söndag, april 02, 2006

Kärnvapen mot Iran-Världens överlevnad beror på oss!

Israel har USAs uppdrag att "nuke Iran" trots att Iran skrivit på NPTavtalet och uppfyllt alla sina åtagande gentemot atomenergiorganet IAEA.

Men också EUs egna aggressiva kärnvapenstater är med i båten, utan att vi andra har någon som helst inblick i vad som pågår och heller inte kommer undan radioaktiviteten, vilket England fick erfara efter Irakkriget.

Men Bushadministrationens sedan länge planerade skådespel närmar sig med Israel som huvudaktör. Redan ser vi hur media eldar på islamofobin och vänder världsopinionen mot Iran..

Vi känner igen mönstret från Irak, där Saddam Hussein anklagades för kärnvaspeninnehav och förbindelser med Usama bin Laden. Vilket senare visade sig vara helt grundlöst

Afghanistan ockuperades strax efter 9/11 anklagad för för att stå bakom terrorattacken genom bin Laden. Och där befinner sig NATO än, och nu även Sverige..

Tecken tyder på att Iran framöver kommer att anklagas för att stå bakom något terroristattentat gentemot USA, och USA då enligt sin nya militärdoktrin kan svara Iran med kärnvapen mot dess underjordiska kärnanläggningar.

Men de "bunkerbusters", där den minsta modellens sprängverkan är 2/3 av en Hiroshimabomb, klarar ändå inte att tränga långt ner i berget utan att sprängkraften och stoftets förödelse sprider sig runtom i området.

USA tänker använda både konventionella och kärnvapen och låta Israel bomba med sina 500 "mininukes" och "bunkerbusters".

USA har laddat upp med kärnvapen i södra Irak för att svara på Irans vedergällning om dess anläggningar bombas.

What we are dealing with is a joint US-Israeli military operation to bomb Iran, which has been in the active planning stage for more than a year.

The Neocons in the Defense Department, under Douglas Feith, have been working assiduously with their Israeli military and intelligence counterparts, carefully identifying targets inside Iran (SeymourHersh,www.globalresearch.ca/articles/HER501A.html)

Israel will not implement an attack without the participation of the US.

Covert Intelligence Operations: Stirring Ethnic Tensions in Iran

Meanwhile, for the last two years, Washington has been involved in covert intelligence operations inside Iran. American and British intelligence and special forces (working with their Israeli counterparts) are involved in this operation.

"A British intelligence official said that any campaign against Iran would not be a ground war like the one in Iraq. The Americans will use different tactics, said the intelligence officer. 'It is getting quite scary.'"

The expectation is that a US-Israeli bombing raid of Iran's nuclear facilities will stir up ethnic tensions and trigger "regime change" in favor of the US.

Bush advisers believe that the "Iranian opposition movement" will unseat the Mullahs. This assessment constitutes a gross misjudgment of social forces inside Iran.

What is more likely to occur is that Iranians will consistently rally behind a wartime government against foreign aggression. In fact, the entire Middle East and beyond would rise up against US interventionism.

Retaliation in the Case of a US-Israeli Aerial Attack

Tehran has confirmed that it will retaliate if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel. These attacks, could also target US military facilities in the Persian Gulf, which would immediately lead us into a scenario of military escalation and all out war.

In other words, the air strikes against Iran could contribute to unleashing a war in the broader Middle East Central Asian region.

Moreover, the planned attack on Iran should also be understood in relation to the timely withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon, which has opened up a new space, for the deployment of Israeli forces.

The participation of Turkey in the US-Israeli military operation is also a factor, following an agreement reached between Ankara and Tel Aviv.

In other words, US and Israeli military planners must carefully weigh the far-reaching implications of their actions.

"Defensive and Offensive" Actions

The planning of the aerial bombings of Iran started in mid-2004.

"the United States is currently: deploying B61-type tactical nuclear weapons in southern Iraq as part of a plan to hit Iran from this area if and when Iran responds to an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities".

