noworldsystem.com


Saddam’s Nuke Salesman Was Protected By U.S. Government

Saddam’s Nuke Salesman Was Protected By U.S. Government

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
March 10, 2010

The Washington Post has completely whitewashed new revelations concerning how close Saddam Hussein came to obtaining a nuclear bomb by failing to mention the fact that the provider, Khan Research Laboratories, was shielded from investigation by the U.S. government for decades.

“As troops massed on his border near the start of the Persian Gulf War, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein weighed the purchase of a $150 million nuclear “package” deal that included not only weapons designs but also production plants and foreign experts to supervise the building of a nuclear bomb, according to documents uncovered by a former U.N. weapons inspector,” reports the Post today.

“The offer, made in 1990 by an agent linked to disgraced Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, guaranteed Iraq a weapons-assembly line capable of producing nuclear warheads in as little as three years.”

However, the report completely fails to even mention the fact that Khan Research Laboratories, the source from which Saddam would have procured a nuclear bomb, was protected from investigation by the U.S. government since at least the mid-1970’s, as investigative journalist Greg Palast exposed in a 2001 BBC report.

In 2004, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan’s atom bomb program, admitted sharing nuclear technology via a worldwide smuggling network that included facilities in Malaysia that manufactured key parts for centrifuges.

Khan’s collaborator B.S.A. Tahir ran a front company out of Dubai that shipped centrifuge components to North Korea.

Despite Dutch authorities being deeply suspicious of Khan’s activities as far back as 1975, the CIA prevented them from arresting him on two occasions.

“The man was followed for almost ten years and obviously he was a serious problem. But again I was told that the secret services could handle it more effectively,” former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers said. “The Hague did not have the final say in the matter. Washington did.”

Lubbers stated that Khan was allowed to slip in and out of the Netherlands with the blessing of the CIA, eventually allowing him to become the “primary salesman of an extensive international network for the proliferation of nuclear technology and know-how,” according to George W. Bush himself, and sell nuclear secrets that allowed North Korea to build nuclear bombs.

“Lubbers suspects that Washington allowed Khan’s activities because Pakistan was a key ally in the fight against the Soviets,” reports CFP. “At the time, the US government funded and armed mujahideen such as Osama bin Laden. They were trained by Pakistani intelligence to fight Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Anwar Iqbal, Washington correspondent for the Pakistani newspaper Dawn, told ISN Security Watch that Lubbers’ assertions may be correct. “This was part of a long-term foolish strategy. The US knew Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons but couldn’t care less because it was not going to be used against them. It was a deterrent against India and possibly the Soviets.”

In September 2005 it emerged that the Amsterdam court which sentenced Khan to four years imprisonment in 1983 had lost the legal files pertaining to the case. The court’s vice-president, Judge Anita Leeser, accused the CIA of stealing the files. “Something is not right, we just don’t lose things like that,” she told Dutch news show NOVA. “I find it bewildering that people lose files with a political goal, especially if it is on request of the CIA. It is unheard of.”

In 2005, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf acknowledged that Khan had provided centrifuges and their designs to North Korea.

Having armed once branch of the “axis of evil,” it’s no surprise that Khan was also used in an attempt to arm Saddam Hussein with nuclear weapons, opening up another perfect justification for Iraq to subsequently be invaded and occupied by U.S. forces.

Although the 2003 invasion was sold on the lie that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction which proved to be non-existent, it wasn’t for the want of trying, since efforts to arm Saddam with nuclear weapons via the Khan network were a mere continuation of the U.S. government’s program to provide Saddam with chemical and biological weapons, tools used to commit atrocities that were later cited by the U.S. as one of the primary reasons for the attack.

Of course, since the Washington Post is a mouthpiece for the new world order and the Bilderberg Group that owns it, in covering the Khan-Saddam connection writer Joby Warrick knows that his bosses wouldn’t be pleased if he actually gave you more than half the story, which is why his article amounts to nothing more than a misleading whitewash.

