Nuclear Iran: A Unique Opportunity for the Stability and Prosperity of the Middle East;a true benefi

J. Abizeid

Well-Known Member
Syndicated Content - Vertical Acuity - KFVS12 News & Weather Cape Girardeau, Carbondale, Poplar Bluff
Israeli army chief says Iran not building nuclear weapons

Iran talks to continue, both sides see progress - KFVS12 News & Weather Cape Girardeau, Carbondale, Poplar Bluff

VIENNA (AP) - U.N. nuclear negotiators seeking to probe Tehran's nuclear program for signs of secret work on atomic-weapons technology spoke of a good exchange of views Tuesday after talks with Iranian officials, who described the meeting as having made progress.
Neither side elaborated on the substance of their talks. But they stood together as they talked to reporters and in another indication that some common ground had been found after more than four years of stalled discussions, both said the talks would resume Monday.
International Atomic Energy Agency officials had entered the talks seeking more cooperation from Iran in their attempts to investigate what the agency sees as strong indications that Tehran has conducted research and development on components of a nuclear weapons program - something Iran strenuously denies.
In particular, they were pressing for access to a site at Iran's Parchin military facility that they suspect was used to test multipoint rapid explosives of the kind needed to set off a nuclear charge. Iran has denied such tests have taken place but has fended off repeated IAEA requests over the past three months for quick access.
Those requests have taken on added urgency after agency officials suggested that Tehran was cleaning up the site. Diplomats say the IAEA has seen satellite imagery showing what appear to be streams of water coming out of the building in question and of removal of bags from inside into waiting trucks. Some fear that Iran may even dismantle the explosives containment chamber believed to be inside the suspect building, taking it out in small pieces, if given enough time.
Tehran last month said a visit was possible but only after "modalities" were worked out, and diplomats accredited to the IAEA and critical of Iran's nuclear program have expressed concern that could turn into a drawn-out process that would allow Iran to "sanitize" the site of any signs of the explosives tests.
Chief Iranian delegate Ali Asghar Soltanieh indicated Iran is continuing to insist on a comprehensive plan on what could be visited when. He told reporters the talks resulted in "progress ... regarding the preparation of modalities of a framework for resolving our outstanding issues." He spoke of a "fruitful discussion in a very conducive environment."
IAEA Deputy Director General Herman Nackaerts was more circumspect. He said the two sides had talked about "a number of options to take the agency verification process forward in a structured way."
Describing the meeting as focusing on "unclarified issues related to possible military dimensions of Iran's nuclear program," Nackaerts said: "We had a good exchange of views."
A senior diplomat who said he was familiar with the discussions said both sides had managed "to close the gap a little" on Parchin. While the Iranians wanted a roadmap on how the visit there should take place, they were no longer insisting on intricately mapping out each step - an approach the agency rejected in March as unnecessarily delaying access. He demanded anonymity because his information was confidential.
There was no word on how quickly the agency hoped to gain access to the site. But with nuclear talks between Iran and six world powers scheduled for May 23 in Baghdad, and the IAEA scheduled to release its latest report card on Iran's nuclear strivings a few days later, any such visit was unlikely before those two events, even if agreement was reached on an inspection early next week.
Nackaerts went into the first set of talks Monday saying the IAEA was looking to visit facilities where it suspected such secret nuclear work was ongoing, and to interview scientists it suspects of involvement and look at relevant documents. All are goals the agency says have been stymied by Iran's refusal to cooperate.
Another diplomat - who also demanded anonymity because his information was confidential - said the Iranians were asking for single visits to sites with no right to return, something the agency was opposed to.
The Islamic Republic describes allegations of clandestine weapons-related work as fabrications, based on phony evidence from the United States, Israel and their allies, and says its nuclear program is geared only toward producing energy.
The IAEA, in a November report, said the tests at Parchin were conducted in 2003 in a metal containment chamber the Iranians covered by erecting a building over it.
A computer-generated drawing provided to the AP by a nation critical of Iran's nuclear program late last week shows such a structure, with the official who shared the drawing saying it was drawn based on information from someone who saw it.
Former IAEA Deputy Director Olli Heinonen says it is similar to a photo he has seen that depicts the chamber, down to the matching colors.
The senior diplomat familiar with Tuesday's discussions in Vienna says Iran has never acknowledged or denied the chamber's existence.
 
  • Advertisement
  • J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    US military option on Iran 'ready': Envoy to Israel - The Times of India

    JERUSALEM: The United States has a military option "ready" if diplomacy fails to halt Iran's controversial nuclear programme, the US envoy to Israel has said, an Israeli newspaper reported today.

    "It would be preferable to resolve this diplomatically through the use of pressure than to use military force," right-wing nationalist daily Makor Rishon quoted Daniel Shapiro as telling an Israeli bar association meeting this week.

    "But that doesn't mean that option is not fully available," the newspaper quoted him as saying. "It is not just available, but it is ready; the necessary planning has been done to ensure that it is ready."

    In Washington, State department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Shapiro was completely in sync with White House policy.

    "Ambassador Shapiro's comments were designed to reflect completely what the president has said all along, which is that even as we move forward with the P5+1 discussions with Iran and hope that we can settle these issues through diplomacy that we nonetheless take no option off the table," she said.

    The United States, Israel and much of the international community believe Iran's nuclear programme masks a weapons drive, a charge Tehran denies.

    Washington has pursued a policy of pushing tough sanctions against Iran, while leaving the door open to a diplomatic resolution.

    After a 15-month hiatus, Iran and the P5+1 powers -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States plus Germany -- met in Istanbul in mid-April, in talks described as "positive."

    They are to meet again in Baghdad on Wednesday. Israel has expressed scepticism about the talks, warning they could simply give Tehran more time to pursue a weapon.

    Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak said on Monday that the demands being made of Tehran "are so minimalist that even if Iran were to accept all of them, it could still continue and advance its nuclear programme."

