Israel Tries to Stop the Shia Crescent

Israel May Be Planning A Nuclear Attack On Syria

https://i2.wp.com/www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/syria.jpg

Surprising Videos:Israel Plans A Nuclear Attack On Syria;Russia Summons The Israeli Ambassador To Moscow For Clarification

We know Syria has decided to fight it out with Israel despite the 2013 nuclear attack the world continues to deny. We know Israel who admits to giving medical treatment to ISIS has been moving jihadists through Jordan for years, arming and training ISIS and supplies its intelligence, communications and even air support. Denying this is insanity.Everyone knows Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States finance ISIS, recruit for them, arm them and keep other nations from effectively opposing them.
Those other nations include not just the United States but perhaps Russia as well. Israel is terrified of ISIS being defeated. This means Hezbollah returns to Lebanon, victorious in war and able to stand up to the Israeli onslaughts that are staged whenever Israel’s internal politics demand a whipping boy outside the country.Bombing Palestinians and whipping up hatred at home against them and the the few remaining Christians inside Greater Israel and the Occupied Territories is a useful narrative that Saudi Arabia, in particular, has played a part in all along.When did the Saudi/Israeli alliance begin? Some believe long before the 1973 war and the oil embargo against the United States. The Saudi’s have been playing a double game that long. Yesterday’s Israeli bombing attacks aimed at the Syrian Arab Army and its Russian advisers at Palmyra, a battlefield with no Hezbollah forces whatsoever, has to be “enough” for Russia.
Back on May 2, 2013, SyriaNews reported an Israeli submarine sunk off the coast of Latakia. Their mission was to pick up IDF commandos tasked with planting communications relays to support a false narrative that the Syrian Army was using sarin gas, in order to force the United States into war.
Two days later, Israel staged a bombing attack outside Damascus using a tactical nuclear weapon, and this is not conjecture. It is time the world community and Russia began dealing with this and the likelihood that Israel is going to do the same thing again, against Syria, against Lebanon and do it with full complicity of Donald Trump.
Nuclear Attack
VT submitted the video above to inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency and University of California at Los Alamos. They confirmed that the presence of ball lightning is an indicator of a nuclear weapon, nothing else can cause this, though there were many other observable factors that made this a nuclear explosion as well.
If you think Syria was Israel’s only nuclear target, watch the video below. This attack was confirmed by the IAEA as well who observed the video and found “slam dunk” proof of a tactical nuclear weapon strike. Attempts were made, unsuccessfully, by the IAEA to get soil samples, needed within 72 hours, from the site but their inspectors were blocked by Saudi Arabia.
Those other nations include not just the United States but perhaps Russia as well. Israel is terrified of ISIS being defeated. This means Hezbollah returns to Lebanon, victorious in war and able to stand up to the Israeli onslaughts that are staged whenever Israel’s internal politics demand a whipping boy outside the country.
Bombing Palestinians and whipping up hatred at home against them and the the few remaining Christians inside Greater Israel and the Occupied Territories is a useful narrative that Saudi Arabia, in particular, has played a part in all along.
When did the Saudi/Israeli alliance begin? Some believe long before the 1973 war and the oil embargo against the United States. The Saudi’s have been playing a double game that long.
Yesterday’s Israeli bombing attacks aimed at the Syrian Arab Army and its Russian advisers at Palmyra, a battlefield with no Hezbollah forces whatsoever, has to be “enough” for Russia.
Back on May 2, 2013, SyriaNews reported an Israeli submarine sunk off the coast of Latakia. Their mission was to pick up IDF commandos tasked with planting communications relays to support a false narrative that the Syrian Army was using sarin gas, in order to force the United States into war.
Two days later, Israel staged a bombing attack outside Damascus using a tactical nuclear weapon, and this is not conjecture. It is time the world community and Russia began dealing with this and the likelihood that Israel is going to do the same thing again, against Syria, against Lebanon and do it with full complicity of Donald Trump.
Nuclear Attack
VT submitted the video above to inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency and University of California at Los Alamos. They confirmed that the presence of ball lightning is an indicator of a nuclear weapon, nothing else can cause this, though there were many other observable factors that made this a nuclear explosion as well.
If you think Syria was Israel’s only nuclear target, watch the video below. This attack was confirmed by the IAEA as well who observed the video and found “slam dunk” proof of a tactical nuclear weapon strike. Attempts were made, unsuccessfully, by the IAEA to get soil samples, needed within 72 hours, from the site but their inspectors were blocked by Saudi Arabia.