 



China Will Soon Have Power to Shut Lights Off Britain

China Will Soon Have Power to Shut Lights Off Britain

UK Telegraph
January 4, 2010

The year is 2050, and a diplomatic dispute between China and Britain risks escalating into all-out war. But rather than launching a barrage of ballistic missiles and jet fighters to destroy key British targets, Beijing has a far simpler plan for defeating its enemy. It simply turns off the lights.

At the flick of a switch elite teams of Chinese hackers attached to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) launch a hi-tech assault on Britain’s computer systems, with devastating consequences. Within minutes the country’s power stations, water companies, air traffic control, government and financial systems are totally shut down.

Britain’s attempt to respond by launching nuclear-armed Trident missiles at China has to be abandoned, as the computer systems that control the weapons system are no longer functioning.

At a time when relations between China and Britain are supposed to be improving, the prospect of Beijing launching a cyber attack against Britain and its allies might seem to be the stuff of fantasy.

After all, it is only two years since Gordon Brown made a highly successful visit to Beijing where the two countries agreed to increase trade by 50 per cent by this year, and to cooperate on a range of issues, such as global warming. As one of the world’s leading economic powers, China’s role on the world stage has transformed dramatically over the past decade, with the huge wealth that Beijing has accumulated from its impressive economic growth playing a key role in supporting the global economy.

As a consequence Western policymakers have intensified their efforts to persuade China to draw on its economic prosperity and play a constructive role in world affairs, such as persuading North Korea and Iran to give up their controversial nuclear weapons programmes.

But last week Mr Brown came up against an altogether different kind of China, one that appears to have no interest in behaving like a proper ally.

For weeks British ministers and officials tried desperately to persuade their Chinese counterparts to commute the death sentence passed on Akmal Shaikh, a mentally ill 53-year-old minicab driver from North London who was convicted of smuggling four kilos of heroin into China two years ago.

Mr Brown is said to have personally raised Shaikh’s case with the Chinese premier, Wen Jiaboa, when they met at last month’s climate change summit in Copenhagen, and David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, made similar entreaties to the Chinese embassy in London.

But for all the talk of improved bilateral ties between the two countries, the Chinese took absolutely no notice. At 10.30am on Tuesday, Shaikh was put to death by lethal injection in the remote province of Urumqi, and his body disposed of in an unmarked grave. And when Messrs Brown and Miliband sought to remonstrate with the Chinese authorities for pressing ahead with Shaikh’s execution, all they received from Beijing in response was a firm admonition not to interfere in China’s internal affairs.

At a stroke the cold reality of China’s attitude to the outside world was laid bare for all to see. Rather than being a partner that can be trusted to work with the West on issues of mutual concern, the Chinese have demonstrated that their default position is that Beijing’s only real priority it to look after its own interests, whether it is enforcing its zero tolerance policy on drug abuse or refusing to cooperate with global efforts to reduce carbon emissions.

China’s self-centred approach to international affairs should come as no surprise to the British government. American President Barack Obama was similarly rebuffed during his state visit to Beijing last November. Mr Obama arrived in China hoping to get Chinese cooperation on a range of issues, such as North Korea, financial stability and human rights. But despite being given a warm reception in public by Chinese officials, including a private guided tour of the Great Wall, the American president left Beijing without gaining any concessions from China on any major issue.

Much of China’s reluctance to engage constructively with the West on issues of mutual concern dates back to the psychological trauma the country suffered during the Opium Wars of the nineteenth century, when British gunboats routinely humiliated the Chinese government of the day. The deep feelings of resentment most Chinese feel for the humiliation they suffered continues to this day, and was even reflected in the official statement issued by the Chinese Embassy in London following Shaikh’s execution. It said the “strong resentment” felt by the Chinese public to drug traffickers was based “on the bitter memory of history”.

To ensure that there is no repeat of a time when foreign powers could push the Chinese people around with impunity, Beijing is today investing enormous effort into developing technology that would render the West’s superior military firepower useless.