What the report suggests is that conventional weapons would be used in the first instance. If Iran were to retaliate in response to US-Israeli aerial attacks, tactical thermo-nuclear B61 weapons could then be launched. .

Israel is part of the military alliance and is slated to play a major role in the planned attacks on Iran.

Israel has taken delivery starting 2004 of some 500 US produced BLU 109 bunker buster bombs. meant to "contribute significantly to U.S. strategic and tactical objectives." .

Mounted on satellite-guided bombs, these can be fired from Israel´s F-15 or F-16 jets. Israel very likely manufactures its own bunker busters and possesses 100-200 strategic nuclear warheads. Israel has taken delivery of two new German produced submarines that could launch nuclear-armed cruise missiles for a "second-strike" deterrent.

Israel's tactical nuclear weapons capabilities are not known

Israel's participation in the aerial attacks will also act as a political bombshell throughout the Middle East. It would contribute to escalation, with a war zone which could extend initially into Lebanon and Syria. The entire region from the Eastern Mediterranean to Central Asia and Afghanistan's Western frontier would be affected..

The Role of Western Europe

The US has supplied some 480 B61 thermonuclear bombs to five non-nuclear NATO countries including Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, and one nuclear country.

Turkey, which is a partner of the US-led coalition against Iran along with Israel, possesses some 90 thermonuclear B61 bunker buster bombs at the Incirlik nuclear air base.

Consistent with US nuclear policy, the stockpiling of B61 in Western Europe are intended for targets in the Middle East.

Moreover, in accordance with "NATO strike plans", they could be launched "against targets in Russia or countries in the Middle East such as Syria and Iran" .

Arrangements were made in the mid-90s to allow the use of U.S. nuclear forces in Europe outside the area of responsibility of U.S. European Command (EUCOM).

As a result of these arrangements, EUCOM now supports CENTCOM nuclear missions in the Middle East, including, potentially, against Iran and Syria (http://www.nukestrat.com/us/afn/nato.htm)

While these "non-nuclear states" casually accuse Tehran of developing nuclear weapons, they themselves have capabilities of delivering nuclear warheads, which are targeted at Iran.

To say that this is a clear case of "double standards" by the IAEA and the "international community" is a understatement.

Germany - de Facto Nuclear Power

Among the five "non-nuclear states" "Germany remains the most heavily nuclearized country with three nuclear bases (two of which are fully operational) and may store as many as 150 B61 bunker buster bombs

In accordance with the ´NATO strike plans´ these tactical nuclear weapons are also targeted at the Middle East.

While Germany is not officially a nuclear power, it produces nuclear warheads for the French Navy and has the capabilities of delivering nuclear weapons. EADS, a Fr-Ge-Sp joint venture, is Europe's second largest military producer, supplying .France's M51 nuclear missile.

France Endorses the Preemptive Nuclear Doctrine

In January 2006, French President Jacques Chirac announced a major shift in France's nuclear policy.

Without mentioning Iran, Chirac intimated that France's nukes should be used in the form of "more focused attacks" against countries, which were "considering" the deployment of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).

He also hinted to the possibility that tactical nuclear weapons could be used in conventional war theaters, very much in line with both US and NATO nuclear doctrine.

The French president seems to have embraced the US sponsored "War on Terrorism". He presented nuclear weapons as a means to build a safer World and combat terrorism:

Nuclear weapons against the leaders of states which used (or considered using) "terrorist means against us", (in one way or another) weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they are exposing themselves to a firm, appropriate response "on our side...."

Although Chirac made no reference to the preemptive use of nuclear weapons, his statement broadly replicates the premises of the Bush administration's 2001 Nuclear Posture Review , which calls for the use of tactical nuclear weapons against ''rogue states" and "terrorist non-state organizations". (See "National Resources Defense Council, Nuclear Weapons in Europe , February 2005")

Building a Pretext for a Preemptive Nuclear Attack

The pretext for waging war on Iran essentially rests on two fundamental premises, which are part of the Bush administration's National Security doctrine.

