On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:13:34 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:
Are any of you onto this breaking story?
The Times of London is generally accepted as a credible
source:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...le3137695.ece?
For a video, see this less credible source:
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12166
For more info, see:
http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff01072008.html
it suggests that living in one
of the 4 or 5 largest U.S. cities is a bit less safe than
one might suppose.
Metalworking content: Nuke building
Gunner
====================
While if true (as it appears to be) this is indeed a major
concern, however the more immediate, and therefore more dangerous
situation, is the administration's attempt to generate a "Son of
Tonkin" or "Tonkin II" situation and panic congress into passing
a resolution to justify a pre-emptive war with Iran.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080108/...7kZf3rH2Cs0NUE
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...tory?track=rss
This became necessary when our "spooks" leaked the NIE indicating
that Iran had stopped nuclear military work shortly after the end
of the Iran/Iraq war, because it became evident that the "raw"
intelligence data was again being "cherry-picked," and that the
intelligence services were again being setup to be the fall-guy.
For actual NIE text see
http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf
Other news that may be impacting events in the area include
http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/men...6820152845.htm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20080104/cm_csm/ylynch_1
On the other hand this claim of massive espionage may be another
diversionary "Reichstag fire" to panic the people and
additionally slander the functionaries/bureaucrats in the
permanent government as "pay-back" for leaking the NIE, and
stopping a war they had their hearts set on, but which would have
been [and will be] a disaster for the people and government of
the United States [It won't do much for the Iranians either…]
-- Change of topic here --
Politically I am somewhat to the right of Attila the Hun, but the
IMT [International Military Tribunal / Nuremberg] is unequivocal
on the following points.
http://www.lib.uconn.edu/online/rese...ound/index.htm
snip
On 8 August 1945, the charter of the International Military
Tribunal declared that aggressive war was an international crime
and an International Military Tribunal was established in
Nuremberg, Germany to try the remaining major German leaders for
their actions both before and during World War II. Nuremberg was
the city where Hitler had proclaimed his racial laws in 1935.
Judges from the United States, Great Britain, France, and the
Soviet Union, as well as four alternates were assigned the
jurisdiction to try high ranking Nazis deemed personally
responsible for the specific charges. This would be the first
time that an international court would hold a government
responsible for its treatment of both its own citizens and
citizens of other countries during war time.
"The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so
calculated, so malignant and so devastating that civilization
cannot tolerate their being ignored because it cannot survive
their being repeated." [Justice Robert Jackson, opening
statement People vs. Nazism]
The specific charges that were brought against twenty-three
individuals included crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes
against humanity. ==Crimes against peace were defined as the
planning, preparation, initiation, and waging of a war of
aggression.== [emphasis added] War crimes were defined as the
violations of the laws or customs of war including the murder,
ill treatment and deportation to slave labor of civilian
populations and the murder and ill treatment of prisoners of war.
Crimes against humanity were defined as the murder,
extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane
treatment of civilians before and during the war. This also
included the persecution of individuals on political, racial or
religious grounds.
snip
----------
In addition, by its documented actions, the Bush administration
is in direct and flagrant violation of several articles of the UN
charter/treaty, which has the force of law, and "trumps" the US
Constitution [which is one of the main danger of treaties].
http://www.cdi.org/news/law/preemptive-war.cfm
Notes for Cliff:
It is both useless and counter-productive to demonize
Bush/Chaney. By themselves they could do little or nothing. The
problem is the system/organization that allows, indeed promotes,
these sorts of activities, and introduces "positive feed-back"
where "reality" is made to conform to the biases,
pre-conceptions, and assumptions of the leaders. This is
dangerous in business and catastrophic in government, as sooner
or later "reality" always wins.
The combination of a "duty to act" with the "power to act"
defines accountability. By their failure to exercise the
fundamental Constitutional "power of the purse," and their
continual evasion of the Congressional responsibility to "Declare
War" [Artice I section 8] Reid/Pelosi and the Democrats are as
guilty as Bush/Chaney and the Republicans, under the legal
doctrine of "aiding and abetting."
To his credit John McCain introduced twin resolutions that would
have forced Congress to take a firm position either for or
against war with Iraq, but was shouted down by the gas-bags,
no-loads and dick-weeds. Unfortunately, he has not followed
through on his initial skepticism.