on a dangerous path that it must abandon or else face the consequences."

This article shows how the nuclear power industry is spending millions on public relations to revise the image of nuclear power from something dangerous, not to be touched,  to something clean, green and desirable. The way the PR companies, and the media, use the industry's ex-Greenpeace spokesman - and will not reveal what they pay him - is most instructive. The comments following the original version are excellent and contain many provoking pros and cons of the debate. Serious nuclear power researchers should read these, and develop counter arguments, if they wish to be able to answer the pro-nuclear lobbyists.

"We just find it maddening that Hill & Knowlton , which has an $8 million account with the nuclear industry, should have such an easy time working the press," concluded the Columbia Journalism Review in an editorial in its July / August 2006 issue.
The magazine was rightly bemoaning the tendency of news outlets to present former Greenpeace activist Patrick Moore and former EPA chief Christine Todd Whitman as environmentalists who support nuclear power, without noting that both are paid spokespeople for a group bankrolled by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). NEI represents nuclear power plant operators, plant designers, fuel suppliers and other sectors of the nuclear power industry. Hill & Knowlton is NEI's public relations firm, though it's not the only firm working to build support for nuclear power.

A new US hydrogen bomb will add momentum to the new nuclear arms race. The US disregard of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty - making more bombs rather than nuclear disarmament as promised, and Bush's threat to bomb a non-nuclear nation - Iran - will convince other nations that their security lies with adding to and modernising their own nuclear arsenals.

A U.S. plan to develop a new hydrogen bomb could spark production of new nuclear weapons by other countries, including several foes of the Bush administration, warn some of the nation's leading arms control and disarmament advocacy groups.

. . . But will it be enough, will it reach enough people? Will it actually motivate them to do enough to stop the Bush regime? Bear in mind the colossal forces, power, money and millions of skilled personnel of the military-industrial-congressional-media complex. Most are dedicated servants of the Bush neocon regime. Opposing that are some dedicated US citizens. But is there enough to make a dent in the plans, plots and covert deceptions of the trillion dollar Bush regime?

In his new book, CIA analyst, distinguished scholar, and best-selling author Chalmers Johnson argues that US military and economic overreach may actually lead to the nation's collapse as a constitutional republic. It's the last volume in his Blowback trilogy, following the best-selling "Blowback" and "The Sorrows of Empire." In those two, Johnson argued American clandestine and military activity has led to un-intended, but direct disaster here in the United States. [includes rush transcript]

This paper provides new insights into why the US will not withdraw troops from Iraq. It is the new imperialism and colonialism and exploiting Iraqi oil that provides enormous profits to the 100,000 private military contractors in Baghdad , and provides billions in profits for the military-industrial complex in the US . Money is the great motivator, with no-bid contracts for chosen Pentagon suppliers. Greater war risks, the slaughter or hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, morality and ethics don't matter to people participating in a gigantic profits feeding frenzy in Baghdad and Washington.

Neither the Iraq Study Group nor other establishment critics of the Iraq war are calling for the withdrawal of US troops from that country. To the extent that the Study Group or the new Congress purport to inject some "realism" into the Iraq policy, such projected modifications do not seem to amount to more than changing the drivers of the US war machine without changing its destination, or objectives: control of Iraq's political and economic policies.
In light of the fact that by now almost all of the factions of the ruling circles, including the White House and the neoconservative war-mongerers, acknowledge the failure of the Iraq war, why, then, do they balk at the idea of pulling the troops out of that country?

By being the only country to vote "no" at the UN to a resolution to ban weapons in space, the US formally exposes its plans to militarise space. It does not want any legal encumbrances such as the following no weapons in space resolutions.

Dear Friends,
There was an error in the report I sent out from the UN about the vote on the two space resolutions.  Cote D'Ivoire and Israel abstained on the Paros resolution to Prevent an Arms Race in Outer Space, while the US was the only country to vote 'No' on A/C.1/61/L.10/Rev 1. .  166 countries voted to prevent an arms race in outer space.  In the second resolution, A/C.1/61/L36, on Transparency and Confidence building Measures in Outer Space, there was only 1 vote against it from the US and one abstention from Israel .  167 nations vote for it.  I've corrected the report below.  Alice    Full Report

This is very valuable paper because it shows how influential people and countries are using the terrorist threat to advance their ambitions to make nuclear weapons.
Also, it gives an insight into the origins of American neoconservatism and its American author Leo Strauss, whose mentor was Carl Schmitt, an infamous Nazi law professor under Hitler. Leo Strauss teachings reflected those of his Nazi mentor, and his US students are now highly placed and very influential in formulating American policies under President Bush.

Remember the Nazis had their law professors too. Carl Schmitt was the most  notorious Nazi Law Professor. He was mentor to and sponsor for Leo Strauss,  who founded the Neo-Conservative Movement in the United States. These Neo-Cons are Neo-Nazis. We have many of these Neo-Con Neo-Nazi Law Professors in the United States, almost all of them affiliated with the right-wing, racist, bigoted, reactionary, sexist, warmongering and totalitarian Federalist Society. Scholz should join the Federalist Society.
He would fit right in. ...
A former top German official said yesterday that his country should consider building a nuclear arsenal in response to the threat of nuclear terrorism, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported today.

Considering the war is both preplanned and based on lies, it is a robbery on a gigantic scale. Will Bush and his collaborators get away with this $trillion gigantic fraud, and the totally unjustified mass killing of 655,000 Iraqi people and 3,000 unwitting US Servicemen who believe they are doing their duty?

When America invaded Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration predicted that the war would turn a profit, paying for itself with increased oil revenues. So far, though, Congress has spent more than $350 billion on the conflict, including the $50 billion appropriated for 2007.

Americans have had four years of unjustified, illegal war for no legitimate reason or excuse. Constantly they have been bombarded by a litany of lies, war propaganda, and pro-war commentators, and democratic politicians repeating these lies.
War is the new neocon -generated reality for many Americans.

The Bush Administration is hooked on the drug of military might, with Gates calling for sending more troops to a war we can't win. Here we go again: A new secretary of defense and yet another call for ending the war in Iraq by escalating it. What are they smoking in the Bush White House?