    Barak met today with US defence secretary Leon Panetta for their third session of talks in the Pentagon in as many months and thanked him for Washington's pledge of $70 million in funding for more batteries of Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system.
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/w...-speaks-of-military-option-for-iran.html?_r=1

    nytlogo153x23.gif




    May 17, 2012

    U.S. Ambassador to Israel Speaks of Military Option for Iran


    JERUSALEM — The American ambassador to Israel said this week that not only was America willing to use military force to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but that preparations had already been made for a possible attack.
    “It would be preferable to resolve this diplomatically and through the use of pressure than to use military force,” the ambassador, Dan Shapiro, said Tuesday at a meeting of the Israeli bar association. “But that doesn’t mean that option is not fully available. And not just available, but it’s ready. The necessary planning has been done to ensure that it’s ready.”
    While American leaders, including President Obama and his defense secretary and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have frequently said all options are on the table regarding Iran, the notion of specific plans being made is not something they typically talk about. In fact, at a March speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the pro-Israel lobby, Mr. Obama warned that “loose talk of war” could actually speed Tehran’s move toward weaponization, saying “now is not the time for bluster.”
    Some analysts here said Thursday that Mr. Shapiro’s remarks might have been aimed at reassuring an Israeli administration — and an Israeli public — worried that the United States was softening its stance ahead of the talks with Iran and other world powers scheduled for next week in Baghdad. Israeli officials, who describe a nuclear Iran as an existential threat, constantly talk about the possibility of a military strike if diplomacy fails, and some have tired of Jerusalem always playing the bad cop to Washington’s good cop.
    “Any expression that all options are on the table can only strengthen the negotiations,” said Dore Gold, a former adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and now president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. “There’s an irony in the situation, because a hawkish position on Iran probably makes a peaceful diplomatic outcome more likely, and that could be what he was trying to do.”
    Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence who now runs the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, said that “what’s important is to make the military option credible” and that Mr. Shapiro’s remarks did so.
    “If you’re saying that the military option is on the table and at the same time you transmit that a military option will be a doomsday and will be a World War III and the Middle East will be in flames, then nobody will take you seriously,” Mr. Yadlin noted. “A serious military, even if it’s not on the plan for next week or next month, but strategically thinking that this is an option, they have to prepare a contingency plan, that makes sense.”
    In Iran, officials reacted coolly to the ambassador’s remarks. “These are words to calm down the extremists and radicals in Israel,” said Hamid Reza Taraghi, a political analyst who is close to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He said that if Iranians reacted to the remarks they would “without a doubt” have a negative effect on the coming talks.
    Mr. Taraghi, who has inside knowledge of the negotiations, emphasized that threats had never changed Iran’s position, and added, “Nor will such remarks be of any influence now.”
    He added, “When Americans understand there will be no Iranian nuclear weapon and our technology is not against their interest, there will be no need for threats.”
    While Iran insists its nuclear program is for civilian purposes, Israel and the United States suspect it aims for weaponization, something both governments see as unacceptable. The Obama administration has increasingly focused on diplomacy and sanctions as the crucial tools, while the Netanyahu government has emphasized the possibility of a strike on the nuclear facilities and a ticking clock for its effectiveness.
    “We do believe there is time — some time, not an unlimited amount of time,” Mr. Shapiro said, according to The Associated Press, which said it obtained a tape of the remarks. “But at a certain point, we may have to make a judgment that the diplomacy will not work.”
    Ambassador Shapiro, who spoke about Iran during a question-and-answer session with about 150 lawyers that was first reported by the Israeli newspaper Makor Rishon, declined to discuss the issue on Thursday. Spokesmen for the prime minister and the defense minister — both of whom were traveling abroad — also had no response.
    But one top official in the Netanyahu administration, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to do so publicly, called Mr. Shapiro’s comments “a significant contribution to making the American military threat credible,” though he noted that they were made in a low-profile forum. “Quite clearly he didn’t mean this to be public,” the official said. “For the Iranians to understand that they really mean it, they have to hear it publicly and clearly.”
    Meir Javedanfar, a lecturer on Iranian politics at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzilya, said that Ambassador Shapiro’s statement was not just “a warning to Khamenei’s government in Tehran to take the upcoming negotiations seriously.” A second audience, he said, was “Republicans in the U.S. who have tried to hurt Obama’s credibility on Iran by saying that the president has been too soft on Iran and that Iran’s leadership don’t take his warnings regarding the existence of a possibly military option seriously.”
    Mr. Javedanfar’s colleague Shmuel Bar, director of studies at Herzilya’s Institute for Policy and Strategy, was unmoved by Mr. Shapiro’s statement. “Saying it is not enough,” Mr. Bar said. What would have more significant effect, he said, is to show actual preparations for a military option by, for example, increasing deployment in the Persian Gulf.
    “What actually the U.S. administration is doing is blowing hot and cold,” said Mr. Bar, who previously worked as an intelligence officer in the Israel Defense Force and in the prime minister’s bureau. “Actions do speak louder than words. The actions say the U.S. has a very strong aversion to any kind of military action.”
    Mr. Bar pointed to a recent post on the Web site of Iran’s supreme leader that he described as “an analysis of why the U.S. cannot and will not go to war.”
    “That is their candid evaluation of the situation,” he said. “When the Iranians see this, they say the Americans are doing everything they can to prevent Israel from attacking.”
     

    Rising Phoenix

    Well-Known Member
    UN nuclear chief: Deal reached on Iran probe

    Published: 22 May, 2012, 12:16
    Edited: 22 May, 2012, 12:17

    The chief of the UN nuclear agency says he has reached a deal with Iran over probing suspected work on nuclear weapons, and adds that the agreement will be “signed quite soon."

    *Yukiya Amano says some details still need to be worked out. But he told reporters that Iranian officials say those will not stand in the way of signing the deal, AP reports.

    Amano spoke Tuesday on return from Tehran, after talks on resuming a long-stalled probe over suspicions that Iran has secretly been working on developing nuclear weapons.

    The investigation has been stalled for more than four years, with Iran saying it has never carried out such experiments. Tehran denies that it is interested in nuclear weapons, saying it wants atomic power only to generate energy.


    ...Some good news at last!!
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    Iran confirms ?Flame? cyber attack — RT

    Iran confirms ‘Flame’ cyber attack

    30 May, 2012,

    nuclear-official-presidents-picture.n.jpg


    High-ranking Iranian officials’ computers have been attacked by a newly detected data mining virus called “Flame,” an Iranian cyber defense group confirmed on Tuesday. The cyber attack is the most destructive since the Stuxnet virus.
    Iran has deplored the “massive” data loss suffered since over the six months or more that Flame has been active. But the exact extent of damage has not been disclosed.