1. Iran's alleged possession of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" (WMD), more specifically its nuclear enrichment program.

2. Iran's alleged support to "Islamic terrorists".

These are two interrelated statements which are an integral part of the propaganda and media disinformation campaign.

The "Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)" statement is used to justify the "pre-emptive war" against the "state sponsors of terror", countries such as Iran and North Korea which allegedly possess WMD.

Iran is identified as a State sponsor of so-called "non-State terrorist organizations". North Korea also possess WMDs and potentially constitute a nuclear threat. Terrorist non-state organizations are presented as a "nuclear power".

"The enemies in this [long] war are not traditional conventional military forces but rather dispersed, global terrorist networks that exploit Islam to advance radical political aims.

These enemies have the avowed aim of acquiring and using nuclear and biological weapons to murder hundreds of thousands of Americans and others around the world." (2006 Quadrennial Defense Review ),

In contrast, Germany and Israel which produce and possess nuclear warheads are not considered "nuclear powers".

In recent months, the pretext for war, building on this WMD-Islamic terrorist nexus, has been highlighted ad nauseam, on a daily basis by the Western media.

In a testimony to the US Senate Budget Committee, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Iran and Syria of destabilizing the Middle East and providing support to militant Islamic groups.

She described Iran as the "a central banker for terrorism", not withstanding the fact amply documented that Al Qaeda has been supported and financed from its inception in the early 1980s by none other than the CIA.

"It's not just Iran's nuclear program but also their support for terrorism around the world. They are, in effect, the central banker for terrorism," (Statement to the US Senate Budget Committee, 16 February 2006)

Second 9/11: Cheney's "Contingency Plan"

(anm: Pretexten är hotande attacker mot USA som mot Afghanistan (efter 9/11), Irak (Saddam/bin Laden) och nu Iran (terrroristattack)

While the "threat" of Iran's alleged WMD is slated for debate at the UN Security Council, Vice President Dick Cheney is reported to have instructed USSTRATCOM to draw up a contingency plan "to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States".

This "contingency plan" to attack Iran uses the pretext of a "Second 9/11" which has not yet happened, to prepare for a major military operation against Iran.

The contingency plan, which is characterized by a military build up in anticipation of possible aerial strikes against Iran, is in a "state of readiness".

What is diabolical is that the justification to wage war on Iran rests on Iran's involvement in a terrorist attack on America, which has not yet occurred:

The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons.

Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option.

As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States.

Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing that "Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack" but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

Are we to understand that US military planners are waiting in limbo for a Second 9/11, to launch a military operation directed against Iran, which is currently in a "state of readiness"?

Cheney's proposed "contingency plan" does not focus on preventing a Second 9/11. The Cheney plan is predicated on the presumption that Iran would be behind a Second 9/11 and that punitive bombings would immediately be activated, prior to the conduct of an investigation,

Much in the same way as the attacks on Afghanistan in October 2001, allegedly in retribution for the role of the Taliban government in support of the 9/11 terrorists. It is worth noting that the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan had been planned well in advance of 9/11. As Michael Keefer points out in an incisive review article feb 06

"At a deeper level, it implies that "9/11-type terrorist attacks" are recognized in Cheney’s office and the Pentagon as appropriate means of legitimizing wars of aggression against any country selected for that treatment by the regime and its corporate propaganda-amplification system...

Keefer concludes that "an attack on Iran, which would presumably involve the use of significant numbers of extremely ‘dirty’ earth-penetrating nuclear bombs, might well be made to follow a dirty-bomb attack on the United States, which would be represented in the media as having been carried out by Iranian agents"

The Battle for Oil a direct relationship to the hate campaign directed against Muslims

Iran possesses 10 percent of global oil and gas reserves. The US is the first and foremost military and nuclear power in the World, but it possesses less than 3 percent of global oil and gas reserves.