U.S. Command Declares Global Strike Capability has been in a state of readiness since 2004. This very limited release raises many questions.
Pre-emptive nuclear war suggests that the USA would not wait to be attacked before launching its pre-emptive attack in anticipation.
In other words they (meaning the Bush Administration or its successor) reserve the right to be intelligence interpreter, judge, jury and executioner. This is because any nuclear strike could kill a nation - or a number of nations. As they have already demonstrated a terrible failure of intelligence over the Iraq war, and many indications they have doctored and biased the intelligence to get the results they wanted to justify war, how can anyone judge the validity of US intelligence excuses they may give to justify a nuclear strike.?

U.S. Command Declares Global Strike Capability    
The U.S. Strategic Command announced yesterday it had achieved an operational capability for rapidly striking targets around the globe using nuclear or conventional weapons, after last month testing its capacity for nuclear war against a fictional country believed to represent North Korea.

There are many unanswered questions in the following article. such as:
1)   What were new workers told about the dangers of their workplace?
2)   What % of workers were effected by nuclear-related diseases?
3)   What is the mortality rate among workers suffering from nuclear work diseases?
4)   What occupations at the nuclear plants were most dangerous, and were workers warned about these occupations and given any protective measures.
The Bush Administration is adopting the same denial tactics toward nuclear workers it is using towards soldiers complaining of diseases caused by DU poisoning.

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration repeatedly sought ways to limit payouts to nuclear weapons workers sickened by radiation and toxic material, according to a memo written by congressional investigators and obtained by USA TODAY.
The investigation focuses on a federal program created in 2000 to compensate people with cancers and other illnesses tied to their work at government and contractor-owned facilities involved in Cold War nuclear weapons production. About 98,000 cases have been filed under the program, and the Labor Department has approved compensation in about 24,000 of those cases. However, program records show that not all of those approved claims have been paid. full story

... DU munitions - shells, bombs and bullets, are combined with depleted uranium, a by-product of the nuclear industry. As a destroyer, tank-buster and killer, these weapons are much more effective and deadly than conventional munitions. As a result the USA and its allies have used DU weapons in four wars since the first Gulf war in 1991- increasing the DU tonnage used in each war.. But they explode on impact into millions of deadly, microscopic particles that slowly rise into the upper atmosphere, then blow and drift around the planet eventually settling to earth thousands of miles from where they are first used. As they have a half life of 4.5 billion years, they go on killing forever and infecting the gene pool, adults and children of all future generations. They cause many types of cancer, organ failure, other types of lingering killer diseases and horrific genetic mutations of foetuses.

"At that time, you just trusted the government," said Yeley, who received compensation this year. "We were out there wallerin' around in it (radiation) and I didn't know a thing." . . .
"The Cold War is still being fought in nursing homes, in convalescent facilities and in emergency rooms and in hospices all over the United States," Borris said. "It's not the type of killer that kills right away.
"It kills over a long period of time."

The military use of space is part of the  U.S. plan to be able to wage war in space or anywhere in the world. This is illustrated by its votes in the UN below and the US abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the new US National Space Policy statement.

Sadly, the US statement today was consistent with its flagrant assertion in its new space policy doctrine that it “will oppose the development of new legal regimes or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit U.S. access to or use of space.”
What hypocrisy and deception!

This is one of the most important papers we have ever re-printed, by a world authority on U.S. nuclear war policies, and U.S. plans to wage nuclear war on Iran . Michel Chossudovsky details the various nuclear war doctrines that are an integral part of Pentagon military options. No longer do the U.S. military consider nuclear weapons 'a weapon of last resort', likely to lead to escalation and an end to humanity.
Today they literally, have learned to 'love the bomb' and have radically changed past perceptions so that nuclear weapons have become just one of a number of military options military commanders may use in various battle situations. They allow the U.S. to suddenly launch a preemptive nuclear strike against a chosen enemy. The enemy may be non-nuclear or nuclear. Also, they claim the right to introduce nuclear weapons use into conventional military conflicts.

Is the Bush Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust?

Will the US launch "Mini-nukes" against Iran in Retaliation for Tehran's "Non-compliance"?
At no point since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945, has humanity been closer to the unthinkable, a nuclear holocaust which could potentially spread, in terms of radioactive fallout,  over a large part of the Middle East.
All the safeguards of the Cold War era, which categorized the nuclear bomb as "a weapon of last resort" have been scrapped. "Offensive" military actions using nuclear warheads are now described as acts of "self-defense".

The following article provides more evidence that the U.S. regards nuclear weapons as an essential component of it's military posture and has no intention of giving them up, as it pledged to do under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
It's new nuclear doctrines, licensing itself to wage 'pre-emptive' nuclear war against nuclear or non-nuclear nations is another indicator. It's plan to allow the introduction of nuclear weapons, and their use, into conventional conflicts is yet another indicator that nuclear weapons have assumed a more important role in the military strategy of the Bush Administration.
The withdrawal of the U.S. from various nuclear disarmament treaties and downgrading of others such as the NPT indicates they don't want any legal encumbrances to their possible, and perhaps intended, use of nuclear weapons.

U.S. Plan for New Nuclear Weapons Advances

The United States took another step yesterday toward building a new stockpile of up to 2,200 deployed nuclear weapons that would last well into the 21st century, announcing the start of a multiyear process to repair and replace facilities where they would be developed and assembled and where older warheads could be more rapidly dismantled.

United Nations Day

James Bovard's article shows how Bush is emerging as America's dictator and how media helps this process by portraying it as perfectly normal. Congress and the Senate are allowing Bush to get away with installing a law that allows him to torture suspects. Also, laws to allow the courts to accept testimony obtained under torture, which is generally considered faulty. Most people will say anything just to stop the torture. The  Bush Administration will get the confessions it wants, to justify the sentence it wants to give it's prisoners. Bush can also declare anyone in the world a suspect and does not have to produce evidence to support that charge. It looks like the apathetic American public will accept this, mainly because the media do not make them aware.
If Bush stages a "False Flag" operation to incriminate Iran and then declares war on Iran, the process will be stepped up as well as the popularity of Bush and the Republicans. Few people are aware or care about this frightening loss as their democracy is legislated out of existence.