    The newly spotted data mining virus may be the most harmful Iran has ever faced, even more dangerous than Stuxnet, warns Iran’s Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Centre. Two years ago, Stuxnet destroyed several centrifuges used for Iran’s nuclear enrichment program.

    “Flame” also appears to have been planted by a USB stick, which means a flash driver or a similar device had to have been inserted manually into at least one computer hooked up to the network.
    Those controlling the virus can direct it from a distance.' Flame' is no ordinary product. This was designed to monitor selected computers,” Kamran Napelian, an Iranian official, told The New York Times.

    Still, Tehran says that the detection and clean-up tools were already finished in early May and can now be distributed among organizations at risk of infection.

    Iran has suffered most due to the “Flame” attack, according to a report drawn up by Kaspersky Labs. The computers security company said 189 infections were reported in the Persian country, 98 in Israel and Palestine and 32 in Sudan. Other Middle East countries such as Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Egypt were also under attack.

    Despite Israel also falling under attack, Iran still thinks the malware was “made by Tel-Aviv.”

    Its encryption has a special pattern which you only see coming from Israel. Unfortunately, they are very powerful in the field of IT,” says another Iranian cyber defense official.

    The number of massive cyber attacks on Iran now totals four, while no one has yet claimed responsibility for the Stuxnet assault in 2010. The attacks run parallel to a series of unexplained explosions and assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, constantly raising feeling in the nation that the country is increasingly being targeted by covert operations organized by the US and Israel.
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    Cyber virus in Iran was from U.S.

    Posted: Sat, Jun. 2, 2012, 3:01 AM
    Cyber virus in Iran was from U.S.
    The target was the nuclear infrastructure, a report says, and Israel helped develop the computer malware.

    LOS ANGELES - It reads like a riveting sci-fi novel, but it's stunningly real: A super-sophisticated malicious computer virus burrowed its way into Iran's nuclear facilities and took down several parts of the operation. Oh, and it apparently came from us.
    In 2010, it was the United States who launched Stuxnet, a seek-and-destroy cyber missile so sophisticated that some briefly thought it might have an other-than-earthly origin, against Iran's nuclear infrastructure, according to a New York Times report. The virus was, in fact, created jointly by the United States and Israel.
    In his first months in office, President Obama covertly ordered sophisticated attacks on the computers that ran Iran's nuclear facilities, upping U.S. use of cyber weaponry in a sustained attack, the newspaper said.
    Early on, a programming error allowed the worm to escape Iran's Natanz plant and whoosh around the world on the Internet.
    "Should we shut this thing down?" Obama asked members of his national security team who were in the room told the paper.
    Ultimately, the super worm was left to wreak its havoc, and it took out 1,000 of 5,000 centrifuges Iran was using to enhance uranium, according to the report. It was as effective as a bomb or agents infiltrating country's nuclear facilities to plant explosives, the report said.
    German cyber-security expert Ralph Langner found the worm in 2010. As his team dug deeper into the code, "each new discovery left them more impressed and wondering what was coming next," he told NPR. The sophistication of the worm "seemed almost alien." But it was, indeed, decidedly terrestrial in nature.
    Only recently has the government acknowledged developing cyber-weapons, though it has never admitted deploying them. Now efforts are under way to decipher the origins of another malicious program experts believe is part of government-sponsored cyber warfare and intelligence gathering. Again, Iran is the target.
    As the Los Angeles Times' Sergei L. Loiko wrote this week, computer experts at Russia's Kaspersky Lab came across this malware while searching for a villain dubbed the Wiper.
    "We entered a dark room in search of something and came out with something else in our hands, something different, something huge and sinister," Vitaly Kamlyuk, an antivirus expert at Kaspersky Lab, said in an interview.
    Flame, as it's called, can copy and steal data and audio files, turn on a computer microphone and record all the sounds nearby, take screen shots, read documents and emails, and capture passwords and logins.
    The program can communicate with other computers in its vicinity through the infected computer's Bluetooth and locate them even without an Internet connection, Kamlyuk said. "Many people still think that cyber warfare is a myth and a fantasy, but . . . we see that it is a real weapon of this undeclared war that is already going on."
     

    modesty

    Well-Known Member
    رئيس الموساد السابق: حرب إقليمية ستندلع بعد خمس دقائق من مهاجمة إيران
    الإثنين 04 حزيران 2012، آخر تحديث 21:13

    حذر رئيس الموساد السابق مئير دغان من خطورة الأوضاع التي قد تنشأ جراء هجوم إسرائيلي يستهدف المنشآت النووية الإيرانية.
    ووصف دغان الهجوم على إيران بـ الساذج والغبي قائلا: "إن الهجوم على إيران امرأ ساذجا وغبيا ولا احد يكلف نفسه عناء السؤال ماذا سيحدث بعد خمس دقائق فقط من الهجوم؟ وانا اقول اننا سنجد أنفسنا في خضم حرب إقليمية بعد خمس دقائق من الهجوم وفقا لما نقله موقع "يديعوت احرونوت" الالكتروني.
    واضاف دغان: "لو كنت مقتنعا بان هجوما يستهدف المنشآت النووية الإيرانية سيوقف برنامجها النووي لدعمت هذا الأمر".
    وفي سياق اخر، اتهم دغان الذي كان يتحدث اليوم الاثنين، امام مجموعة من طلبة جامعة "بن غريون" الحكومة الاسرائيلية بعدم تنفيذ معظم قراراتها وبضعف قدرتها على ممارسة الحكم.
    وقال دغان: "إن قدرة الحكومة على ممارسة الحكم تراجعت بشكل خطير لاسباب تاريخية وسياسية واصبح وضعا لايطاق خاصة وان 70% من القرارات التي تتخذها الحكومة لا تجد طريقها للتنفيذ".

     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    'Nuclear Iran won't confront Israel, will inspire Middle East'

    RT's correspondent Paula Slier interviews MidEast expert Uzi Rabi on stand-off between Iran and Israel.