There have already been well-documented instances in recent years where Chinese hackers have successfully launched cyber attacks against key Western targets, including the Pentagon and Whitehall. In 2006 Chinese computer hackers were accused of shutting down the House of Commons computer network by flooding it with bogus emails, and the Foreign Office and other key government departments have accused rogue Chinese computer experts of trying to hack in their systems.

In America Chinese hackers are reported to have attempted up to 100,000 attacks on government computers each year, and have successfully penetrated the computer systems of some of the American military’s elite units, such as US Army’s 101st and 82nd Airborne Divisions.

But now Western security experts believe Beijing has authorised PLA commanders to draw up a cyber wars blueprint that would give them the capability to neutralise the West’s military firepower by 2050.

The Pentagon recently reported that two highly accomplished Chinese computer hackers had been recruited by the PLA to draft a detailed plan that would enable China to disable the United States’ entire aircraft carrier battle fleet, simply by launching a pre-emptive cyber attack.

This blueprint is now seen as being part of an aggressive push by Beijing to achieve “electronic dominance” over each of its global rivals by 2050, with the US, Britain, South Korea and Russia the main targets. To ensure they recruit the best hackers available it was recently reported that senior PLA officers were holding computer hacking competitions throughout the country, and recruiting the winners to their burgeoning cyber army.

“The Chinese realise that, if it came to a conventional military conflict with the West, they would struggle to compete with the West’s superior military firepower,” said a Western security source. “But by concentrating their efforts on cyber wars they believe they can develop a cheap and highly effective method of achieving technical supremacy over the West.”

The government is now so concerned about the threat posed by China’s cyber warriors that it has established a Cyber Security Operations Centre at the GCHQ listening centre in Cheltenham. Lord West, Mr Brown’s security adviser, said that Britain was developing the capability to strike back against Chinese hackers by recruiting former British hackers to GCHQ.

“You need youngsters who are deep into this stuff,” Lord West explained last year. “If they have been slightly naughty boys, very often they enjoy stopping other naughty boys.”

And he warned that any future war between world powers was more likely to be fought over the Internet than on the battlefield. “As their ability to use the web and the net grows, there will be more opportunity for these attacks,” he said.

 



Obama Asks McCain to Join Forces Against Iran

Obama goes over the top in bashing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Salon
September 24, 2008

Sen. Barack Obama responded with outrage to the remarks made Tuesday by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad before the United Nations General Assembly, expressing regret that the quirky little president was even allowed to speak. Obama’s denunciation was mild compared with that of Gov. Sarah Palin, who accused Ahmadinejad of dreaming “of being an agent in a ’Final Solution’ — the elimination of the Jewish people.” In contrast, “Larry King Live” carried an hourlong interview with Ahmadinejad in which the Iranian was allowed to speak for himself and repeatedly denied any violent intentions. King thus reinforced the trend whereby entertainment television, whether Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” or King’s own dog-and-pony interview hour, conveys reality-based news while politicians continue to paint inaccurate and even fantastic scenarios that are harmful to U.S. foreign policy.

In his speech, Ahmadinejad said “the American empire … is reaching the end of the road” and accused the U.N. Security Council of allowing “Zionist murders” because of “pressure from a few bullying powers.” Obama issued a statement saying, “I strongly condemn President Ahmadinejad’s outrageous remarks at the United Nations, and am disappointed that he had a platform to air his hateful and anti-Semitic views.” He added, “The threat from Iran’s nuclear program is grave.” Obama then called on his rival in the presidential race, Sen. John McCain, “to join me in supporting a bipartisan bill to increase pressure on the Iranian regime by allowing states and private companies to divest from companies doing business in Iran.” He slammed McCain, saying that the senator was playing partisan politics by declining to join Obama in this divestment campaign.

In the heat of the campaign, Obama surely overreached himself in appearing to advocate barring leaders of member states from addressing the United Nations because their views are obnoxious to Americans. He also fell into the trap of declining to make a distinction between anti-Zionist views and anti-Semitic ones. If a policy of exclusion had been adopted by past administrations, Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev could not have announced from that podium the reduction of Red Army forces in Eastern Europe in 1988. And if anti-American statements should trigger the denial of a visa to come to New York, should Nelson Mandela, who called the United States the “most dangerous country in the world,” be excluded, too?