How to Make a Power Grab 'Mundane'

The Washington Post's story today -- "Bush Signs Terrorism Measure" -- looks like just another routine report on the approval of a piece of legislation, accompanied by the usual "he said/ she said" quotes. A typical reader might shrug at this point and shift to the sports section to read the latest autopsy on the Redskins.
How will we know when a dictatorship has arrived? Not from reading the Washington Post. The Post's story today -- “Bush Signs Terrorism Measure” -- looks like just another routine report on the approval of a piece of legislation, accompanied by the usual “he said/ she said” balancing quotes.

Terrorstorm exposes how Governments have long staged false-flag terror events in order to achieve political and sociological ends.
1) False Flag Terror Alert
- - Public's Right To Know – Demand Release of 9/11-Documents
- - Official 9/11 story On Life support; Truth is Taking Over
- - Terrorstorm Raises The Bar In Truth Film Making
- - Kucinich Hearing on War Plans for Iran

Representative Dennis Kucinich knows the neocon playbook used to lead our nation into war. That's why the courageous Congressman is doing everything he possibly can to ensure that the Bush administration fails in its effort to pull the same old tricks in manufacturing a war with Iran. . . .
1) Iran is at least 5 years – but more likely 10 or more years – away from producing weapons-grade nuclear materials
2) Iran poses no imminent threat to the US, Israel, or its neighbors
3) The Bush administration has already selected the military option and is moving to make it operational
4) The consequences of a military confrontation with Iran are global and nightmarish
5) We should be pursuing multilateral negotiations and have missed key opportunities to do so – including not even responding to an Iranian offer to put     recognition of Israel and suspension of its nuclear program on the table.
    Perhaps more than anything else, our refusal to engage Iran frustrates this panel.

Talk of space wars and weaponizing space, suggests that Israel will choose the path of war, conquest and domination. In the long run, that could result in disaster for all people and nations in the Middle East.

Israeli Official Urges Space-Based Weapons

" Israel is one of the very few nations of the world that routinely abstains from voting for a resolution to ban weapons in space," noted Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the Washington-based Center for Defense Information, a public policy think tank.

Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He frequently travels and offers reflections on organizing and the state of America's soul....

D.U. weapons radiation, being spread by the US and UK in Iraq, and now in Lebanon, has a half-life of 4.5 billion years.
Wind currents will carry it around the world. The more DU weapons are used the more people will become radiated, diseased and die - not just in the countries where it is directly used - but eventually it will contaminate and kill everywhere.. The Pentagon assures everyone it is safe. They are fully aware that they are lying. Without doubt this is one of George Bush's most terrible war crimes. .

Adding to the horrors of the current offensive into Lebanon, with Afghanistan close to anarchy and Iraq drifting into civil war, Bush is now rushing depleted uranium (DU) bombs to Israel. This supports their colossal act of homicide and will increase further global contamination by radioactive DU particles.

Pakistan is building a reactor that could produce enough plutonium for 40 to 50 nuclear weapons in what would be a major expansion of its nuclear program and an intensified arms race in South Asia, a report has shown.
Satellite photos show what appears to be the construction site for a larger nuclear reactor adjacent to Pakistan's only plutonium production reactor, according to an analysis by nuclear experts at the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security.

Professor Andrew Bacevich, graduate of WestPoint and the Vietnam war is Director of the Center for International Relations at Boston University. He shows how America has spread it's control around the world with "hundred and hundreds of military bases, large and small" and that today "...planning, preparing, and waging war has become the normal state and seemingly permanent condition of the United States" 
America needs enemies to feed its "military/industrial complex" which has become a threat to the continuation of the United States as Americans know and love it. President Dwight Eisenhower warned Americans about this as he left  office in 1960.

We are now in an America where it's a commonplace for our President, wearing a "jacket with ARMY printed over his heart and 'Commander in Chief' printed on his right front," to address vast assemblages of American troops on the virtues of bringing democracy to foreign lands at the point of a missile. As Jim VandeHei of the Washington Post puts it: "Increasingly, the president uses speeches to troops to praise American ideals and send a signal to other nations the administration is targeting for democratic change."

Accepted by the National Consultative Committee on Disarmament Convention:  
"Threats To Peace And Disarmament - The Way Forward"

The President of Iran has reached out to President Bush offering a dialogue of peace instead of preparations for war. My hope is that President Bush will choose to talk, and pull back from starting an escalating war with Iran that could suddenly become nuclear and end the human race. Why on earth would he do that?

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Scott Ritter gives a detailed account of U.S. preparations and plans to strike at Iran before June/05. Obviously this has been postponed for unknown reasons. As Iran will retaliate against U.S. attack, the situation could very easily escalate and involve China and Russia. A sudden global nuclear exchange could result. It's so obvious, why is Europe so compliant and people so passive and silent in the face of global nuclear disaster which would kill and maim billions?

Late last year, in the aftermath of the 2004 Presidential election, I was contacted by someone close to the Bush administration about the situation in Iraq.
There was a growing concern inside the Bush administration, this source said, about the direction the occupation was going.

Google is a great resource to get the details on U.S. war plans, objectives and methods of making war on other nations. Also, it has many articles on U.S. excuses and justifications for each war. The fact that the Bush Administration engages in an almost continuous flow of lies and false justifications, does not stop the mass media from parroting each and every lie as if it is true. The mass media usually does not publish doubts and exposure of these lies or the real purposes of the Bush Administration. If anything it runs editorials justifying the lies as if the lies are really true. Then it does not print letters exposing these lies.
Search on Google - Results 1 - 10 of about 134,000,000 for Iran War . (0.08 seconds)

Chalmers Johnson is a WWII US Navy vet and a historian of American militarism, ran the Center for Chinese Studies at the University of California. He had a long career as a Japan specialist. His two-part article for Tomdispatch is a very valuable insight into what has happened to America and the enormous magnitude of the problems facing it today.