On the other hand, the countries inhabited by Muslims, including the Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia, West and Central Africa, Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei, possess approximately 80 percent of the World's oil and gas reserves.

The "war on terrorism" and the hate campaign directed against Muslims, which has gained impetus in recent months, bears a direct relationship to the "Battle for Middle East Oil".

How best to conquer these vast oil reserves located in countries inhabited by Muslims?

Build a political consensus against Muslim countries, describe them as "uncivilized", denigrate their culture and religion, implement ethnic profiling against Muslims in Western countries, foster hatred and racism against the inhabitants of the oil producing countries.

The values of Islam are said to be tied into "Islamic terrorism". Western governments are now accusing Iran of "exporting terrorism to the West" In the words of Prime Minister Tony Blair:

In contrast, America's humanitarian "nuclear weapons will be accurate, safe and reliable."

The World is at a Critical Cross-roads

It is not Iran which is a threat to global security but the United States of America and Israel.

In recent developments, Western European governments --including the so-called "non-nuclear states" which possess nuclear weapons-- have joined the bandwagon.

In chorus, Western Europe and the member states of the Atlantic alliance (NATO) have endorsed the US-led military initiative against Iran.

The Pentagon's planned aerial attacks on Iran involve "scenarios" using both nuclear and conventional weapons.

While this does not imply the use of nuclear weapons, the potential danger of a Middle East nuclear holocaust must, nonetheless, be taken seriously. It must become a focal point of the antiwar movement, particularly in the United States, Western Europe, Israel and Turkey.

It should also be understood that China and Russia are (unofficially) allies of Iran, supplying them with advanced military equipment and a sophisticated missile defense system. It is unlikely that China and Russia will take on a passive position if and when the aerial bombardments are carried out.

The new preemptive nuclear doctrine calls for the "integration" of "defensive and offensive" operations. Moreover, the important distinction between "conventional and nuclear" weapons has been blurred..

From a military standpoint, the US and its coalition partners including Israel and Turkey are in "a state of readiness."

Through media disinformation, the objective is to galvanize Western public opinion in support of a US-led war on Iran in retaliation for "Iran's defiance of the international community".

Supported by the Western media, a generalized atmosphere of racism and xenophobia directed against Muslims has unfolded, particularly in Western Europe, which provides a fake legitimacy to the US war agenda. The latter is upheld as a "Just War".

The "Just war" theory serves to camouflage the nature of US war plans, while providing a human face to the invaders.

What can be done?

The antiwar movement is in many regards divided and misinformed on the nature of the US military agenda. Several non-governmental organizations have placed the blame on Iran, for not complying with the "reasonable demands" of the "international community".

These same organizations, which are committed to World Peace tend to downplay the implications of the proposed US bombing of Iran.

To reverse the tide requires a massive campaign of networking and outreach to inform people across the land, nationally and internationally, in neighborhoods, workplaces, parishes, schools, universities, municipalities, on the dangers of a US sponsored war, which contemplates the use of nuclear weapons.

The message should be loud and clear: Iran is not the threat. Even without the use of nukes, the proposed aerial bombardments could result in escalation, ultimately leading us into a broader war in the Middle East.

The corporate media also bears a heavy responsibility for the cover-up of US sponsored war crimes. It must also be forcefully challenged for its biased coverage of the Middle East war.

The Dangers of a Middle East Nuclear War.
New Pentagon Doctrine: Mini-Nukes are "Safe for the Surrounding Civilian Population"

In an utterly twisted logic, the nuclear bunker buster bomb is presented as an instrument of peace-making and regime change, which will enhance global security.

It is intended to curb the dangers of WMD proliferation by "nonstate organizations (terrorist, criminal)" and "rogue states". Pentagon propaganda has carefully distorted the nature of this bomb....

The B61-11 is casually described as causing an underground explosion without threatening "the surrounding civilian population".