    [vbtube]1iFm0kRsJeU[/vbtube]​
     
    Jon Abizeid, Iran's regime is a destabilizing agent and a backward autocratic theocratic oppressive totalitarian regime that has nothing to do with fostering prosperity anywhere, except in the pockets of its regional tools.
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    Jon Abizeid, Iran's regime is a destabilizing agent and a backward autocratic theocratic oppressive totalitarian regime that has nothing to do with fostering prosperity anywhere, except in the pockets of its regional tools.
    I suppose a Clintonian regime will resolve all the issues of integrity and economic prosperity for Iran and the region in general…:cool:
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    Iran arrests scientist killers linked to Israel | The Nation

    TEHRAN - Iran on Thursday said it arrested a number of chief suspects in the assassinations of two of its nuclear scientists in the past two years, and claimed they were linked to Israel.
    A statement from the intelligence ministry, published by state media, said "the main elements behind the killings... were arrested and moved to detention" following an investigation of at least 18 months involving surveillance in Iran and abroad.
    It provided no details as to the number of suspects, their identities or nationalities, or when or where they were arrested. But it promised further information would be made public once it was declassified.
    The ministry said the suspects were believed to be involved in the murders of Majid Shahriari, a key member of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, on November 29, 2010, and Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a deputy director of the Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, and his bodyguard on January 11, 2012. Those men were killed when unidentified assailants on motorbikes attached limpet-style bombs to their cars in peak-hour Tehran traffic.
    Iranian officials have previously blamed the Israeli and US intelligence services for those and two other murders of Iranian scientists carried out since 2010. Israel has neither confirmed nor denied involvement in the killings. Washington strongly denied complicity in assassinating Roshan. Iran last month hanged an Iranian man, Majid Jamali Fashi, convicted of being a "Mossad spy" and the killer of nuclear scientist Masoud Ali Mohammadi, who died in a bomb attack outside his home in January 2010. Tehran from time to time announces the arrest of suspected Israeli or US spies, but provides little or no public evidence supporting the accusations.
    Meanwhile, Iranian Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi warned on Thursday ahead of the OPEC cartel's latest output meeting in Vienna that looming EU oil sanctions against Iran will result in a higher cost for Europe.
    "Of course we might face some problems, but for sure ... the European citizens will pay more costs," Qasemi told reporters in Vienna, when asked about the sanctions which will apply from July 1.
    "We did tell our European friends: do not take that action... The embargo (is) against the development of the oil industry of Iran."
    Venezuela, meanwhile, added that it has written to OPEC secretary general Abdullah El-Badri to ask for OPEC members to discuss the group's relations with the EU at Thursday's meeting, in the wake of the Iran sanctions.
    "We have sent a communication to the secretary general to have a discussion today on how the relations with the EU" will be affected, Venezuelan Energy Minister Rafael Ramirez told reporters.
    The pair spoke ahead of the regular output meeting of the 12-nation Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which pumps one third of the world's oil.
    Questioned about whether the EU sanctions would result in reduced output, Qasemi responded: "Our oil exports remain as before. If the exports reduce, it will still not have any negative impact on Iran.
    "We do have the second ranking position of reserves in the world ... do think the world can ignore this energy?"
    The European Union is preparing to impose an oil embargo on Iran on July 1, unless diplomatic talks over its disputed nuclear programme see progress.
    Western countries and Israel believe Iran is trying to develop a nuclear bomb under cover of its civilian programme but Tehran insists its purpose is merely peaceful.
    In recent months, the United States and ally Israel -- the sole if undeclared nuclear weapons state in the Middle East -- have threatened military strikes against the Islamic Republic if diplomacy fails.


    U.S., Israel developed Flame computer virus to slow Iranian nuclear efforts, officials say - The Washington Post