In Part 1 of his interview, Chalmers Johnson suggested what that fall-of-the-Berlin-Wall, end-of-the-Cold-War moment meant to him; explored how deeply empire and militarism have entered the American bloodstream; and began to consider what it means to live in an unacknowledged state of military Keynesianism, garrisoning the planet, and with an imperial budget -- a real yearly Pentagon budget -- of perhaps three-quarters of a trillion dollars. Tom

THE HISTORICAL ROOTS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER AND ITS PERMANENT WAR ECONOMY
Beginning with the use of nuclear energy for military purposes, mankind has entered a seemingly endless race to harness the natural forces within the planet, in the atmosphere and in space for waging war. The earth is already gravely affected by many of those secret research and testing programmes leading to unpredictable environmental and epidemiological consequences .

Prof. Klare shows how Bush has gone against 35 years of US policy supporting the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, by selling India nuclear technology. This is allegedly only to help India's nuclear energy program. But it will allow India to double it's production of nuclear weapons. That effectively scraps a cornerstone of US policy - the NPT.

....For thirty-five years nuclear nonproliferation was a major priority of U.S. foreign policy. But now, in a throwback to early cold war power politics, President Bush has agreed to supply nuclear technology to India in blatant violation of the NPT.

Here is yet more evidence that Bush stole the 2000 and 2004 elections, knew about and was involved in the 9/11 attack that was used as an excuse to justify his illegal Iraq war. He now presides over a growing criminal empire of deception and lies that gets stronger every day. The results of his escalating crimes will be felt years into the future, unless his wars trigger off a holocaust that destroys us all first.
The media has covered up for him, and his crimes, at every turn and does everything it can to divert public attention from the truth about 9/11 and the Iraq war. The Democrats have been too beholden to the military/industrial complex to challenge Bush lies and illegal actions. Most people who participated in these crimes against their fellow Americans are too afraid to talk, deeply and profitably involved themselves, or psychopaths and neocons who believe in what they are doing.

"To initiate a war of aggression is, therefore, not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes only in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
- Judgment of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, relating to "Count Two, the Crime of Aggression," as brought against Herman Goering, Joachim von Ribbentrop, and 14 other defendants.
In Mr. Bush's "State 0f The Union" address, he claimed that "US forces will be drawn down as Iraqi forces stand up."
[1] However, this claim is flatly contradicted by the Pentagon's ongoing multibillion-dollar expenditures for the construction of 106 permanent bases - including six hi-tech "super-bases" - inside Iraq. [2]

The great increase in U.S. bombing in Iraq does not help the U.S. win their illegal war.
It does make many more Iraqi casualties and many more opponents of the U.S. occupation and war making. The U.S. then calls them "terrorists", thereby attempting to justify even more bombing.
......It is not a war on terrorism in Iraq. The U.S. makes terrorists where there were none before. It is a war on civilians.

The American media continues to ignore the increasingly devastating air war being waged in Iraq against an ever more belligerent Iraqi resistance -- and, as usual, Iraqi civilians continue to bear the largely unreported brunt of the bombing.
When the air war shows up at all in our press, it is never as a campaign, but as scattered bare-bones reports of individual attacks on specific targets, almost invariably based on military announcements.

El Baradei was praised by the Nobel chairman for resisting U.S. pressures to find the hard nuclear evidence against Iran
they could use in their plans to justify attack.
That may not be enough to stop the U.S. and Israel from attacking Iran.

The director-general, Mohamed ElBaradei, said a "good start" would be for the United States and other nuclear powers to cut nuclear weapons stockpiles sharply and redirect spending toward international development.

One of the strongest influences in the Bush Administration are the Neo-Conservatives. They fill many of the top positions in the Bush Administration. Their war plans for the U.S. in the Middle East have so far been implemented, such as their phoney war with Iraq. It was promoted before the 9/11 attack- the "Pearl Harbour" the Neocons claimed they needed to justify the war to the American people. Although the war was based on a number of lies - now well-known and publicised, both the Republicans and Democrats want victory over Iraq - nothing less. This and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton's silence about the war lie's is one of many indications that the Democrats have sold out to the Republicans and that the American system of Democracy has been corrupted by the military/industrial complex, other corporates, the oil interests and other special interests.

Steven P. Weisman wrote in The New York Times of Nov. 19 that the “biggest challenge” in President George W. Bush’s second term is “how to contain” Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, however, Iran constitutes no threat to the United States. Its “threat” is to Israel, according to “some” (read neocons) in the administration who believe that Iran supports violence against Israel and helps the resistance in Iraq.

.....The next U.S. pre-emptive war could be against Iran, and/or Syria. Both have been mentioned as potential targets by Bush, as has North Korea if it dares to try and make nuclear weapons.
...... From the following record, and George Bush's actions and statements, we know what to expect.
Hopefully this should encourage people to work to keep New Zealand nuclear-free, and encourage other countries to adopt this step toward a nuclear weapons-free world.

U.S. military spending ($343 billion in the year 2000) is 69 percent greater than that of the next five highest nations combined. Russia, which has the second largest military budget, spends less than one-sixth what the United States does. Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Cuba, Sudan, Iran, and Syria spend $14.4 billion combined; Iran accounts for 52 percent of this total.

Over 350(US) billion dollars yearly finances the US Global War On Terror (GWOT).
As the following report by the Center For Defense Information shows, much of it is wasted. Some 12 billion cannot be accounted for. As pointed out in other papers on this site, the U.S. continues to create enemies in order to justify ever increasing defence budgets. These in turn help make arms corporations very, very wealthy. Naturally that assures continuing large campaign donations from the mainly republican arms trade corporations to ensure Bush and other Republican candidates and chosen Democrats get re-elected.

From Sept. 11, 2001, to last week, the federal government has spent $357 billion on the “Global War on Terror.” These expenses include military operations, reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan and security at U.S. bases and embassies overseas.

...Only by constantly inventing new enemies and justifying new wars, can Bush and his Republican allies satisfy the needs of a growing military/industrial complex. President Eisenhower warned Americans in 1960 about the growing power of "the military-industrial complex". Now this has become the military-industrial-political-scientific-academic complex, as so many Politicians, Scientists and Academics depend on this complex of interests.

"Never before in the history of the world has so much been spent,
so quickly and recklessly on so much wanton destruction and evil by so few."

There are many important peace issues and Flyby News gives you vital information about them, as does this web site. Flyby also suggests constructive ways to help and things you can do.