According to US. military planners, "potential adversaries" are hiding their WMDs in "fortified bunkers" below more than 100 feet of concrete.

Yet test results indicate that the low yield B61-11 has never penetrated more than 20 feet below the ground (See also The Independent. 23 October 2003) :

If B61-11 were to be launched against Iran, it would result in radioactive contamination over a large part of the Middle East - Central Asian region, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths, including US troops stationed in Iraq:

"The use of any nuclear weapon capable of destroying a buried target that is otherwise immune to conventional attack will necessarily produce enormous numbers of civilian casualties.

No earth-burrowing missile can penetrate deep enough into the earth to contain an explosion with a nuclear yield [of a low yield B61-11] even as small as 1 percent of the 15 kiloton Hiroshima weapon (comm: about the minnukes).

The explosion simply blows out a massive crater of radioactive dirt, which rains down on the local region with an especially intense and deadly fallout." (Low-Yield Earth-Penetrating Nuclear Weapons, by Robert W. Nelson, op cit )

källhänvisningar finns i

As Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer have recently documented, foreign policy in the United States is essentially an extension of the Israeli determination to undermine and balkanize Arab neighbors at any cost, especially if that cost is borne out by benighted American tax-payers propagandized to believe they face a long-term Islamic "fascist" threat.

Kärnkraft och kärnvapen är som siamesiska tvillimgar. Bombmattorna över Irak med utarmat uran från kärnkraftverk har kontaminerat Europa med ökat antal missbildningar som följd Storbritannien. Ingen kommer undan

Uranium bombing in Iraq contaminates Europe
by Bob Nichols march 27, 2006

Nine days after the start of the American president's 2003 "shock and awe" uranium bombing campaign in Baghdad, an invisible radioactive uranium oxide gas cloud swept through Britain's towns and countryside and throughout Europe.

Respected scientists reported on the unrevealed gas cloud after conducting research on specialized high volume air filters in England. Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan stunned Europe in a Sunday Times of London article on Feb. 19, 2006.

Their scientific paper, released March 1st, 2006, [1] proved the event. With all the vigor of delusional drunkards, British nuclear and military spokesmen predictably denied the reality of an invisible radioactive cloud.

The military claimed that a Chernobyl-like event in the area was probably responsible, but no explosive meltdowns of operating reactor cores have been reported or observed in 2006 anywhere in the world.

Evidence of the truth of the gas cloud panicked the military into frantic, irrational, ludicrous denials. The military spin was later refined and the new Chernobyl claim quietly dropped.

In America, lightweight wannabe spin doctor Dan Fahey issued the cover up talking points. [2] The "nuke sycophants" will take up these siren call lies as per instructions.

Bush's radioactive "shock and awe" gas cloud descended on Britain and Europe like a warm, deadly ticking blanket and stayed throughout the American and British shock and awe bombing campaign in 2003.

Bush's radioactive cloud lasted more than five weeks at high radioactive particle concentration levels. There is no gas mask filter fine enough to trap this radioactive gas and protect humans.

At Aldermaston, England, where the data was collected and where the British Atomic Weapons Establishment, complete with air monitoring facilities, is located, the deadly uranium oxide gas measured about 48,000 radioactive particles per square meter.

The average radioactive dose, according to official government index based calculations, was about 23 million radioactive particles for the average adult male in Britain and Europe.

Yes, people breathed this poison gas, absolutely. People throughout England and presumably throughout Europe breathed in large quantities of this radioactive uranium poison gas.

What are the effects of the poison gas cloud?

After a steady decline for 41 years, the infant death rate has started inching up, many researchers think because of the Central Asian nuclear wars. The infant death rate is the most sensitive measure of the health of the human race. Like the proverbial canaries in a coal mine, the tiniest babies die first.

George W. Bush, as the current appointed manager of the senior American political and military establishments, oversees a vast empire that knows exactly what the effect of millions of pounds of deadly weaponized radioactive ceramic uranium oxide gas and tiny aerosols are on the health of people throughout the world. They used uranium munitions in Iraq anyway.