    The United States and Israel jointly developed a sophisticated computer virus nicknamed Flame that collected intelligence in preparation for cyber-sabotage aimed at slowing Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon, according to Western officials with knowledge of the effort.
    The massive piece of malware secretly mapped and monitored Iran’s computer networks, sending back a steady stream of intelligence to prepare for a cyber­warfare campaign, according to the officials.
    The effort, involving the National Security Agency, the CIA and Israel’s military, has included the use of destructive software such as the Stuxnet virus to cause malfunctions in Iran’s nuclear-enrichment equipment.
    The emerging details about Flame provide new clues to what is thought to be the first sustained campaign of cyber-sabotage against an adversary of the United States.
    “This is about preparing the battlefield for another type of covert action,” said one former high-ranking U.S. intelligence official, who added that Flame and Stuxnet were elements of a broader assault that continues today. “Cyber-collection against the Iranian program is way further down the road than this.”
    Flame came to light last month after Iran detected a series of cyberattacks on its oil industry. The disruption was directed by Israel in a unilateral operation that apparently caught its American partners off guard, according to several U.S. and Western officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
    There has been speculation that Washington had a role in developing Flame, but the collaboration on the virus between the United States and Israel has not been previously confirmed. Commercial security researchers reported last week that Flame contained some of the same code as Stuxnet. Experts described the overlap as DNA-like evidence that the two sets of malware were parallel projects run by the same entity.
    Spokesmen for the CIA, the NSA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, as well as the Israeli Embassy in Washington, declined to comment.
    The virus is among the most sophisticated and subversive pieces of malware to be exposed to date. Experts said the program was designed to replicate across even highly secure networks, then control everyday computer functions to send secrets back to its creators. The code could activate computer microphones and cameras, log keyboard strokes, take screen shots, extract geo­location data from images, and send and receive commands and data through Bluetooth wireless technology.
    Flame was designed to do all this while masquerading as a routine Microsoft software update; it evaded detection for several years by using a sophisticated program to crack an encryption algorithm.
    “This is not something that most security researchers have the skills or resources to do,” said Tom Parker, chief technology officer for FusionX, a security firm that specializes in simulating state-sponsored cyberattacks. He said he does not know who was behind the virus. “You’d expect that of only the most advanced cryptomathematicians, such as those working at NSA.”
    Conventional plus cyber
    Flame was developed at least five years ago as part of a classified effort code-named Olympic Games, according to officials familiar with U.S. cyber-operations and experts who have scrutinized its code. The U.S.-Israeli collaboration was intended to slow Iran’s nuclear program, reduce the pressure for a conventional military attack and extend the timetable for diplomacy and sanctions.
    The cyberattacks augmented conventional sabotage efforts by both countries, including inserting flawed centrifuge parts and other components into Iran’s nuclear supply chain.
    The best-known cyberweapon let loose on Iran was Stuxnet, a name coined by researchers in the antivirus industry who discovered it two years ago. It infected a specific type of industrial controller at Iran’s uranium-
    enrichment plant in Natanz, causing almost 1,000 centrifuges to spin out of control. The damage occurred gradually, over months, and Iranian officials initially thought it was the result of incompetence.
    The scale of the espionage and sabotage effort “is proportionate to the problem that’s trying to be resolved,” the former intelligence official said, referring to the Iranian nuclear program. Although Stuxnet and Flame infections can be countered, “it doesn’t mean that other tools aren’t in play or performing effectively,” he said.
    To develop these tools, the United States relies on two of its elite spy agencies. The NSA, known mainly for its electronic eavesdropping and code-breaking capabilities, has extensive expertise in developing malicious code that can be aimed at U.S. adversaries, including Iran. The CIA lacks the NSA’s sophistication in building malware but is deeply involved in the cyber-campaign.
    The CIA’s Information Operations Center is second only to the agency’s Counterterrorism Center in size. The IOC, as it is known, performs an array of espionage functions, including extracting data from laptops seized in counter­terrorism raids. But the center specializes in computer penetrations that require closer contact with the target, such as using spies or unwitting contractors to spread a contagion via a thumb drive.
    Both agencies analyze the intelligence obtained through malware such as Flame and have continued to develop new weapons even as recent attacks have been exposed.
    Flame’s discovery shows the importance of mapping networks and collecting intelligence on targets as the prelude to an attack, especially in closed computer networks. Officials say gaining and keeping access to a network is 99 percent of the challenge.
    “It is far more difficult to penetrate a network, learn about it, reside on it forever and extract information from it without being detected than it is to go in and stomp around inside the network causing damage,” said Michael V. Hayden, a former NSA director and CIA director who left office in 2009. He declined to discuss any operations he was involved with during his time in government.
    Years in the making
    The effort to delay Iran’s nuclear program using cyber-techniques began in the mid-2000s, during President George W. Bush’s second term. At that point it consisted mainly of gathering intelligence to identify potential targets and create tools to disrupt them. In 2008, the program went operational and shifted from military to CIA control, former officials said.
    Despite their collaboration on developing the malicious code, the United States and Israel have not always coordinated their attacks. Israel’s April assaults on Iran’s Oil Ministry and oil-export facilities caused only minor disruptions. The episode led Iran to investigate and ultimately discover Flame.
    “The virus penetrated some fields — one of them was the oil sector,” Gholam Reza Jalali, an Iranian military cyber official, told Iranian state radio in May. “Fortunately, we detected and controlled this single incident.”
    Some U.S. intelligence officials were dismayed that Israel’s unilateral incursion led to the discovery of the virus, prompting counter­measures.
    The disruptions led Iran to ask a Russian security firm and a Hungarian cyber-lab for help, according to U.S. and international officials familiar with the incident.
    Last week, researchers with Kaspersky Lab, the Russian security firm, reported their conclusion that Flame — a name they came up with — was created by the same group or groups that built Stuxnet. Kaspersky declined to comment on whether it was approached by Iran.
    “We are now 100 percent sure that the Stuxnet and Flame groups worked together,” said Roel Schouwenberg, a Boston-based senior researcher with Kaspersky Lab.
    The firm also determined that the Flame malware predates Stuxnet. “It looks like the Flame platform was used as a kickstarter of sorts to get the Stuxnet project going,” Schouwenberg said.
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    How do you spell double standard?
    Ask the hacker in chief…

    [vbtube]z2up5ZXgh-U[/vbtube]​

    Reports have surfaced suggesting the U.S. and Israel are behind a computer virus that appears to have been launched to try to spy on Iran's nuclear activities. That's despite Washington's loud condemnation of hacker attacks - at least, those directed against the U.S - as RT's Gayane Chichakyan explains.
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    American Conceit: The Case of Iran.

    I came across this remarkable OP-ED published in the latest “Free Inquiry” issue by a Professor I admire so much. I’m taking the liberty sharing and comparing her thoughts with what I wrote earlier in this thread back in 2010.
    Thank you Shadia; you’re an inspiration! I hope you don’t mind me posting your article.