This space ship was traveling at record speeds, more than 10 miles per second, and carrying more than 72 pounds of radioactive plutonium on board. It was only seconds away from a possible inadvertent reentry into Earth's atmosphere, which would have released more than 400,000 curies of radiation in a breathable/ingest able form. This could have resulted in millions of fatalities, and untold suffering for generations to come.
NoFlyby's Press Release, "The FORCE Behind Cassini" explains why NASA might have conducted such a high-risk civilian space mission. Flyby News covers this issue of the militarization of space and other concerns vital for life's survival in the 21st Century.

Carefully analyse the Russian warning below. It is an ominous warning, but unlikely to deter the Bush Administration's advanced war plans for Iran.
All governments should know about Bush's policies on pre-emptive nuclear war, instructions to the Pentagon for a nuclear assault plan that might be used against Iran, taking out those nations the President decrees could become potential enemies, his 'Axis of Evil' speech and what it means, his Nuclear Posture Review, warning that up to 7 nations could be attacked with US nuclear weapons including Russia and China and the 3 crisis situations that could set it off: (1) The Middle East, (2) The Korean Peninsula (3) China and Taiwan. There are more. The self-justifying, self-fulfilling delusional aspects of Bush's reality, as he chooses to define and express in his recent speeches, also have to be taken into account. Never forget that Bush and Blair manufactured the hideous situation they studiously defend and continue in spite of being exposed as dangerous liars.

"We consider that it would be counter-productive and dangerous to use force, the serious consequences of which would be barely predictable." warning from the Russian Foreign Ministry to the Bush Administration about prospective plans to attack Iran.

Feedback on Nuclear Free NZ issues raised on "Agenda" TVNZ 1, Sunday August 13.
US President Bush's nuclear weapons policy and pre-emptive war policy are major reasons why New Zealand should not change it's nuclear free legislation. He is planning to make new nuclear weapons and resume testing, and has sabotaged the nuclear non-proliferation treaty conference...
These are points that should have been raised with ex-US Deputy Secretary Kenneth Dawn when talking about NZ-US relations.
They are strong reasons for keeping New Zealand nuclear-free.

Op-ed for August 6th the 60th anniversary of Hiroshima - signed by the Mayor of Hiroshima and co-signed by 72 Belgian mayors
Sixty years ago at 8:15 a.m. the sun was radiant in a blue and silent sky when the U.S. B-29 Enola Gay bomber appeared as a shining silver bird above the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Seconds later it dropped the uranium bomb 'Little Boy' which was detonated 580 meters above the city. The bomb instantly created a blinding flash and firestorm of up to 4000 degrees Celsius. Never before had a bomb of 15,000 tons of TNT equivalent been dropped above a city with hundred of thousands of people. It immediately turned the city into a living nightmare, where thousands of people burned alive, while thousands of others were killed by the enormous blast which destroyed most buildings. The city was soon changed in a ghost-town, with heavily burned people and enormous suffering everywhere. There was hardly any medical help as hospitals, doctors and nurses had not been spared by the atomic bomb.

There is no evidence that President Bush has already made the decision to attack Iran if Tehran proceeds with uranium-enrichment activities viewed in Washington as precursors to the manufacture of nuclear munitions. Top Administration officials are known to have argued in favor of military action if Tehran goes ahead with these plans--a step considered more likely with the recent election of arch-conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Iran's president--but Bush, so far as is known, has not yet made up his mind in the matter. One thing does appear certain, however: Bush has given the Defense Department approval to develop scenarios for such an attack and to undertake various preliminary actions. As was the case in 2002 regarding Iraq, the building blocks for an attack in Iran are beginning to be put into place.

Can you imagine that in a time of peace at the end of the cold war, with the US recognised as the only superpower, the US military takes 68 cents of every tax dollar for defence, as against only 32 cents on everything else. And it's not enough, they want more.

Many Americans believe that 19 cents on defense for every 81 cents on non-defense is a reasonable way to spend a tax dollar. But by another calculation, the tax dollar splits 68 cents for defense and 32 cents on everything else. It is a common misconception that U.S. defense expenditure is equivalent to the Department of Defense outlays. Instead of $436.4 billion of defense expenditure, as Congressional budgeteers count, government statisticians in the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) counted $548.0 billion for calendar year 2004—a whopping $112 billion difference. And by our own calculations, U.S. defense expenditure is much higher than even the BEA's numbers suggest, namely $765.6 billion in calendar year 2004—about $330 billion or than the Department of Defense outlays.

STOCKHOLM - World military spending rose for a sixth year running in 2004, growing by 5 percent to $1.04 trillion on the back of "massive" U.S. budgetary allocations for its war on terror, a leading research institute said on Tuesday.

In answer to U.S. Ambassador Swindells (July 5) the theory that humanity must exist under the threat of global nuclear destruction for reasons of security was rejected by New Zealanders when they enacted the Nuclear Free Act in 1987. In spite of the end of the cold war, why do Russia and the U.S. still have thousands of nuclear missiles ready for instant launch against each other.

Obviously the US does not need the poisonous U-238 for security as claimed. The US is already the one and only super power and can destroy any enemy, even the whole of humanity, at any time. In these perilous times, it is not beyond possibility that an 'End Times Nuclear War' would be launched by a religious Fundamentalist nutter Administration. They may think it is time for the religious Armageddon that Fundamentalists believe was promised in the Bible.

NEW YORK - The United States plans to produce highly radioactive plutonium 238 for the first time since the Cold War, The New York Times reported on Monday.
The newspaper quoted project managers as saying most, if not all, of the new plutonium was intended for secret missions. The officials would not disclose details, but the newspaper said the plutonium in the past powered espionage devices.
The Times said Timothy Frazier, head of radioisotope power systems at the US Energy Department, vigorously denied in a recent interview any of the classified missions would involve nuclear arms, satellites or weapons in space.
"The real reason we're starting production is for national security," Frazier was quoted as saying.
Officials at the Energy Department could not be reached for comment.

James Bamford's book "Body of Secrets" gives particularly valuable insight into who was involved in Northwoods; how pervasive such thinking was in the Pentagon, and how incredible extremist and evil it was. Secretary of Defence McNamara's rejection of the plan in 1962, for the US to create terrorist acts and blame Cuba as a pretext for launching a war on Cuba, did not stop such thinking and planning.