Read Full Article Here

 

Bush lashes Syria, Iran as terrorism sponsors

AFP
September 24, 2008

US President George W. Bush accused Syria and Iran Tuesday of sponsoring terrorism and said that such violence “has no place in the modern world” in his farewell speech to the UN General Assembly.

“A few nations — regimes like Syria and Iran — continue to sponsor terror, yet their numbers are growing fewer and they’re growing more isolated from the world,” he said.

“Like slavery and piracy, terrorism has no place in the modern world,” said Bush.

The outgoing US leader told the UN General Assembly that it must also enforce sanctions against North Korea and Iran over their nuclear programs.

Bush said UN members must uphold resolutions “enforcing sanctions against North Korea and Iran” and stressed “we must not relent until our people our safe from this threat to civilization.”

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/25/iran.israelandthepalestinians1

Kissinger Backs Direct Talks ’Without Conditions’ with Iran
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/kissinger-backs.html

House Dems Shelve Iran ‘Naval Blockade’ Bill for Now
http://news.antiwar.com/2008/..-shelve-iran-naval-blockade-bill/

’Israel can’t destroy Iran N-facilities’
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=70331&sectionid=351020104

Ahmadinejad warns Iran will ‘break hands’ of invaders
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/080921144553.ikvdjmkm.html

Bush: The Iranians Are Assholes
http://noworldsystem.com/2008/09/22..80%98assholes%E2%80%99/

Coup on Iran & False Flag News Archive

 



Kim Jong Il: dead, alive or using a body double?

Kim Jong Il: dead, alive or using a body double?

Russia Today
September 9, 2008

The health of North Korea’s dictator, Kim Jong Il, has come under the spotlight, just as his country celebrates 60 years since its foundation. The leader did not attend a military parade dedicated to the state holiday. The 66-year-old has not appeared in public for more than three weeks, leading to various rumours emerging. A Tokyo professor even claims Kim died five years ago.

Western media claim that he is ill, while a local newspaper in the South Korean capital Seoul reported Tuesday that Kim collapsed last month.

It is not known how serious the condition of the North Korean leader. According to South Korean diplomats based in North Korea’s capital Pyongyang, Kim lost consciousness on August 22. After that a group of five Chinese doctors traveled to Pyongyang and is now taking care of him. South Korean officials also say the 66-year-old leader suffers from obesity, diabetes and a number of other diseases.

South Korean media, though, doubts the North Korean leader sought medical help from China as before they mainly looked to Germany, France and Russia.

At the same time, Seoul intelligence data claims the North Korean leader has health problems but is still capable of fulfilling his duties.

A new book by Toshimitsu Shigemura, a professor at Japan’s Waseda University, recently added fuel to the long-lasting speculation. In “The true Character of Kim Jong Il” Shigemura claims Kim Jong Il died in the autumn of 2003. Shigemura believes this happened within 42 days after September 10 when the North Korean leader was last seen in public.

In the years that preceded his “death” Kim undertook some big moves influencing the country’s relationship with the outside world. These include the June 2000 summit with South Korean President Kim Dae Jung, a visit from Russian leader Vladimir Putin the following month and then U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in October 2000. August 2003 saw the opening of six-way talks on halting North Korea’s nuclear weapons programmes.

According to the professor, a group of senior officials took power in their hands willing to protect their positions. The role of “Kim Jong Il” went to several of his doubles controlled by one of the “puppet-masters”.

There has been no reaction from official Pyongyang but the association of Korean residents of Japan strongly denied the claim.

 



Taxpayers To Pay For Mortgage Company Bailout

Top Investor: Fannie/Freddie Bailout Serves “Bunch Of Crooks And Incompetents”
Rogers says move indicates U.S. is “more Communist than China”

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
September 8, 2008

A leading investor has denounced the government seizure of two of the nation’s largest financial companies as “madness” and says the move will only serve to make the markets more volatile and see house prices continue to go down.