India And Gandhi Nearly Started A Nuclear War

  

Indira Gandhi Had Reckoned To Attack Pakistan Nuclear Facilities: CIA

The move was being made when the US was in an advanced stage of providing F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan, says the Central Intelligence Agency document. The document was titled ‘India’s Reaction to Nuclear Developments in Pakistan’.

BY TEHELKA WEB DESK

In 1980, former PM Indira Gandhi had reckoned a military strike on nuclear installations in Pakistan to make it incapable of acquiring weapons capabilities, claimed a declassified CIA document.
The move was being made when the US was in an advanced stage of providing F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan, says the Central Intelligence Agency document. The document was titled ‘India’s Reaction to Nuclear Developments in Pakistan’. ‘

A revised version of the 12-page document was posted on the CIA website in June 2015. As per the document, India, in 1981, was concerned about the progress made by Pakistan on its nuclear weapons programme, and believed that it was steps away from acquiring nuclear capability. The US had made a similar assessment.

“If Indian concerns increase over the next few months, we believe the conditions could ripen for a military confrontation between India and Pakistan thereby providing a framework for destroying the latter’s nuclear facilities. But India had not taken such a decision so far. Since Pakistan was in an advanced stage of producing plutonium and uranium, Indira Gandhi responded to the threat by authorising Indian nuclear test preparations,” added the report.

In February 1981, excavations began in the Thar desert to permit an underground explosion of an Indian test device,” the CIA said. In May, preparations were completed by India for a 40-kiloton nuclear test.

“Our best estimate, however, is that India will follow a wait and see strategy,” said the CIA report. According to it, a vital factor in estimating what Indira Gandhi would do was her attitude toward exercising India’s own nuclear weapons option.

“If the Indians were opposed to developing their own nuclear weapons, they probably would try to destroy Pakistan’s nuclear facilities before a significant stockpile of nuclear material could be produced,” the report said.

“If the Indians decide to set up their own nuclear capability against China, destroying Pakistan’s nuclear facilities would be not attractive . From the Indian perspective, it would have the serious drawback of inviting Chinese intervention,” felt the CIA.

“We have noted that Indira Gandhi has some interest in this viewpoint. But we don’t know whether she favours that course and haven’t observed any activity by the Indian military that would suggest authorisation for a nuclear weapons programme,” said the CIA document.

India And Pakistan Exchange Nuclear Facility “Ghost” Lists

List of nuclear facilities exchanged between India and Pakistan
Pakistan India Nuclear Facilities
— By AGENCIES | Jan 01, 2015 02:25 pm

New Delhi : The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) on Thursday in a statement said that India and Pakistan exchanged the list of their nuclear installations and facilities.

This annual exercise carried out between the two countries is covered under a bilateral agreement that bars them from attacking each other’s nuclear facilities.

This is the twenty fourth consecutive exchange of such list taking place between the two countries, the first one having taken place on January 1, 1992.

The agreement, which was signed on 31 December 1988 and entered into force on January 27, 1991 provides, inter alia, that the two countries inform each other of nuclear installations and facilities to be covered under the Agreement on the first of January of every calendar year.

The two countries also exchanged, through diplomatic channels simultaneously at their respective capital, the list of nationals of each country lodged in the jails of the other country.

The agreement which was signed on 31st May 2008 provides for a comprehensive exchange of list of nationals of each country lodged in other country’s jails twice a year on 1st of January and 1st of July.
– See more at: http://freepressjournal.in/list-of-nuclear-facilities-exchanged-between-india-and-pakistan/#sthash.xSPAWCKo.dpuf

The Iranian Horn Obviously Has A Lot To Hide

Iran defends refusal to let in UN nuclear expert

Obama and Khamenei

VIENNA: Iran has dismissed criticism by the International Atomic Energy Agency of its refusal to let one IAEA expert into the country as part of a team investigating allegations of nuclear weapons research.