US PLANNED FAKE TERROR ATTACKS ON CITIZENS TO CREATE SUPPORT FOR CUBAN WAR
...In [Joint Chief's chair] Lemnitzer's view, the country would be far better off if the generals could take over. [JFK assassination legend has it some general presided over the fudgy JFK autopsy. --Mk]
For those military officers who were sitting on the fence, the Kennedy administration's botched Bay of Pigs invasion was the last straw. "The Bay of Pigs fiasco broke the dike," said one report at the time. "President Kennedy was pilloried by the super patriots as a 'no-win' chief . . . The Far Right became a fount of proposals born of frustration and put forward in the name of anti-Communism. . . Active-duty commanders played host to anti-Communist seminars on their bases and attended or addressed Right-wing meetings elsewhere."
From BODY OF SECRETS, James Bamford, Doubleday, 2001, p.82 and following.
Scanned and edited by NY Transfer News.

Bush knows enemies are much more politically potent vote-getters than peace partners looking for a solution to a very expensive 50 year problem. The US and Korea are still at war and Bush wants to keep it that way. So he spurned Kim's offer of nuclear peace talks.
The US has 10,000 nuclear weapons and Trident subs loaded with nuclear missiles cruising off the Coast of North Korea. They can wipe out North Korea anytime. Nevertheless the US propaganda machine will portray it as the ultra dangerous enemy with it's few nuclear weapons.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong-il attempted to engage President Bush directly on the nuclear weapons issue three years ago but the administration spurned the overture, two American experts on Asia said on Wednesday.
Writing in the Washington Post, former U.S. ambassador to South Korea Donald Gregg and former journalist Don Oberdorfer expressed concern that Kim's November 2002 initiative was never pursued and urged Bush to respond positively to his current overture, made last week.

Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency From the Cold War Through the Dawn of a New Century
Back in 1982 James Bamford published THE PUZZLE PALACE, the first book-length study of the National Security Agency, the U. S. Government's mammoth but super-secretive agency devoted to electronic eavesdropping on the rest of the world. That book caused some sharp tremors in military and government circles.
Now Bamford is back with an updated and much more exhaustive study of the same subject. BODY OF SECRETS is detailed history, description, critical assessment, editorial comment, and character study all rolled into one massively researched volume. It should cause an earthquake or two.     Read an Excerpt

Everyone should see this DU documentary on Sunday June 26 at 11.00 pm on TV1 in NZ.
Poisoning the Iraq people and neighbouring states with DU weapons and residue is bad enough. But with a half life of 4.5 billion years, eventually DU dust will drift around the planet and contaminate all life.
That's all of us regardless of where we live, including our children, grandchildren and future generations.
Unless we can stop manufacture and use of this evil weapon (already used by the USA and UK in four wars), the whole planet will be poisoned.
It's time the NZ government took a position on banning DU weapons. Concerned citizens and nations took a stand to ban land mines. It was successful. The same kind of concern can apply to DU weapons which are far worse.
Ban them

Lawmakers in the United States were scheduled to vote on Monday to approve $45 billion US in additional funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, making the recent Middle East foray more expensive than the entire Korean War.
Since the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress has approved $350 billion, mostly for combat and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The amount, which includes $82 billion approved last month, is equal to the total amount in today's dollars spent on the Korean conflict from 1950-53.

The Downing Street memos have created such a stir that even Congress is rubbing its eyes and awakening from its long slumber to ask questions about the Iraq war: a hearing convened by antiwar Democrats, chaired by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), has created quite a lot of buzz, generating headlines – and howls of outrage from all the usual suspects, as well as from the Washington Post's Dana Milbank and – surprise, surprise! – Howard "The Scream" Dean. Milbank snarks:
"In the Capitol basement yesterday, long-suffering House Democrats took a trip to the land of make-believe. They pretended a small conference room was the Judiciary Committee hearing room, draping white linens over folding tables to make them look like witness tables and bringing in cardboard name tags and extra flags to make the whole thing look official."

It is inescapable historical reality that leaders of nations will lie to their people to trick them into wars they otherwise would have refused. It is not "conspiracy theory" to suggest that leaders of nations lie to trick their people into wars. It is undeniable fact.    This brings us to the present case.
Did the government of the United States lie to the American people, more to the point, did President Bush and his Neocon associates lie to Congress, to initiate a war of conquest in Iraq?
This question has been given currency by a memo leaked from inside the British Government which clearly indicates a decision to go to war followed by the "fixing" of information around that policy. This is, as they say, a smoking gun.

It is 1962, at the height of the induced US paranoia over Cuba. Pentagon Hawks and their right-wing political allies
created a diabolically evil plan to covertly murder American citizens and blame Cuban agents in the US. The purpose was to provide a believable excuse that would anger Americans and the world, causing them to support a US war against Cuba. All top Pentagon generals approved this plan. The Kennedy Administration did not approve it.

In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods.

Although this article was first published on Jan 1, 2004, it applies today.
It shows how a more moderate approach by the Bush Administration "to pull the plug on Iraq" was over-ruled
by the neoconservatives and Pentagon, who installed a diabolically evil 3 billion dollar fund to establish "a radical new counterinsurgency program."

Tucked away in the Iraqi appropriation was $3 billion for a new paramilitary unit. Vietnam similarities?
With the 2004 electoral clock ticking amid growing public concern about U.S. casualties and chaos in Iraq, the Bush administration’s hawks are upping the ante militarily. To those familiar with the CIA’s Phoenix assassination program in Vietnam, Latin America’s death squads or Israel’s official policy of targeted murders of Palestinian activists, the results are likely to look chillingly familiar.

The United States joined with other states to wreck the nuclear non-proliferation treaty’s 2005 review conference. Patricia Lewis of the United Nations Institute of Disarmament Research examines what went wrong.

The Campaign Against Depleted Uranium (CADU) was launched in 1999 to focus specifically on trying to achieve a global ban on the manufacture, testing, and use of depleted uranium weapons.