In an interview with CNBC Jim Rogers, CEO of Rogers Holdings, described the move by the Treasury to nationalize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as “insanity”.

The Treasury has pledged to provide as much as $200 billion to the companies, replace their chief executives and place them under a conservatorship, giving management control to their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or FHFA.

“This is madness, this is insanity,” Rogers said, “they have more than doubled the American national debt in one weekend for a bunch of crooks and incompetents. I’m not quite sure why I or anybody else should be paying for this.”

“America is more communist than China is right now,” Rogers declared. “You can see that this is welfare of the rich, it is socialism for the rich… it’s just bailing out financial institutions,” he added.

Rogers and other critics alike are concerned that American taxpayers, already facing the worst housing bust since the 1930s, will now be saddled with billions of dollars in losses from home loans made by the private sector, radically changing the nature of the crisis. Government officials have justified the move by stating that that the cost of doing nothing would be far greater.

“You’re certainly gonna see a huge jump in any financial institutions which owned a lot of Fannie or Freddie… because they don’t have to worry about going bankrupt all of a sudden,” Rogers said.

“Bank stocks around the world are going through the roof, that’s ’cause they’ve all been bailed out. You don’t see the homeowners in Kansas going through the roof ’cause they’re not being bailed out,” he added.

Other investors have criticized the takeover as a “stopgap” and a “band aid” aimed at keeping the companies going into 2009, leaving the next president and Congress to deal with the fallout.

Jim Rogers commented that neither of the presidential candidates has a solution to the crisis.

“This is a big huge mess and neither one of them has a clue what to do next year. It’s going to be a mess.” Rogers said.

Watch the interview with Jim Rogers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gZuG-52js0

Taxpayers take on trillions in risk in Fannie, Freddie takeover
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2008-09-07-fannie-freddie-plan_N.htm

Fannie, Freddie rescue binds taxpayers to housing market
http://news.yahoo.com/s//csm/20080909/ts_csm/atakeover

U.S. Seizes Mortgage Giants
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122079276849707821.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news

US Government stages world’s biggest bail out
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/money/2008/09/07/cnfreddie207.xml

 



McCain and Obama’s Advisors Want War With Russia

George Washington’s Blog
August 14, 2008

Georgia is located in Eurasia, is a gateway to other Eurasian countries, and possesses important oil pipelines.

For months previous to the start of hostilities in the Georgia-Russian war, American trainers have been getting the Georgians ready for war.

As revealed in a July article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution: “A large contingent of Georgia Army National Guard soldiers flew to the Republic of Georgia on Sunday for joint military exercises at a time when tension is brewing in the region”.

And you won’t hear it on the tv news, but Georgia started the war.

It is clear that the U.S. has been behind Georgia’s military adventures.

McCain

McCain’s top foreign affairs advisor was until very recently a high-level Georgian lobbyist , a neocon, and a key player in pushing fake intelligence and the Iraq war. He is a hawk who is very good at starting wars.

Former LA Times’ journalist Robert Scheer thinks the war was started to boost McCain’s election chances.

Obama

Obama’s top foreign policy advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, wrote in his book The Grand Chessboard, that the top priority for the U.S. was seizing control of Eurasia and its rich oil resources.

Here are some sample quotes:

  • “Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world power.”- (p. xiii)
  • “It is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book.” (p. xiv)
  • “How America ‘manages’ Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world’s three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa’s subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world’s central continent. About 75 per cent of the world’s people live in Eurasia, and most of the world’s physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world’s known energy resources.” (p.31)

It is clear that the US is following Brzezinski’s playbook for Eurasia.

Indeed, this is exactly what Mikhail Gorbachev was referring to when he wrote:

“By declaring the Caucasus, a region that is thousands of miles from the American continent, a sphere of its ‘national interest,’ the United States made a serious blunder.”