Tehran said it had a sovereign right to decide who to let onto its territory. But its failure to issue a visa to an IAEA official, that diplomatic sources said was probably a Western atomic bomb expert, may add to longstanding Western suspicions it is stonewalling the U.N. agency’s inquiry.

The IAEA said last month that Iran had not issued a visa for one member of a team that visited Tehran on Aug. 31 to try to advance the investigation into what the U.N. agency calls the possible military dimensions of the country’s nuclear programme.

It was the third time the person, whom it did not identify, had not obtained an entry permit.

It is important, the IAEA added in a Sept. 5 report on Iran’s nuclear programme, that “any staff member identified by the agency with the requisite expertise is able to participate in the agency’s technical activities”.

But, in a statement distributed to IAEA member states this week, Iran said that issuing visas was “our sovereign national right and we will issue it when we deem it appropriate”.

The IAEA has for years been trying to investigate allegations that Iran has worked on designing a nuclear bomb.

Iran says its nuclear work is a peaceful, but suspicions in the West that the civil nuclear programme is a front for weapons development have led to punishing economic sanctions, which Tehran hopes will be lifted if ongoing negotiations with world powers succeed in ending the standoff.

IAEA member states have the right to deny access to individual inspectors proposed by the U.N. agency, and Iran has for several years blocked staff from some Western nations, including the United States, to check its nuclear sites.

A separate, high-level IAEA team in charge of the Iran inquiry – which at least on some occasions has included officials from France, the United States and Britain – has held several meetings in Tehran since early 2012, including one this week.

NUCLEAR “AMBIGUITIES”

Western officials say Iran needs to cooperate with the IAEA probe if it wants to reach a diplomatic deal with world powers.

Last month’s IAEA report said Iran had failed to answer questions about possibly military dimensions of its nuclear programme by an agreed Aug. 25 deadline, in a possible setback for the broader diplomacy between Iran and the United States, France, Germany, Britain, China and Russia.

Iran rejects the accusations as baseless. But it has promised, since Hassan Rouhani, seen as a pragmatist, became president last year on a platform to end its international isolation, to work with the IAEA to clear up the suspicions.

“We continue to cooperate with the IAEA on some of the ambiguities in order to clarify and resolve them,” said the Iranian communique to IAEA member countries, which was dated Sept. 19 but only posted on the IAEA’s website this week.

While the powers seek to limit the size of Iran’s future nuclear programme – and thereby extend the time it would need for any bid to amass fissile material for a weapon – the IAEA is investigating alleged research and experiments in the past that could be used to make the bomb itself.

Israel Nuclear Program Backfires On Iranian Negotiations

Nuclear standoff between the Arab League and the west

Israel's Dimona Nuclear Reactor

Israel’s Dimona Nuclear Reactor

Negev Nuclear Research Center at Dimona, Israel, photographed in 1968 by American reconnaissance satellite. US Government/Wikimedia Commons. Public domain.

On 16 June the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna circulated a request backed by 18 members of the Arab League calling on Israel to place its nuclear facilities under the IAEA’s inspection regime and to formally commit to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

This Arab resolution, which has been something of a hardy annual for decades now, will also be supported by almost all Muslim states, many non-aligned states, and others. Although the IAEA cannot require Israel to join the NPT, its members can apply enormous political pressure on Israel through the IAEA’s premier decision-making body.

In the meantime the Arab League Secretary General has “urgently” contacted all IAEA states, formally requesting them to support the Arab initiative.  The IAEA General Conference will open on 22 September.

Arab League, a historical commitment

All Middle Eastern states other than Israel have already joined the NPT. None of these states possesses nuclear weapons, while Israel is generally agreed to possess between 100 and 200 state-of-the-art nuclear warheads fitted to long-range ballistic missiles, and a handful of submarines armed with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, as well as nuclear-capable strike aircraft and powerful conventional armed forces.

If or when Israel eventually decides to accede to the NPT, it will be required to declare all nuclear weapons, to open them up to international inspection and eventually to destroy them.

It should be noted at this point that France, Norway, the UK, and the US all helped Israel to develop its clandestine nuclear program, at different times, under different governments. When the NPT entered into force in 1970, France, the UK, and the US knew that Israel already possessed at least one nuclear weapon. They did not request Israel to ratify the treaty, and have publicly covered for its expanding nuclear arsenal ever since. The treaty’s non-proliferation regime was accordingly still-born.