Call it Star Wars, parts VII-XXII; but last week, just as Revenge of the Sith was opening galaxy-wide -- multiplexes on Tatooine alone were expected to pull in billions -- reporter Tim Weiner revealed on the front page of the New York Times that a new presidential directive will soon essentially green-light the future U.S. militarization of space.
(When, in December 2001, the administration withdrew from the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, which forbade the weaponization of space, it opened the way for exactly the kind of Pentagon R&D that now threatens to come to mutant fruition in the heavens.) Just three days before Weiner's piece appeared, military analyst William Arkin reported in the Washington Post that "early last summer, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld approved a top secret 'Interim Global Strike Alert Order,'" preparing the way for devastating attacks against hostile powers developing weapons of mass destruction, air strikes that could be carried out more or less on demand anywhere on the planet and, if so desired, included a "nuclear option."

First Consider The Evidence, Then Draw Your Own Conclusions
Let us consider the possibility that the USA has become addicted, in an economic sense, to war. While the evidence offered below is by no means exhaustive, it is directly relevant and highly probative. Therefore, the reader should consider ALL of the evidence in Exhibits A through D before judging whether or not a prima facie case has been made that America is economically addicted to war.

The radioactive microscopic dust residue from depleted uranium weapons has a half-life of 4.5 billion years and eventually drifts from wherever it was first used, around the world. It kills and causes life-threatening diseases wherever it goes, and also contaminates the gene pool causing hideously malformed foetuses.
The US and UK like it because it is such an effective battlefield weapon; so they keep defending it's usage.
They have used D.U. weapons in 4 wars so far. It also kills or contaminates many US and UK war veterans and their offspring. There is a very large amount of evidence of it's damage, and many groups working to outlaw such weapons.
The long-term effects around the world are potentially devastating for the human race, as D.U. goes on killing forever.

“After the Americans destroyed our village and killed many of us, we also lost our houses and have nothing to eat. However, we would have endured these miseries and even accepted them, if the Americans had not sentenced us all to death.”

Following this analysis, is a Pentagon paper on implementing Bush's new pre-emptive nuclear war doctrines.
It has much deeper implications than I first thought.
.....Bush, and his ally, the UK, both threatened to use nuclear weapons to accomplish their objectives - if they claimed their chosen enemy used what Bush and his allies decided was WMD. That is, Bush and his allies threatened to use nuclear weapons to accomplish military objectives in a war they started based on lies they invented.
I find that mind-blowingly evil and pathologically stupid.

"Geographic combatant commanders may request presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions," the paper says.

All but unheard in the snarling din are the true voices of peace -- voices calling on the one group of nations to resist the demonic allure of nuclear arms and on the other group to rid themselves of the ones they have, leaving the world with a single standard: no nuclear weapons. Of the countries represented at the conference, fully 183 have found it entirely possible to live without atomic arsenals, and few -- barring a breakdown of the treaty -- show any sign of changing their minds. In the UN General Assembly the vast majority of them have voted regularly for nuclear abolition. Behind those votes stand the people of the world, who, when asked, agree. Even the people of the United States are in the consensus. Presented by AP pollsters in March with the statement, "No country should be allowed to have nuclear weapons," 66% agreed. In other countries, the percentage of supporters is higher. On the day their voices are heard and their will made active, the end of the nuclear age will be in sight.     www.tomdispatch.com - May 23rd edition

Here is a Pentagon paper on implementing Bush's new pre-emptive nuclear war doctrines.
It is a proposal on actions a local commander may request to initiate a limited nuclear war action.
Now the cowboys can really play God!
Real war games for the boys but the world they are gambling with is ours too.

"Geographic combatant commanders may request presidential approval for use of nuclear weapons for a variety of conditions," the paper says.

Since 1945 and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki nuclear bombings, the US has led the way in developing nuclear weapons. A total of nine states now deploy nuclear weapons, supposedly for their security. They were originally portrayed as a deterrent to prevent attack. But now the US, under Bush, has changed the rules. They can now be used for war-making as one of a number of options in a conventional war situation.

More than 30 Nobel laureates have joined hundreds of organizations and lawmakers in signing a statement to be released today calling for all strategic nuclear weapons to be taken off "hair-trigger" and "launch on warning" alerts
(see GSN, June 22, 2004).

To justify the war on Iraq and everything since, Bush's neocons wrote in their pre-9/11 Iraq war plans that "we need another Pearl Harbour". 9/11 gave it to them, and they were keen to start the pre-planned Iraq war from the day 9/11 happened. They did not have a shred of real evidence to support this war, so they created a litany of justifying lies. Other articles on this site under "US Elections" and "9/11 Questions" show US election fraud and doubt the 'official' story on the origins of 9/11.

This article below is particularly important because it reveals that the US itself creates many of the terrorism incidents and then blames other for these actions. Thus they are creating the excuse they need for increasing their military action.

The Pentagon Plan to Provoke Terrorist Attacks
This column stands foursquare with the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, when he warns that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large. We know, as does the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, that this statement is an incontrovertible fact, a matter of scientific certainty. And how can we and the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, be so sure that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large?
Because these attacks will be instigated at the order of the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense.

Disarmament Minister Marian Hobbs will be advocating for a strengthened nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty when she represents New Zealand at the five-yearly NPT review conference in New York in May.
It is 20 years today since former Prime Minister David Lange won the 1985 Oxford Union debate arguing that nuclear weapons were morally indefensible. Today Marian Hobbs reiterated that nuclear disarmament remains New Zealand's ultimate goal.

US Warns about Nuclear Proliferation, While It Proliferates

"The Energy Department now spends 35% more on the US nuclear arsenal each year than it did between 1948 and 1991(when it spent the equivalent of $4.2 billion annually in current dollars) The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) "plans to increase spending on the US arsenal to $7.6 billion by 2009"
"Even the Pentagon's own Defence Science Board has come round to the view that there is no need to rebuild large numbers of high yield "legacy" nuclear weapons to support a credible and effective deterrence policy."

US Spending Twice as Much on Nukes as 10 Years Ago

Guess What? We're Spending Twice As Much

Now on Nuclear Weapons Than We Did Ten Years Ago
Experts have nodded approvingly at President Bush’s program for non-proliferation enforcement. Leaders of all the nuclear nations agree—for the record—that the nuclear ogre must be brought under control.
But here’s the problem. Any nation that might be inclined to live by the President’s nuclear control words has to be highly unsettled by his deeds.