    American Conceit: The Case of Iran.
    By Shadia B. Drury

    It is hard to imagine a greater misfortune for the world than being saddled with a superpower whose exaggerated perception of its righteousness and innocence fuels its belligerence. The only thing worse is having an enemy that is just as arrogant, self-righteous, and belligerent. There is nothing new about such smug, myopic self-righteousness of course. It has been with us since monotheism managed to infiltrate the moral and political spheres of human life. With one God, one truth, and one right way, intolerance is bound to flourish. The conflict between America and its Islamic enemies is exacerbated by the fact that they share the same monotheistic monopoly on truth and justice, dualistic inclinations, and intolerable arrogance.
    Witness the American fury over the possibility that Iran might acquire a nuclear weapon. With the exception of the maverick Ron Paul, all the Republican candidates for president in the election of 2012 and their cohorts in Congress are beating the drums of war to prevent Iran from having such a weapon. As Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta claimed, Iran poses a threat to the world because it is a sponsor of global terrorism; if it developed nuclear capability, it would share it with its terrorist friends, and then mushroom clouds would proliferate over all the cities of Europe and America. As leader of the "civilized world," Barack Obama has reassured his allies, "when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say." The assumption is that it is "unacceptable" for Iran to have a nuclear weapon because it is evil and irrational. But it is fitting and proper for the United States to have thousands of nuclear weapons because it is rational and good.
    The only person in the American public conversation with a sensible approach to the situation is Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul. It is no wonder that young people cling to him as the only hope for a sane future. But he is a voice in the wilderness; no pundits discuss his vision as a serious alternative, and no newspaper op-ed writers give added voice to his arguments. As long as America insists on dominating the world, it will be mired in endless wars. If Americans were to follow Paul and suspend their myopic conceit, then their predicament would not seem so intractable.
    In the first place, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has not threatened to wipe out Israel. He announced his desire to put an end to the Zionist state. This should not shock anyone - least of all Americans, who are masters of regime change. It did not shock Israelis on the Left, many of whom endorse the end of the Zionist state so that Israel can become a country for all its people - the so called one-state solution. In contrast, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton threatened to "obliterate" Iran in 2008 - a threat that was joyously recalled during the huge pro-Israeli lobby gathering in Washington this year of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
    Second, Ahmadinejad has not denied the reality of the Holocaust. He denied that it happened in his neighborhood, which is to say he denied that Muslims had anything to do with it. The truth is that the Holocaust was a European atrocity, and Muslims have paid a huge price to assuage European guilt. When a boatload of European Jews came to Canada seeking asylum from Hitler, its top government official responsible for immigration famously said, "None is too many." Nor was the United States more gracious. The staunchly unconditional defense of Israel feeds the Western sense of superiority. It allows it to pretend that anti Semitism was not its invention.
    Third, Iran has some legitimate grievances against the West. In 1953, its popular and democratically elected leader Mohammad Mossadeqh was ousted in a coup orchestrated by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and replaced by the murderous tyranny of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. The latter was overthrown in 1979 by a revolution that installed a religious theocracy that promised truth and justice but delivered only brutality in the name of God. But even though the theocrats declared America to be the Great Satan, the people of Iran are not as bitter toward America as they should be. They admire American freedom as an achievement that they have yet to attain. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, thousands of young Iranians demonstrated in the streets of Tehran against al-Qaeda and in solidarity with the Americans. So, the enmity is nowhere near as implacable as Americans are inclined to believe.
    Fourth, Iran is surrounded by the American military on every side-on its borders with Iraq and Afghanistan, and in the Persian Gulf. It has every reason to be jittery. Five of its nuclear scientists have been killed in terrorist attacks, most likely orchestrated by Israel’s Mossad and/or the U.S. CIA. It has every reason to seek nuclear weapons-if it is to avoid the fate of Iraq and Afghanistan. If the United States and Israel have the right to defend themselves, why does Iran not have the same right?
    Fifth, it would be suicidal for Iran to attack Israel with a nuclear weapon, because Israel has two or three hundred nuclear weapons. It is equally unreasonable to assume that Iran would share its nuclear capacity with terrorists who would destroy the world. In fact, Iran is a mortal enemy of al-Qaeda. It is, however, allied with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. But these are not global terrorists; they specialize in attacking Israel with primitive weapons in retaliation for Israel’s more lethal assaults on Palestinians. Israel has a reason to be paranoid. Its people have a horrifying history of persecution in Europe, and it has cultivated mortal enemies in its new neighborhood. But even if Iran were reckless enough to provide Hamas or Hezbollah with nuclear weapons, they could not use them without risking self-annihilation.
    All this leads me to conclude that the world would be better off if Iran had a nuclear weapon. Such a weapon would act as a deterrent. It would mean that Israel and the United States could no longer do whatever they please with impunity. The situation would be akin to the mutual assured destruction (MAD) that kept the Soviet Union and the United States from annihilating each other. This is precisely what Ron Paul has proposed. Yet, he has been deemed a threat to the Republican Party, to America, and to world order.
    And which world order is that? It is the world order in which America and its allies can destroy any country with impunity, while their victims have no ability to defend themselves or retaliate. Such a "world order" is devoid of any balance of power. But the United States and Israel have no use for the balance of power as a means of achieving international stability. They demand absolute security, which is both unreasonable and unjust. Absolute security can be achieved only by making all others totally vulnerable. As Henry Kissinger has rightly maintained, "absolute security for one country means absolute insecurity for all others" (American Foreign Policy, 1969). This is the situation that Israel has enjoyed in its neighborhood. If Iran were to have a nuclear weapon, Israel would lose its impunity. It would have to act with greater restraint; it would have to treat its neighbors more equitably. But any limit on its ability to act with impunity is precisely what it is determined to avoid. As Israel’s minister of defense, Ehud Barak, explained in an interview with Ronen Bergman for the New York Times Magazine, if Iran had a nuclear weapon and "we enter another military confrontation with Hezbollah ... it would definitely restrict our range of operations." In short, what Israel and America demand is what the neo cons called "full spectrum dominance."
    So, let us be clear on what Americans will be sending their kids to fight and die for. They will not be fighting to defend their country or its ally. They will be fighting to achieve monopoly on the weapons of mass destruction. A nuclear Iran poses no existential threat to Israel or America, but it does "restrict their range of operations." A world order that does not "restrict the range of operations" of the nuclear powers is so intolerable that it is bound to inspire more suicidal terror born of despair. If they hope to escape the endless cycle of war and terrorism, Americans must liberate themselves from the mindless conceit that cripples their capacity for self-criticism and hence their capacity for justice, compromise, and diplomacy.




    shadia5.jpg
    shadiafront.gif


    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canada Research Chair in Social Justice, Director of the Masters Program in Social and Political Thought and Professor in the Departments of Political Science and Philosophy. [/FONT]
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    The EU embargo of Iranian oil is now in place, along with fresh U.S. sanctions against countries dealing with Tehran. The measures are aimed at pressurizing Iran to curb its nuclear programme. The Islamic Republic says however that it's been stockpiling money as a buffer and that selling oil remains no problem - thanks to America exempting some countries from penalties - including China and Singapore. Author and journalist Afshin Rattansi says the sanctions are unlikely to have the desired effect.

    [vbtube]eg-Q2_RvUHs&feature=relmfu[/vbtube]​
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    Iran says new western oil sanctions could impact negatively on future nuclear negotiations. Tensions are mounting around Tehran, as a new EU embargo aims to put pressure on its atomic programme. RT's Middle East correspondent, Paula Slier reports. Iran says new western oil sanctions could impact negatively on future nuclear negotiations. Tensions are mounting around Tehran, as a new EU embargo aims to put pressure on its atomic programme. RT talks Lindsey German from the Stop the War Coalition in London.