The American political and military leaders wanted to use genocidal weapons. You might even say the U.S. military went out of their way to use these radiation-based genocidal weapons in Iraq. Lots of them, too.

Indeed, the American permanent war establishment has known the effect of poisonous uranium oxide gas since 1943. A declassified World War II memo to Gen. Leslie Groves, director of the ultra-secretive Manhattan Project to make atomic bombs, listed two reasons to use radioactive gas: One was to kill people, and the other was to contaminate their land. [3]

A British newspaper quotes Dr. Busby, a government adviser on radiation, as saying: "This research shows that rather than remaining near the target, as claimed by the military, depleted uranium weapons contaminate both locals and whole populations hundreds to thousands of miles away." [4]

There were and are laws in England that require notification of the government when levels of radioactivity are reached around the nuclear weapons complex at Aldermaston. No notification was made. When the records were requested, the clearly labeled "shock and awe" time frame data was omitted.

The Defense Procurement Agency in Bristol supplied the missing data to scientists Busby and Morgan. The real British patriots are the ones who provided the deleted incriminating data to Busby and Morgan.

Bush and his faithful followers, the neocon fascists, will be remembered as securing their place in history by exposing hundreds of millions of people to high levels of internal radiation poisoning. Make no mistake about it; this is real radioactive uranium gas. The Americans used this genetics changing and killing weapon on men, women and children. It made no difference to the Americans.

The citizen opposition liberal groups in America who only stand on the street corners with signs are misdirecting legitimate citizen outrage and protest. These groups are more than just not effective; they contribute to the protection of the multi-national corporations, senior political and military leaders involved in these pre-planned war crimes.

About ineffective protests, the famous author Ward Churchill says: "No one really cares a whit that a sector of the beneficiary population (American protesters) has chosen to bear a sort of perpetual 'moral witness' to the crimes committed against the Third World.

What they do care about is whether such witnesses translate their 'professions of outrage' into whatever kinds of actions may be necessary to actually put an end to the horror." [14] When will the protesters awaken and take action to put an end to this horror? Never? Sometime? When?

A well planned effort

The American military is nothing if not well planned. When the decision was made to go nuclear in conventional warfare with the promiscuous use of radiation dispersing uranium weapons, including land mines, bullets, shells, missiles and bombs,

The proper and correct Army rules and regulations for radiological clean-up were created as well.

These rules have the force of American law throughout the world. However, the same government that adopted these rules is not following them, even in the United States.

Army Rules and Regulations on Radiation Poisoning unambiguously specify that U.S. troops and local civilians exposed to radiation poisoning will be treated.

Radiation casualties exist, and provisions are made for their care as best as can be done for a non-curable bystander affliction: radiation poisoning. Clean and treat rules also apply; they are just not obeyed.

In short, the regulations say that if the U.S. military is going to use radioactive weapons, then it must clean up the radiological contamination and treat the casualties. It is consistent with the philosophy of some "if you break it, fix it" former U.S. military leaders.

The applicable rules and regulations are a common sense approach and the only responsible radiological warfare position for the only superpower on the planet.

The rules are not followed even in the United States itself [5] but are buried away in their mountains of paperwork. Why has this approach been rejected by the senior U.S. political leadership? http://tinyurl.com/bk2yn

Marion Fulk, a consultant physicist at the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, is one of the original Manhattan Project scientists. When asked if the main purpose for using depleted uranium was for destroying things and killing people, Fulk was more specific: "I would say that it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people." [6]

Dr. Rosalie Bertell, a respected scientist who serves on a variety of Pentagon committees, says about 1.3 billion people have already been killed, maimed or diseased since the nuclear age started. [7] Is this the Pentagon's purpose for using uranium munitions and rejecting the legally mandated task to treat and clean?

