THE ZIONISTS THREAT VS THE IRANIAN THREAT TO THE WORLD SECURITY
THE ZIONISTS NUKE THREAT versus THE IRANIAN THREAT TO THE WORLD SECURITY
by Syarif Hidayat*
Wake Up Americans and the world! Please don’t allow yourself to be fooled by the Zionists agenda! Facts speak for themselves correctly and objectively that the Zionists are also experts at propaganda, disinformation, denying facts and outright lying. The Zionists and the Imperialists (the US-led western powers) have been demonizing Iran as a threat to Arab world and the world security!
THE REALITY:
– Since the Iranian revolution, no country has been invaded by Iran and not a single person has been killed by Iran in a foreign country, not a single Israeli or American or British nuclear scientist killed and not a single Iranian spy drone is detected over Israeli, the UK or US Air Space!
– Since 1979, the US has invaded Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and has been bombing Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen using drones bombers and killing almost two millions (and continue counting) of innocent people including old men, women, children and babies. The US has also killed Third World leaders such as Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi.
– Since Iranian revolution, Israel has killed thousands of Palestinians and some Iranian nuclear scientists.
– Since Iranian revolution, not a single Israeli or US scientist killed by Iranians.
– Since Iranian revolution, some US and Israeli spy drones reportedly shot down or forced down in Iran.
The US-Israeli collusion
The actual Nuclear World War could be easily triggered by the illicit agreement between the American President and his close counterpart Israeli Prime Minister.
Please take a close look at the example of the actual Israeli nuclear threats to the world security: In 2002, while the United States was building for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon threatened that if Israel was attacked “Israel will react. Is it clear?”
Israeli defense analyst Zeev Schiff explained: “Israel could respond with a nuclear retaliation that would eradicate Iraq as a country.”
It is believed the then US President, George W. Bush gave Sharon the “Green-Light” to attack Baghdad in retaliation, including with Nuclear Weapons, but only if attacks came before the American military invasion.
Where The Actual threat comes from?
Iran is developing nuclear energy program must not alarm the Arab world and the world as a whole. Israel has more than enough nuclear weapons (nuclear warheads and bombs) to destroy the whole Middle East at any moment! So what?
The Israeli weapons of mass destruction (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Bombs) and weapons of ethnic cleansing (Ethnic Bomb) are the real threat to the world security!
However, just as threatening to Arabs, and the world, is Israel’s aggressive stance towards using its own 200 to 500 nuclear weapons — ones which it has never formally admitted exist. These weapons can be deployed by air, missile or submarine to almost any place on earth.
Although dwarfed by the nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and Russia, each possessing over 10,000 nuclear weapons, Israel nonetheless is a major nuclear power, and should be publicly recognized as such.
Possessing chemical and biological weapons, an extremely sophisticated nuclear arsenal, and an aggressive strategy for their actual use, Israel provides the major regional impetus for the development of weapons of mass destruction and represents an acute threat to peace and stability in the Middle East and the world as a whole.
The Israeli nuclear program represents a serious impediment to nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation and, with India and Pakistan, is a potential nuclear flashpoint.(prospects of meaningful non-proliferation are a delusion so long as the nuclear weapons states insist on maintaining their arsenals).
The Israeli bombs themselves range in size from “city busters” larger than the Hiroshima Bomb to tactical mini nukes. The Israeli arsenal of weapons of mass destruction clearly dwarfs the actual or potential arsenals of all other Middle Eastern states combined, and is vastly greater than any conceivable need for “deterrence.”
A staple of the Israeli nuclear arsenal are “neutron bombs,” miniaturized thermonuclear bombs designed to maximize deadly gamma radiation while minimizing blast effects and long term radiation- in essence designed to kill people while leaving property intact.
The Israeli nuclear arsenal is backed-up by the delivery mechanisms that include the long-range all-weather attack fighter bombers: F-4E-2000 Phantoms, F-16 Fighting Falcons and F-35 Radar Evading Stealth Bombers as well as Jericho intercontinental ballistic missiles with a range of 11,500 km, bringing all countries in the Middle East and Gulf regions including Iran and Europe as far as UK into its range.