    [vbtube]hWNTiAMFLQo[/vbtube]​
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News

    0f56837344e8b7c95a5a954ebb28ec7f.png


    ht_military_drill_iran_dm_120703_wmain.jpg



    An Iranian military commander said that his country has detailed contingency plans to strike nearly three dozen U.S. military bases in the region should Iran be attacked, local media reported Wednesday.
    Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force, told reporters the U.S. has 35 bases around Iran and all are "within the reach of our missiles" and could be hit "in the early minutes after an attack," according to an English-language report from Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency. The bases were no threat but instead an "opportunity" for the Iranian military, Hajizadeh said last month, according to Fars.
    Hajizadeh's claims come as the IRGC conducts a major military exercise in which it has fired a barrage of missiles at "mock enemy bases" set up in the Iranian desert. Another IRGC commander, Brig. Gen. Hossein Salami, told reporters Tuesday the main aim of the drill "was to demonstrate the Iranian nation's political resolve to defend [its] vital values and national interests," according to Iran's state-run Press TV.
    Press TV paraphrased Salami's description of the drills as a "firm response to those who threaten Iran with the option of military action."
    The United States and Israel have for years been locked in a struggle with Iran over its nuclear enrichment program and the leaders of both the Israeli and American governments have said that any option -- including military action -- was "on the table" should it become clear Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. Iranian officials have denied the nation seeks nuclear weapons and said Iran is only enriching uranium for domestic nuclear power purposes.
    Press TV said that several different missile types were tested, including the Shabab-3, which reportedly has an operational range of over 900 miles, meaning it could reach potential targets throughout the Middle East. The U.S. and its allies have several military bases in the region, including the home of the Navy's 5th Fleet in Bahrain, a little over 120 miles from Iran's southern border. Israel's eastern border is about 600 miles from Iran's mainland.
    Another base used by the U.S., the United Arab Emirates' Al Dafra *** base, lies less than 200 miles from Iran's southern coast. In April, multiple American next-generation F-22 stealth fighters were sent to Al Dafra but an *** Force spokesperson stressed at the time that the jets should not be seen as a threat to Iran. However, a top official for the jets' manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, told ABC News in April 2011 that the planes -- which have never been used in combat -- could find a home in quick strike missions in countries like Iran or North Korea.
    Iran's new drills also coincided with fresh tensions that followed a new round of harsh sanctions against Iran that targeted the country's oil exports to Europe. Dozens of Iranian lawmakers have reportedly called on the Iranian military to shut down the Strait of Hormuz -- a narrow, strategic waterway that connects the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea through which an estimated one-fifth of the world's oil travels. As an apparent precaution against such action, the U.S. has quietly been building up its military forces in the Persian Gulf.
    The Department of Defense declined to comment on Hajizadeh's claims.
     

    J. Abizeid

    Well-Known Member
    Book: Israeli spies behind Iran assassinations

    Book: Israeli spies behind Iran assassinations

    By Kimberly Dozier Associated Press | Last updated: Jul 19, 2012 -

    israeli_secret_wars07-24-2012.jpg

    WASHINGTON - A new book claims Israel’s spy agency dispatched assassins into Iran, as part of a campaign to sabotage the country’s disputed nuclear program.

    Israeli operatives have killed at least four Iranian nuclear scientists, including targeting them with operatives on motorcycles, an assassination technique used by the Israeli spy service, the Mossad, according to authors Dan Raviv and Yossi Melman in their book published July 9, “Spies Against Armageddon: Inside Israel’s Secret Wars.” The Mossad agents “excel at accurate shooting at any speed and staying steady to shoot and to place exquisitely shaped sticky bombs” and consider it their hallmark, Mr. Raviv said July 6 during an interview with both authors.
    The hits are part of a series of regular missions deep inside Iran, intended to keep Tehran from developing weapons and following through with threats by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to wipe Israel off the map. U.S. officials have said in the past that they were not involved, and they don’t know who did it.
    The U.S. and Israel accuse Iran of seeking nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies.
    Iran has long blamed the scientists’ killings on Israel, which has remained silent on the matter, but media reports speculated Israel had contracted killers to do the job.
    “They don’t farm out a mission that is that sensitive,” so sensitive that Israel’s prime minister has to sign off on it personally, Mr. Raviv said. “They might use dissidents for assistance or logistics but not the hit itself. The methodology and training and use of motorcycles is all out of the Mossad playbook. They wouldn’t trust anybody else to do it.”
    The Mossad operatives enter and exit Iran through a “multitude” of routes, using a series of safe houses once inside the country that predate the 1979 revolution, the authors said.
    In the interview, co-author Melman said Israel believes the campaign successfully disrupted Iran’s nuclear program not only by taking out key scientists but also dissuading other up-and-coming scholars from joining the program.
    Mr. Raviv is a CBS News correspondent, and Mr. Melman is a well-known Israeli reporter and commentator.
    Israel has told the Obama administration that it expects American military power to “obliterate” Iran’s nuclear program, the authors said. If the U.S. does not act, Israel has threatened to attack Iran’s nuclear sites on its own. The U.S. prefers the carrot-and-stick approach of talks aimed at convincing Iran to stick to a peaceful nuclear regime, combined with increasingly harsh financial sanctions to punish Iran as it improves its current program.
    The two nations have cooperated on the harassment campaign, including partnering on cyber programs like Stuxnet, malware credited with damaging the control panel on centrifuges in Iran’s nuclear plant.
    Mr. Melman said the cyber campaign was an Israeli innovation, not an American one as recently reported. It was the brainchild of Israel’s military intelligence agency Aman and Unit 8200—Israel’s equivalent of the eavesdropping, code-breaking National Security Agency—and endorsed by the White House at Israel’s suggestion, he added.
    Israel’s cyber warriors then worked with NSA to build malware. The program Flame was built first—a Trojan horse code designed to penetrate the Iranian nuclear sites and “suck information about the (uranium-enriching) centrifuges and how they operate,” Mr. Melman said. Once the Israeli and U.S. cyber experts got that information, they were able to build Stuxnet.
     
    I came across this remarkable OP-ED published in the latest “Free Inquiry” issue by a Professor I admire so much. I’m taking the liberty sharing and comparing her thoughts with what I wrote earlier in this thread back in 2010.
    Thank you Shadia; you’re an inspiration! I hope you don’t mind me posting your article.