Most reasonable people would agree that racking up 1.3 billion people killed or maimed since the beginning of the nuclear age and the American uranium bombing tragedy spreading the gas cloud to Europe and Britain is not the "treat and clean" approach to radioactive warfare set out in the regulations.

On the contrary, the Bush radioactive gas cloud is just the opposite. The plain purpose of exposing hundreds of millions of people would seem to be to kill and sicken more people. As a rare Pentagon admission said, "The properties of uranium do not change."

Famed former Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab scientist Leuren Moret has spoken about the dangers of so-called "depleted uranium" in 42 countries. In "Exotic Weapons," the author, radio and film celebrity states, "Since 1991, the continued U.S. military use of dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets threatens humanity and all living things ... and is turning Planet Earth into a death star." [8] [12]

Massive carpet bombing of whole countries with uranium bombs appears to be the current war fighting plan of the U.S. military. Unfortunately, U.S. troops are the first to be sacrificed on the altar of the neocon warfare plan for total global domination.

As former U.S. Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger said, "Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." [9] American political and military leaders never asked the "pawns" or troops if that was OK.

In the authoritative World Affairs Journal, Moret states: "The Korea Times reported on Dec. 23, 2005, that the U.S. military has 2.7 million depleted uranium bombs [pre-positioned] in South Korea. It is understandable why North Korea wants nuclear weapons." [10]

North Korea is just slightly smaller than the American state of Mississippi. Two million seven hundred uranium bombs is enough to carpet bomb with workhorse Air Force B-52s at the rate of 10 bombs per square mile.

Some researchers believe that grid bombing with uranium bombs was used in the American war in the former Yugoslavia. There is clear circumstantial evidence that carpet bombing with genocidal weapons is the preferred response of the American military to local resistance efforts.

The San Francisco-based humanitarian and war crimes lawyer Karen Parker states unequivocally that the use of depleted uranium in American/U.K. weapons in Iraq, Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia is a war crime. War crimes are punishable by imprisonment or execution, typically by hanging or a firing squad.

America's war criminal class of senior politicians and military leaders has a powerful reason to lie about using genocidal weapons for at least 15 years in Central Asia - their very lives depend on it. In Johnny's Dad's words, the senior leaders are "filthy rotten scum." [16]

Upcoming war crimes trial

The chief Nuremberg war crimes prosecutor speaks knowingly and directly across more than 50 years to resolutely instruct American citizens on exactly what our duty is today, right now: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience … therefore have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring." [11]

The statement was affirmed by the Nuremberg Tribunal and is now international law and, by extension, American law. It is our duty as Americans to prevent crimes against peace and humanity. The fascist administration now controlling America and the U.S. military cannot be allowed to continue these crimes. The world and international law holds us all accountable, and the price is dear.

It is time to impeach and imprison members of our government for their war crimes commensurate with their degree of complicity and guilt. If the House will not impeach and the Senate will not put them on trial; then we, all 300 million Americans, have a problem.

We all are citizens of this country and the world, and, as such, we must acknowledge the incontrovertible evidence of war crimes by the leaders of the American Expeditionary Forces in Iraq with the use of genocidal weapons. Bush and others crossed the line long ago when they lied to get us into the Iraq War.

They continue to lie about the damage being done with uranium weapons. One of the comforts history provides us is a road map out of unthinkable situations, to a more or less tenable, workable future.

The injured and maimed and families of the dead are due treatment and/or compensation, the cleanup must be initiated and whole countries rebuilt. That is the true legacy of the neocons, the new American Nazis.

What people can do

Every single day thousands of American military and government workers handle thousands of "sensitive" papers that "prove" the War Crimes of the American Government's senior political and military leaders.

These thousands of people could, if they wanted to, create havoc in the fascist administration by providing these incriminating papers and the "smoking guns" of innumerable crimes they hold to the public: A "paper blizzard" to teach a whole new generation that what's right is right.

About 40 years ago, it was thousands of pages of the "Pentagon Papers" that did the trick with the illegal Viet Nam War and President Nixon. Thousands more pages are needed now.