Iran was never building nuclear weapons
Sherwood Ross, an award-winning reporter and editorial as well as book publicist, in his article titled “US spies declare: Iran was never building nuclear weapons” published in IPS, wrote The former Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in a new published report that he had not seen “a shred of evidence” that Iran was “building nuclear-weapons facilities and using enriched materials.”
Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient who spent 12 years at the IAEA, told investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, “I don’t believe Iran is a clear and present danger. All I see is the hype about the threat posed by Iran.” El Baradei, who was a candidate for the presidency of Egypt, added, “The core issue is mutual lack of trust. I believe there will be no solution until the day that the United States and Iran sit down together to discuss the issues and put pressure on each other to find a solution.”
El Baradei’s remarks are contained in an article by Hersh titled “Iran And The Bomb,” published in the June 6 issue of The New Yorker magazine. Hersh points out that the last two U.S. National Intelligence Estimates (N.I.E.s) on Iranian nuclear progress “have stated that there is no conclusive evidence that Iran has made any effort to build the bomb since 2003.”
An N.I.E. Report supposedly represents the best judgment of the senior offices from all the major American intelligence agencies. The latest report, which came out this year and remains highly classified, is said by Hersh to reinforce the conclusion of the last N.I.E. Report of 2007, that “Iran halted weaponization in 2003.” A retired senior intelligence officer, speaking of the latest N.I.E. Report, told Hersh, “The important thing is that nothing substantially new has been learned in the last four years, and none of our efforts—informants, penetrations, planting of sensors—leads to a bomb.”
Hersh revealed that over the past six years, soldiers from the Joint Special Operations Force, working with Iranian intelligence assets, “put in place cutting-edge surveillance techniques” to spy on suspected Iran facilities. These included:
–Surreptitiously removing street signs and replacing them with signs containing radiation sensors.
–Removing bricks from buildings suspected of containing nuclear enrichment activities and replacing them “with bricks embedded with radiation-monitoring devices.”
–Spreading high-powered sensors disguised as stones randomly along roadways where a suspected underground weapon site was under construction.
–Constant satellite coverage of major suspect areas in Iran.
A lot of baloney
Going beyond these spy activities, two Iranian nuclear scientists last year were assassinated and Hersh says it is widely believed in Tehran that the killers were either American or Israeli agents. Hersh quotes W. Patrick Lang, a retired Army intelligence officer and former ranking Defense Intelligence Agency(DIA) analyst on the Middle East as saying that after the disaster in Iraq, “Analysts in the intelligence community are just refusing to sign up this time for a lot of baloney.”
The DIA is the military counterpart of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Hersh writes that Obama administration officials “have often overstated the available intelligence about Iranian intentions.” He noted that Dennis Ross, a top Obama adviser on the region, told a meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that Iran had “significantly expanded its nuclear program.”
Hersh noted further that last March, Robert Einhorn, the special arms control adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, told the Arms Control Assn. The Iranians “are clearly acquiring all the necessary elements of a nuclear-weapons capability.” Additionally, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Connecticut, a strong Israel supporter, told Agence France-Presse, “I can’t say much in detail but it’s pretty clear that they’re(Iran) continuing to work seriously on a nuclear-weapons program.”
Hersh recalled that “As Presidential candidates in 2008, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton had warned of an Iranian nuclear arsenal, and occasionally spoke as if it were an established fact that Iran had decided to get the bomb.” But last March, Lieutenant General James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence which creates the N.I.E. Assessments, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Iran had not decided to re-start its nuclear weapons work.
When asked by Committee Chairman Carl Levin, “What is the level of confidence that you have (in that estimate)? Is that a high level?” Clapper replied, “Yes, it is.” At a round of negotiations in Istanbul five months ago, Iranian officials told Western diplomats that the United States and its allies need to acknowledge Iran’s right to enrich uranium and that they must lift all sanctions against Iran.
Clinton adviser Einhorn has said that because of those sanctions Iran may have lost as much as $60 billion in energy investments and that Iran had also lost business in such industries as shipping, banking, and transportation. “The sanctions bar a wide array of weapons and missile sales to Iran, and make it more difficult for banks and other financial institutions to do business there,” Hersh writes.