    American Conceit: The Case of Iran.
    By Shadia B. Drury

    It is hard to imagine a greater misfortune for the world than being saddled with a superpower whose exaggerated perception of its righteousness and innocence fuels its belligerence. The only thing worse is having an enemy that is just as arrogant, self-righteous, and belligerent. There is nothing new about such smug, myopic self-righteousness of course. It has been with us since monotheism managed to infiltrate the moral and political spheres of human life. With one God, one truth, and one right way, intolerance is bound to flourish. The conflict between America and its Islamic enemies is exacerbated by the fact that they share the same monotheistic monopoly on truth and justice, dualistic inclinations, and intolerable arrogance.
    Witness the American fury over the possibility that Iran might acquire a nuclear weapon. With the exception of the maverick Ron Paul, all the Republican candidates for president in the election of 2012 and their cohorts in Congress are beating the drums of war to prevent Iran from having such a weapon. As Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta claimed, Iran poses a threat to the world because it is a sponsor of global terrorism; if it developed nuclear capability, it would share it with its terrorist friends, and then mushroom clouds would proliferate over all the cities of Europe and America. As leader of the "civilized world," Barack Obama has reassured his allies, "when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say." The assumption is that it is "unacceptable" for Iran to have a nuclear weapon because it is evil and irrational. But it is fitting and proper for the United States to have thousands of nuclear weapons because it is rational and good.
    The only person in the American public conversation with a sensible approach to the situation is Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul. It is no wonder that young people cling to him as the only hope for a sane future. But he is a voice in the wilderness; no pundits discuss his vision as a serious alternative, and no newspaper op-ed writers give added voice to his arguments. As long as America insists on dominating the world, it will be mired in endless wars. If Americans were to follow Paul and suspend their myopic conceit, then their predicament would not seem so intractable.
    In the first place, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has not threatened to wipe out Israel. He announced his desire to put an end to the Zionist state. This should not shock anyone - least of all Americans, who are masters of regime change. It did not shock Israelis on the Left, many of whom endorse the end of the Zionist state so that Israel can become a country for all its people - the so called one-state solution. In contrast, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton threatened to "obliterate" Iran in 2008 - a threat that was joyously recalled during the huge pro-Israeli lobby gathering in Washington this year of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
    Second, Ahmadinejad has not denied the reality of the Holocaust. He denied that it happened in his neighborhood, which is to say he denied that Muslims had anything to do with it. The truth is that the Holocaust was a European atrocity, and Muslims have paid a huge price to assuage European guilt. When a boatload of European Jews came to Canada seeking asylum from Hitler, its top government official responsible for immigration famously said, "None is too many." Nor was the United States more gracious. The staunchly unconditional defense of Israel feeds the Western sense of superiority. It allows it to pretend that anti Semitism was not its invention.
    Third, Iran has some legitimate grievances against the West. In 1953, its popular and democratically elected leader Mohammad Mossadeqh was ousted in a coup orchestrated by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and replaced by the murderous tyranny of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi. The latter was overthrown in 1979 by a revolution that installed a religious theocracy that promised truth and justice but delivered only brutality in the name of God. But even though the theocrats declared America to be the Great Satan, the people of Iran are not as bitter toward America as they should be. They admire American freedom as an achievement that they have yet to attain. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, thousands of young Iranians demonstrated in the streets of Tehran against al-Qaeda and in solidarity with the Americans. So, the enmity is nowhere near as implacable as Americans are inclined to believe.
    Fourth, Iran is surrounded by the American military on every side-on its borders with Iraq and Afghanistan, and in the Persian Gulf. It has every reason to be jittery. Five of its nuclear scientists have been killed in terrorist attacks, most likely orchestrated by Israel’s Mossad and/or the U.S. CIA. It has every reason to seek nuclear weapons-if it is to avoid the fate of Iraq and Afghanistan. If the United States and Israel have the right to defend themselves, why does Iran not have the same right?
    Fifth, it would be suicidal for Iran to attack Israel with a nuclear weapon, because Israel has two or three hundred nuclear weapons. It is equally unreasonable to assume that Iran would share its nuclear capacity with terrorists who would destroy the world. In fact, Iran is a mortal enemy of al-Qaeda. It is, however, allied with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. But these are not global terrorists; they specialize in attacking Israel with primitive weapons in retaliation for Israel’s more lethal assaults on Palestinians. Israel has a reason to be paranoid. Its people have a horrifying history of persecution in Europe, and it has cultivated mortal enemies in its new neighborhood. But even if Iran were reckless enough to provide Hamas or Hezbollah with nuclear weapons, they could not use them without risking self-annihilation.
    All this leads me to conclude that the world would be better off if Iran had a nuclear weapon. Such a weapon would act as a deterrent. It would mean that Israel and the United States could no longer do whatever they please with impunity. The situation would be akin to the mutual assured destruction (MAD) that kept the Soviet Union and the United States from annihilating each other. This is precisely what Ron Paul has proposed. Yet, he has been deemed a threat to the Republican Party, to America, and to world order.
    And which world order is that? It is the world order in which America and its allies can destroy any country with impunity, while their victims have no ability to defend themselves or retaliate. Such a "world order" is devoid of any balance of power. But the United States and Israel have no use for the balance of power as a means of achieving international stability. They demand absolute security, which is both unreasonable and unjust. Absolute security can be achieved only by making all others totally vulnerable. As Henry Kissinger has rightly maintained, "absolute security for one country means absolute insecurity for all others" (American Foreign Policy, 1969). This is the situation that Israel has enjoyed in its neighborhood. If Iran were to have a nuclear weapon, Israel would lose its impunity. It would have to act with greater restraint; it would have to treat its neighbors more equitably. But any limit on its ability to act with impunity is precisely what it is determined to avoid. As Israel’s minister of defense, Ehud Barak, explained in an interview with Ronen Bergman for the New York Times Magazine, if Iran had a nuclear weapon and "we enter another military confrontation with Hezbollah ... it would definitely restrict our range of operations." In short, what Israel and America demand is what the neo cons called "full spectrum dominance."
    So, let us be clear on what Americans will be sending their kids to fight and die for. They will not be fighting to defend their country or its ally. They will be fighting to achieve monopoly on the weapons of mass destruction. A nuclear Iran poses no existential threat to Israel or America, but it does "restrict their range of operations." A world order that does not "restrict the range of operations" of the nuclear powers is so intolerable that it is bound to inspire more suicidal terror born of despair. If they hope to escape the endless cycle of war and terrorism, Americans must liberate themselves from the mindless conceit that cripples their capacity for self-criticism and hence their capacity for justice, compromise, and diplomacy.




    shadia5.jpg
    shadiafront.gif


    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canada Research Chair in Social Justice, Director of the Masters Program in Social and Political Thought and Professor in the Departments of Political Science and Philosophy. [/FONT]
    What a moronic article. I am sure she doesn't mind her article posted by the way, but I love your gracious supplicating humility.
     
    Top