Bad faith and the regional WMD-free zone

Until the present day the west has paid lip service to the notion of a nuclear-free Middle East, while consistently turning a blind eye to Israel’s burgeoning nuclear capability.

Arab and Muslim states, often supported by members of the non-aligned movement, have long lobbied through international forums for the adoption of resolutions supporting a WMD-free Middle East. These initiatives were normally thwarted by the US and the west.

The US and Israel have so far ensured that only they may threaten the Middle East with the possible use of nuclear weapons.  They want it to stay that way.

Arab anger boils over

Arab frustration over western stonewalling of a regional nuclear weapons-free zone boiled over at the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference, when the west desperately wanted the NPT to be extended indefinitely.  If it had not been extended, governments worldwide could have participated in a nuclear lolly-scramble. A powerful coalition of Arab, Muslim and other states dug in and refused to back the treaty’s extension unless the west agreed to prioritise the creation of a WMD-free zone in the Middle East.

Sadly, Arab states and others then accepted wishy-washy undertakings dangled before them by the west. As soon as the indefinite extension of the NPT had been formally adopted, the west drove a horse and carriage through negotiated loopholes, and ceased to view a regional nuclear weapons-free zone as an ongoing commitment of high priority.

Israel’s formidable nuclear capability, coupled with the massive US military presence in the region, means that the US and Israel have overwhelming military superiority.  Ironically, decisions by all Arab governments to renounce the possession of nuclear weapons also played into the hands of the west and Israel, further strengthening their hand.

The US and Sunni states rethink their position on Iran

In 2011 and 2012 some leading Sunni Arab states were influenced by western-inspired concerns about the peaceful nature of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program to suspend their support within the IAEA for a regional nuclear weapons-free zone.

They were also persuaded that, if they backed such a resolution, Israel would boycott international consultations on the subject.  However, Israel has, unsurprisingly, refused to commit seriously to any diplomatic process that could lead to the destruction of its nuclear arsenal.

And in the meantime the west is suddenly singing from a different hymn book where Iran’s nuclear program is concerned. Although the five permanent members of the UN Security Council are divided over almost everything else, they are united in their resolve to pull off a nuclear deal with Iran.  No one really wants a war to end all wars in an already perilously unstable region of great strategic importance.  Moreover, Obama is craving a foreign policy legacy to match that of Nixon in China.

The startling speed with which the Middle East has recently descended into turbulence and fragmentation has encouraged Iran’s regional adversaries to accept that, whether they like it or not, they have to collaborate actively with Iran on core issues such as Iraq, the Islamic State, and a regional nuclear weapons-free zone.

These considerations, coupled with the balkanization of Syria and Iraq and the freeze in Israel-US relations following Israel’s barbaric bombardment of Gaza, have prompted the Arab League to seize this opportunity to push energetically for an IAEA affirmation of a regional WMD-free zone just one year before the impending 2015 NPT Review Conference, at which this will undoubtedly be the key issue.

If the IAEA adopts the Arab League resolution in September, this will have far-reaching consequences for the outcome of the 2015 review conference.

Probable linkage between IAEA votes and seats on the UN Security Council

Three members of the IAEA – New Zealand, Spain, and Turkey – are currently locked in a hard-fought battle for two seats on the UN Security Council.  Spain is regarded as being a certainty for one of the two seats, with New Zealand and Turkey fighting it out for the remaining second seat.

In October the UN General Assembly will vote to decide which two of these three states is deemed most suitable to represent world opinion. New Zealand is widely perceived as another follower of the US in the Asia/Pacific region, although its profile is lower than that of the current hard-right Australian government, which already has a seat on the security council. New Zealand is also generally identified with the policies of the west worldwide. In the context of the UN General Assembly this is not necessarily advantageous.

Just one year ago Turkey would have had the upper hand where New Zealand is concerned. But its recent inglorious record in brutally putting down domestic opposition has seriously dented its standing on the international stage. New Zealand is undoubtedly trying to capitalize on this.

Given the key role to be played in the IAEA vote by the Arab League, Muslim states, and the non-aligned movement – key constituencies of opinion within the UN General Assembly – the way in which the three contenders vote on the highly contentious question of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East could well predetermine the outcome of their battle for places on the UN Security Council.