However, Hersh says, “The general anxiety about the Iranian regime is firmly grounded” even if there is no hard evidence it is working to build a nuclear weapon. “President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly questioned the Holocaust and expressed a desire to see the state of Israel eliminated, and he has defied the 2006 United Nations resolution calling on Iran to suspend its nuclear-enrichment program.”
He goes on to write that while IAEA inspectors “have expressed frustration with Iran’s level of cooperation and cited an increase in production of uranium…they have been unable to find any evidence that enriched uranium has been diverted to an illicit weapons program.”
One approach to resolving the Iran nuclear issue has been suggested by former ranking American diplomat Thomas Pickering, a retired ambassador who served in Russia, Israel, Jordan and India, and who has been active in the American Iranian Council, devoted to the normalization of relations with Iran.
According to Hersh, Pickering has been involved “in secret, back-channel talks with…some of the key advisers close to Ahmadinejad” and has long sought a meeting with President Obama. Hersh quotes one of Pickering’s colleagues as saying if Obama were to grant a meeting, Pickering would tell him: “Get off your no-enrichment policy, which is getting you nowhere.
Stop your covert activities. Give the Iranians a sign that you’re not pursuing regime change. Instead, the Iranians see continued threats, sanctions, and covert operations.” Politico.com reported on May 31 that a senior administration intelligence official asserted Hersh’s article was nothing more than “a slanted book report.”
Shifting focus: Impact of Iran nuclear deal
As details slowly emerge about the interim agreement between Iran and world powers over Tehran’s controversial nuclear program, major questions remain over how the deal will impact Iranian foreign relations with both Western and regional states. United States President Barack Obama called the deal reached on Sunday, November 24, 2013, in Geneva an “important first step” towards easing international concerns over Iran’s nuclear program, while Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said that “the elimination of obstacles in the face of the Iranian nation is of great value”.
The statements reflect a potential rapprochement between Washington and Tehran, but does the agreement truly mark the beginning of the US’ realignment towards Iran? How will the deal impact political alliances and rivalries in the region, particularly the strained relations between Iran and US-allied Saudi Arabia and Israel, who have staunchly opposed the agreement? How will Iran’s influence in the region be affected, especially in relation to the ongoing war in Syria?
Relations with the United States
Iran and the United States cut diplomatic relations short after the 1979 hostage crisis, when Iranian students and activists held US embassy staff and citizens after storming the embassy in Tehran. In recent years, the major dispute between the two countries has been over Iran’s nuclear program. Iran says it is meant only for peaceful purposes, while the US insists the program is aimed at developing a nuclear weapon.
The US trade embargo on Iran was initially imposed in 1995 by then-US President Bill Clinton, in response to what he called Iranian state sponsorship of “terrorism” and its “hostility” to the Middle East peace process. US sanctions have, however, been tightened in recent years, as the US attempts to leverage the economic impact of the sanctions as part of its prevention-rather-than-containment strategy.
But the election earlier this year of a more moderate Iranian President, Hassan Rouhani, was seen by many as a positive first step in mending ties between Tehran and Washington, and bridging the gap over the country’s nuclear program. In September, US President Barack Obama spoke to Rouhani by telephone in the highest-level contact between the two countries in over three decades.
The breakthrough agreement on Iran’s nuclear program is the continuation of trust-building measures between the US and Iran. But whether this deal will be enough to build trust between the US and Iran remains to be seen. US Secretary of State John Kerry said Sunday (November 24, 2013) the US would maintain its close relationship with Israel despite the agreement. Israel has been a vocal opponent to diplomatic initiatives to stall Iran’s nuclear program, forcing Washington to balance between appeasing Israeli security concerns, and gaining Iran’s trust.
The Associated Press reported Sunday that the US and Iran secretly engaged in high-level, face-to-face talks at least three times in the past year. The negotiations were kept secret from even the US’ closest allies, including its negotiating partners, until two months ago. The secret meetings are believed to have laid the groundwork for the interim agreement signed Sunday, November 24, 2013.
Relations with the European Union
European Union (EU) Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton has played a leading role in negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program.
Senior European leaders and diplomats participated in the P5+1 talks – which brought Iran together with representatives of the United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom, and France, plus Germany – and led to the interim agreement. The EU largely follows the US’ lead on relations with Iran, however. The EU has maintained economic sanctions against Iran, for example, and imposed restrictions on trade and contact with the state.
France took a tougher stance on Iran during a previous round of negotiations that ended on November 10. French President Francois Hollande also assured Israel during a three-day visit this month that France would oppose easing economic sanctions on Iran until it received guarantees that it stopped pursuing a nuclear weapon.
The EU is Iran’s main trading partner with trade in goods amounting to $16.6 billion in 2012. Closer ties between the EU and Iran, and an easing of economic sanctions, could mean a boost in this economic cooperation.
Relations with Israel
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Sunday’s nuclear agreement an “historic mistake”. “The world has become a much more dangerous place because the most dangerous regime in the world has taken a significant step toward attaining the most dangerous weapon in the world,” Netanyahu said. Israel, a staunch US ally, opposed engaging in negotiations with Iran from the start, and warned world leaders against signing an agreement that would allow the Islamic Republic to retain much of its nuclear capabilities while easing economic sanctions.
Israel has said it is ready to act unilaterally to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, hinting at a potential military strike. The issue has been a sticking point in Israel’s relationship with the US, which has urged restraint on the military front. Israel is widely believed to have the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East, but has never confirmed nor denied it possesses nuclear weapons.
Asked about Israel’s concerns over the deal Sunday, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said: “This agreement is geared towards resolving a problem that has had its shadow cast over the entire world, and over our region. So I do not see any justification whatsoever to be concerned about [the] resolution of a problem.”
Closer Iranian-US relations have the potential of further upsetting Israel, which continues to say that Iran should not be trusted. It could also have a negative impact on Israel-US relations, which are already under stress as US-brokered peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians continue to flounder.
The strengthening of Iran-US ties could have the opposite effect, however, and push an isolated Israel towards finally reaching a peace agreement with neighboring Arab states, or joining countries with which it shares common interests, and want to act as a counterbalance to Iranian ambitions in the region.
Relations with Syria
The Iranian government has been one of the main supporters of President Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria, saying the civil war is an internal matter and vocally opposing US military intervention into the conflict. Syria’s state media said Damascus welcomed Sunday’s agreement, calling it “historic”.
The two countries have a long history of economic and geostrategic ties. Iran allocated massive sums of money for investments in Syrian infrastructure for decades. This includes building gas pipelines to pump Iranian resources across the region.
Since the Syrian war broke out in March 2011, however, Iran’s support for the Syrian government has led to increased tensions with neighboring Lebanon, where spillover from the ongoing war in Syria has increased sectarian tensions in the country, and strained Lebanon’s infrastructure.
Last week, two suicide bombers detonated explosives in front of the Iranian embassy in Beirut, killing 25 people, including a senior Iranian diplomat. A Lebanese group linked to al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the blasts, saying it was a “message of blood and death” to Iran and Hezbollah, both Assad supporters.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said earlier this month the only alternative to an agreement between Iran and the West was regional war, and that his party would emerge stronger from any deal over Iran’s nuclear program.
Iran supported Hezbollah in its early years, providing the group with military training and equipment, often through Syrian intermediaries. “If there is understanding, our side will emerge stronger locally and regionally,” Nasrallah said.
But both the al-Assad government in Syria and Hezbollah, are vocal critics of US policy and allies in the region, including Saudi Arabia and Israel. They may view warming relations between Tehran and Washington with suspicion, and strain their alliances with Tehran.
Better US-Iran relations may mean more flexibility for al-Assad’s government, however, as Iran is expected to play a large role in securing an internationally-brokered agreement to end the conflict in Syria. The US’ traditional allies in the Gulf fear that the deal could also signal a shift in favor of Iranian-backed policies and power in the Middle East, and boost al-Assad, Hezbollah, the Iraqi government of Nuri Al-Maliki, and other groups in the region. (T/E1/P03)
Mi’raj News Agency (MINA)
*Editor of MINA
A more comprehensive version of this article has been published in the website: WE ARE REALLY IN FAVOR OF WORLD PEACE!
Bibliotheque:
1. http://www.muslimevillage.com
2.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28231.htm