The neocon or neolib papers like the disgraced New York Times or the conservative phantom Washington Post no longer will do the right thing. The timid NYT took almost a year to publish the proof of illegal NSA government spying on American citizens.

Bush then bragged about the illegal spying on network prime time television.

We do not need "timid" now. Far less than that forced Nixon to leave the president's office.

Do what you think best


The following documents were consulted in the preparation of this essay.

1. Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan, "Did the use of uranium weapons in Gulf War 2 result in contamination of Europe?" March 1, 2006, "European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics." http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/aldermastonrept.htm

2. Dan Fahey's instructions to his secretary, Jack Cohen, for distribution, du-list@yahoogroups, Feb. 26, 2006, 11:52 p.m.

3. Letter to Congessman McDermott, Attachment 2. Declassified memo to general L.R. Groves, director of the Manhattan Project, Oct. 30, 1943. http://tinyurl.com/93eq9

4. The Sunday Times, Britain, Feb. 19, 2006, "UK radiation jump blamed on Iraq shells," quoting Dr. Chris Busby.

5. Bob Nichols, "Radioactive Tank No. 9 comes limping home," San Francisco Bay View newspaper. http://tinyurl.com/bk2yn

6. Marion Fulk quoted in the San Francisco Bay View newspaper by Leuren Moret in "Depleted uranium: Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets - A death sentence here and abroad," Aug 18, 2004. http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml

7. Rosalie Bertell, Ph.D., "Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War." http://tinyurl.com/gf9dj

8. Leuren Moret, "Planet Earth as a Weapon and Target," World Affairs Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4, Winter 2005. http://tinyurl.com/e6d8v

9. Kissinger's quote regarding military men comes from Chapter 14, which extensively discusses Al Haig, Kissinger and other Nixon staff advisors' negotiations and differences over national security issues during the 1969-1974 period. The exact, direct quote marks begin with the word 'dumb' and terminate after the word 'used.' Source: Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, "The Final Days," second Touchstone paperback edition (1994), chapter 14, pp. 194-195.

10. Leuren Moret.

11. War Crimes Watch, http://tinyurl.com/k6xb3

12. Documentary "Beyond Treason" with Moret, Rokke and Dennis Kyne. http://www.beyondtreason.com/ Documentary "Blowin' in the Wind" with Moret and Rokke. http://www.bsharp.net.au/

13. Dissent Voice, Bob Nichols. "There Are No Words: Radiation in Iraq equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs ...." http://tinyurl.com/yqxoe

14. Ward Churchill, "The Ghosts of 9-1-1: Reflections on History, Justice and Roosting Chickens," Alternative Press Review http://tinyurl.com/fvhzn

15. Army Regulation 700-48 and Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278 can be found easily at the Traprock Peace Site. http://tinyurl.com/erjue and http://tinyurl.com/pzcrm And the regulations themselves, http://tinyurl.com/kl2r2 and http://tinyurl.com/jzha8 Adobe .pdf versions are also available for download from Traprock Peace Center.

16. "Johnny Got a Gun - Protest Song" by Johnny's Dad. Uranium Weapon Anthem. Distribute freely: http://tinyurl.com/k2zze

This author won a prized Project Censored Award for an article on depleted uranium munitions in October 2004. The article was titled "There Are No Words." http://tinyurl.com/yqxoe (headlined in the Bay View "Radiation in Iraq equals 250,000 Nagasaki bombs," http://www.sfbayview.com/041404/radiationiniraq041404.shtml. [13] Turns out that story was but Part One, a thing I never suspected would be so. This article is Part Two and serves as an update for the war fighting activities of the senior American political and military leaders.

Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award Winner. He is a correspondent for the San Francisco Bay View newspaper and a frequent contributor to various on line publications. Nichols is completing a book based on 15 years of nuclear war in Central Asia. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. Nichols can be reached by email. You are encouraged to write bob.bobnichols@gmail.com