Bottom line: Both McCain and Obama’s top foreign policy advisors want a war. And, obviously, the other neocons and assorted hawks want one also. Indeed, the U.S. is now sending troops into Georgia under the pretense of giving “humanitarian aid”.this (which provides some insights, but may be over-the-top).

See also this and this (which provides some insights, but may be over-the-top).

 

Brezezinski’s Georgia Puppets Attack Russia – World War Three In Sight

Webster G. Tarpley

Clearly playing the role of the aggressor, the NATO puppet regime of Mikhail Saakashvili has carried out a midnight sneak attack against Russian peacekeepers in the province of South Ossetia. Those peacekeepers have been there for 15 years under an agreement with Georgia. Saakashvili is a protégé and creature of Zbigniew Brzezinski, the foreign policy boss of the Barack Obama presidential campaign. As is explained in my book Obama- The Postmodern Coup: The Making of a Manchurian Candidate, Saakashvili was brought to power in 2003-2004 by a people power coup or CIA color revolution, directed by the Brzezinski clan and financed by George Soros, one of Obama’s key financial backers. In a very real sense, it is the Obama campaign which has attacked Russia in South Ossetia.

Responding to this provocation, Russia has struck back powerfully, hurling the Georgian military into full retreat. The 3000% increase in Georgian military spending on US military hardware since 2004 has not had the desired effect. But the Georgians have killed a score of Russian troops and shot down several aircraft. Russia is blockading the Georgian Black Sea coast and has already sunk a Georgian warship. The US regime, the butchers of Iraq, are now whining that the Russian response is “disproportionate,” and that regime change is inadmissible! McCain responded by aggressive posturing against Russia scripted by Ian Brzezinski, as expected. At the Olympics, Bush had a heated exchange with Russian Prime Minister Putin over the Georgian aggression. Bush has dropped his plans to attack Iran and North Korea, and is now slavishly following Brzezinski’s orders by concentrating on provoking Russian and China.

Most interesting is the response of Brzezinski’s other puppet, Obama. The Messiah first intoned that it was necessary to show restraint, and stop the armed conflict. He talked then to NSC Director Hadley, Saakashvili, Rice, and unspecified foreign policy advisers – undoubtedly the Brzezinskis, Zbig and Mark. Notice Obama’s failure to talk with a single Russian leader – he failed to bring anybody together this time. Then Obama switched to a full warmonger line, identical to that of Bush: Obama now lied that Russia had invaded Georgian sovereignty and encroached on Georgian sovereignty. Obama’s spokesman, Ben Rhodes, added that Russia was responsible for the conflict. This goes to show that Obama is a ticket to World War III on the Brzezinski Plan, the crackpot design to break up Russia and China, securing another century for the Anglo-American world empire. Because Brzezinski’s strategic insanity unfolds on a scale more vast than that of the neocons, Obama is indeed a far bigger warmonger than Bush.

Read Full Article Here

 



North Korea threatens to bolster “nuclear armed force”
August 1, 2008, 12:57 pm
Filed under: axis of evil, George Bush, Military, neocons, north korea, Nuke, Troops, WW3, ww4 | Tags:

North Korea threatens to bolster “nuclear armed force”

AFP
July 29, 2008

North Korea threatened Tuesday to bolster its “nuclear armed force,” saying the United States was not yet ready to drop its “hostile policy” towards the communist country.

Washington and Pyongyang face “a grave political challenge” to realise denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula and end their decades-long hostility, the North’s state newspaper Minju Joson said in a commentary.

“What is crucial here is that the US should completely abandon its hostile policy. But the US is not yet prepared to make a strategic decision,” the commentary said.

“As we have stressed several times, our nuclear armed force is a self defensive measure to protect the security of our country and people against manoeuvres by hostile forces to stifle the DPRK (North Korea),” it said.

“Therefore, the stronger US military threats and schemes to invade us are, the more our republic will keep strengthening its powerful self-defensive deterrence. That is our right.”

Read Full Article Here