US EXPANDS THREAT TO OTHER STATES

StratCom Will Oversee WMD Efforts

U.S. Redesigning Atomic Weapons

Space Wars Dream - Will It Fizzle Out Again?

. . . . In this deadly nuclear gamesmanship, would the present or a future US administration ever decide to make a surprise massive first nuclear strike against Russia, China or some other state, taking a calculated risk that they can destroy the retaliatory power of their chosen enemy?

Star Wars Faces a Budget Hit

Unreliability is just one reason why funding is being cut.
The other is the changing nature of potential threats to U.S. security.

In an age when weapons of mass destruction can be slipped into the United States in a cargo container or even a suitcase, is Ronald Reagan's 1983 dream of building an umbrella against long-range enemy missiles passé? Or is it a necessary screen against the possibility of North Korea or another rogue state tossing a nuclear-tipped rocket our way?
As the US moves ahead with testing and deployment of the system, new questions are swirling about the merits of pursuing such a costly program in a time of war and increased demand for defense dollars.
The debate comes amid enduring skepticism about the technological feasibility of erecting an effective shield. In December, the US missile defense program suffered another test failure when the rocket carrying the "kill vehicle" meant to destroy an incoming mock enemy warhead shut down before launch from the Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific Ocean.

NZ ARMS RACE CAN LEAD TO WAR

"One thing leads to another". So people should think it through carefully before they allow NZ to further steps up the escalation ladder. This also is a strong argument for the Labour Government to resist the lobbying efforts of NZ's arms industry to go further, and reverse the dangerous trends. We thank Labour for maintaining NZ's 1987 Nuclear Free Law, but warn then against being seduced into abandoning it.

"Made in New Zealand: a label to be proud of ?
Not when it is the label on shoot-to-kill training equipment, grenades, land mines effect simulators, weapons firing control systems, 'special purpose' ammunition, and aerial bombing score systems ...
And not when the label is used by NZ companies that have overseas parent companies involved in the manufacture and deployment of nuclear weapons." [quote from the new No WARP! leaflet]

Noam Chomsky and Professor Francis Boyle, an international lawyer, both agree that "if Bush decides it is necessary to go to war in order to win in November, he will go to war" with Iran, Syria or North Korea. In my writings I have predicted the same thing.

....there is now considerable writing that the US will authorize an Israeli attack on the Iranian nuclear reactor at Bushehr. Also, the US will now be engaging in major naval maneuvers right off the coast of North Korea in late October. So Syria, Iran, and North Korea--the last two  part of the "axis of evil", along with Iraq. I stand by my conclusion, which Chomsky agrees with, that if Bush decides it is necessary to go to war in order to win in November, he will go to war.

To even consider a "pre-emptive nuclear first strike" indicates the flawed thinking of some of the top military and political people in the European Union (EU).

PARIS (Own report) - Military strategists of the European Union define the EU defense strategy initiated by Berlin and are considering a preemptive nuclear first strike. The EU military doctrine initiated by Berlin - the first one in the history of the EU - specifically envisions the possibility of conducting preventive wars. A recently presented "European Defense Paper", written with the participation of a former German minister of state, included nuclear arms in the first strike strategy of the EU. It states that British and French nuclear powers could be included "explicitly or implicitly" in this preventive military option.

Review: - Rushing to Armageddon, The Shocking Truth About Canada, Missile Defence, and Star Wars by Mel Hurtig
If Canada's probable participation in missile defence could be challenged in court, opponents of the plan would want Mel Hurtig as their lawyer. In this short volume, the fiery Canadian nationalist argues that missile defence won't work, that it entails the weaponization of space, that it will make Canadians less rather than more secure, and that Prime Minister Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham have been "intentionally misleading" the country.

Two recent assassination attempts against Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, have renewed concern in the Bush administration over both the stability of a critical ally and the security of its nuclear weapons if General Musharraf were killed or removed from office.
Administration officials would not discuss their contingency plans for Pakistan, but several said the White House was revisiting an effort begun just after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to help Pakistan improve the security of its nuclear arsenal and to prevent Al Qaeda or extremists within the Pakistani military or intelligence services from gaining access to the country's weapons and fissile material.

The Australian decision to arm warplanes with US long-range stealth missiles, highlights a trend since the 9/11 attack and before, for Australia to adopt policies which echo or compliment US policy.
There has been sufficient time since 9/11 for the most backward of countries, to assess the widespread international concerns about the dangers of US policies, particularly the US nuclear policies, and the well-documented thrust of US policy toward global dominion at any cost. The UK and Australia are not backward - they have sophisticated analysts more than capable of determining real US policy and it's dangers.

On August 6, 2001, while vacationing in Crawford, Texas, George Bush received an intelligence briefing called "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." It included revelations that al Qaeda members were conducting "surveillance of federal buildings in New York"; the World Trade Center was mentioned in the first paragraph, the prospect of terrorist "retaliat[ion] in Washington" in the second. According to the briefing, Osama bin Laden's organization was acting in ways "consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

Two recent assassination attempts against Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, have renewed concern in the Bush administration over both the stability of a critical ally and the security of its nuclear weapons if General Musharraf were killed or removed from office.
Administration officials would not discuss their contingency plans for Pakistan, but several said the White House was revisiting an effort begun just after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to help Pakistan improve the security of its nuclear arsenal and to prevent Al Qaeda or extremists within the Pakistani military or intelligence services from gaining access to the country's weapons and fissile material.

$1 trillion missing -- Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting
The Department of Defense, already infamous for spending $640 for a toilet seat, once again finds itself under intense scrutiny, only this time because it couldn't account for more than a trillion dollars in financial transactions, not to mention dozens of tanks, missiles and planes.

Since the US and the UK are having such a hard time finding
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, we thought we'd lend a
hand by providing this easy guide to the nukes we know about.

The Pentagon Plan to Provoke Terrorist Attacks
This column stands foursquare with the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, when he warns that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large. We know, as does the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, that this statement is an incontrovertible fact, a matter of scientific certainty. And how can we and the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, be so sure that there will be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large?
Because these attacks will be instigated at the order of the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense.