Documents, Secrets, and Lies

 

Read this article!

I love how the DOJ is rubbing Trump’s face in his nuclear lie @spockosbrain

Published by Spocko on September 7, 2022

Banks and Oysters and everything in between...

Of course he wants to give the banks your money.   That's what Republicans do.

The House of FEAAarrrrrr... (Tom Tomorrow).

Lies about Iran and its nuclear program.

How Canada handles terrorism.

Why are some men so angry?

Trolling discussed.

When we hooked up with Neanderthals.

Oysters. They are good for you AND the environment.

Let's all glow in the dark together!

New Leak at Fukushima: Frozen Pipe "Drops Off"

San Onofre nuclear reactor turned off after radiation leak

The good, the bad and the daft

Gabby Giffords.  Grow strong and come back.  We need you.

The downward spiral of the European Union.

Chemists find new material to remove radioactive gas from spent nuclear fuel

Isn't it interesting that when scientists create something for military use, it is often turned against our own citizens? 6 Creepy New Weapons the Police and Military Use To Subdue Unarmed People

Is India investing in a future health crisis by importing asbestos from Canada?

The liberal media.

Gingrich wants the audience to be able to applaud.  Because everything is about him, isn't it?

Fukushima

Is worse than we thought. Which means it's really bad.

Update 8/30: They are suggesting the media shouldn't talk about it because it will cause psychological reactions of illness and mental stress. Excuse me? If they had been forthcoming from the get-go, there wouldn't be this doubt and distrust of the government. This is what you get when corporations are not answerable to the public.

Because of this

Storm suspends work at Japan Fukushima nuclear plant

The operator of Japan's crippled nuclear plant has suspended some of its outdoor work due to a tropical storm, just days after it admitted it was not prepared for harsh weather.

Heavy rain and strong winds are hitting north-east Japan, which was devastated in the 11 March earthquake and tsunami.

There are fears that more radioactive material from the Fukushima plant could drain into the land and sea.

Japan's Meteorological Agency has warned of mudslides and floods.

Typhoon Songda weakened to a tropical storm over south-west Japan late on Sunday, but strong winds and rain have continued to pound the north-east of the country.

Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), which runs the nuclear plant, said it was on alert to ensure that contaminated water in reactor buildings did not flow out.

I am impressed by this:

Switzerland Plans To Abandon Nuclear Power

The Swiss government announced last week a proposal to phase out nuclear power as an energy source for electricity generation and to look more towards energy efficiency and renewables.

Under the proposal, existing nuclear power stations will be decommissioned at the end of their operational lifespan and will not be replaced by new reactors. This would see Switzerland being nuclear free by 2034.

And this:

Germany: Nuclear power plants to close by 2022

Germany's coalition government has announced a reversal of policy that will see all the country's nuclear power plants phased out by 2022.

The decision makes Germany the biggest industrial power to announce plans to give up nuclear energy.

Environment Minister Norbert Rottgen made the announcement following late-night talks.

Chancellor Angela Merkel set up a panel to review nuclear power following the crisis at Fukushima in Japan.

There have been mass anti-nuclear protests across Germany in the wake of March's Fukushima crisis, triggered by an earthquake and tsunami.

Because loss of life and land is a reality and mistakes and disasters are inevitable, these are intelligent actions by these countries. How many of them do we need to learn it takes only one mistake to forever devastate a region and destroy communities?

So on to Iran and Pakistan!!

Al-Qaida and Taliban threat is exaggerated, says security thinktank
Strategy institute challenges idea that troops are needed in Afghanistan to stop export of terrorism to west

And right on schedule....

Iran has enough fuel for 2 nuclear warheads, report says

We can't justify our defense expenditures unless we are at war with somebody!

One good thing

Even though many liberals are disgusted at Obama's conservatism, one really good thing he worked on as a Senator has stayed with him in the White House. The control and destruction of nuclear stockpiles. This one thing alone could save the world from a catastrophe.

US President Barack Obama is planning "dramatic reductions" in the country's nuclear arsenal, a senior US administration official has said.

[snip]

Mr Obama is to meet his Defence Secretary Robert Gates later on Monday to discuss the new nuclear strategy.

The review "will point to dramatic reductions in the stockpile, while maintaining a strong and reliable deterrent through the investments that have been made in the budget," the official said.

He said the review would go further than previous reviews in "embracing the aims of non-proliferation. "

Officials say thousands of nuclear weapons could be cut, in many cases by retiring weapons that are now kept in storage.

The new strategy will also seek to abandon plans put in place by the previous administration to develop a new generation of nuclear weapons for penetrating underground targets known as "bunker busters."

The officials say the strategy will be an important step towards Mr Obama's declared aim of reversing the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking a world without them.

Thank you, Mr. President.

What do you think, Sherlock?

Iranian nuclear scientist goes missing in Saudi Arabia:

CAIRO, Egypt — An award-winning Iranian nuclear scientist traveled to Saudi Arabia earlier this year to perform a religious pilgrimage. He never returned.

Shahram Amiri's mysterious disappearance is turning into a Middle Eastern whodunit involving nuclear secrets and political intrigue, with a new round of accusations emerging this week and the U.S. government still refusing to comment.

There are two big questions: Was Amiri spirited away by Saudi-backed American covert agents? Or did the scientist seize the chance to defect to the West, offering sensitive information in exchange for asylum?

Finger-pointing in Amiri's case has heightened tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which are bitter rivals for regional dominance and self-proclaimed guardians of Islam's two main sects. Iran claimed earlier this week that Saudi Arabia conspired with U.S. agents to abduct Amiri in June and transfer him to the U.S., presumably for interrogations about Iran's controversial nuclear program.

Blog sprinkles

• Rumpus over nuclear warheads in Pakistan:

Nuclear fallout rocks Pakistan
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

ISLAMABAD - Sharp differences between Pakistani leaders over safeguarding the country's nuclear arsenal are placing increasing pressure on the embattled administration of President Asif Ali Zardari.

Zardari is already seriously at odds with the military establishment over dealing with the Taliban-led insurgency and there is a strong likelihood that his government will face a make-or-break test within weeks in the form of mass street protests.

Pakistan has reacted strongly to an article in The New Yorker by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh on November 16, "Defending the arsenal", in which he claimed that Pakistan was discussing "understandings" with the US that could even see specialists take sophisticated nuclear triggers out of the country to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands.

• Excellent Afghanistan Conflict Monitoring site and Pakistan Conflict Monitoring site. And considering the Taliban in Afghanistan.

• When you can have only one child and that one is a girl, you might be tempted to buy a kidnapped boy off the black market.

• Michele Obama talks about the need for dedicated teachers for our economic future.

• Don't talk about pulling the plug on the 'comatose' patient within his hearing...

• What if the earth became hotter by 4 degrees Celsius?

• But who cares about keeping perspective, just frantically buy buy buy!

• JJ of Unrepentant Old Hippie has a suggestion for teabaggers in your family for this War on Christmas season.

• Blue Girl of They Gave Us A Republic: The growing demand on community food pantries.

• Republican distortions.

• Ok, we've got two of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse... Should the two others be Glenn and Rush?

It's obvious that the world needs this:

• 'World's strongest' beer with 32% strength launched

We aren't going to attack Iran because it's strong

But because it's weak?! Gareth Porter for Asia Times:

WASHINGTON - New arguments by analysts close to Israeli thinking in favor of United States strikes against Iran cite evidence of Iranian military weakness in relation to the US and Israel, and even raise doubts that Iran is rushing to obtain such weapons at all.

The new arguments contradict Israel's official argument that it faces an "existential threat" from an Islamic extremist Iranian regime determined to get nuclear weapons. They suggest that Israel, which already has as many as 200 nuclear weapons, views Iran from the position of the dominant power in the region rather than as the weaker state in the relationship.

[snip]


These analysts, all of whom are pushing for a US, rather than an Israeli attack, argue that Iran's power to retaliate for a US attack on its nuclear facilities is quite limited. Equally significant, they also emphasize that Iran is a rational actor that would have to count the high costs of retaliation. That conclusion stands in sharp contrast to the official Israeli line that Iran cannot be deterred because of its alleged apocalyptic Islamic viewpoint on war with Israel.

So... do these analysts actually think the rest of the world will be standing by stroking their respective chins and saying hmmm? Or do you think the Islamic world would ignite like dried tinder, the world community would recoil with horror, and Israel and the US would be considered rogue nations: armed, dangerous, and insane. The use of nuclear bombs has stayed taboo and untouchable since we dropped the two on Japan and justifiably so.

Why do Bush and Cheney think it's okay to use them now?

Iran will not take such an event lying down:

The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards said in remarks published late last month that Tehran would impose controls on shipping in the Gulf and the strategic Strait of Hormuz if it was attacked.

Speculation about a possible attack on Iran because of its nuclear program has risen since a report last month said Israel had practiced such a strike.

Vice-Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, the commander of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet, said last week the United States would not allow Iran to block the Gulf.

And just what would happen to our military stuck in Afghanistan and Iraq if nukes were to go off next door?

Cheney and Rumsfeld used to play shadow government games together. The neocons have been dreaming of this opportunity for such an action for years.

Can we survive the next 200 days of the Bush administration? Can Iran?

Update:
Bryan of Why Now? offers the end result of attacking Iran:

If your goal is Israel a smoking ruin, the 5th Fleet at the bottom of the Gulf, oil at $300+ per barrel, and tens of thousands of US troops dead, then attacking Iran is a good idea … for a madman.

Mutual assured destruction

Isn't it interesting that we haven't heard this term being used recently? The actual reason why the Cold War didn't devolve into a real World War? The fact that it actually worked?

Besides discussing the horrific and mind-boggling numbers of how many people would actually die if Israel and Iran had a nuclear war, Julian Delasantellis at Asia Times reminds us: (my bold)

The success of deterrence is intimately related to the nature of politics and politicians. From their days in short pants, the world's leaders have dreamt of possessing power and dominion over millions of their fellow citizens; whether they do so through democratic or other means is only a question related to the random chance of what nation they were born in.

After they assume ultimate national power, after a lifetime of political striving and ambition, those who say that deterrence does not work are, in essence, saying that these leaders will put some abstract hatred or ideology above the lives and interests of their fellow citizens who put them into power. The countering argument to this is that you can't rule a country if there's no country to rule.

Reading the article, it is clear that Iran and especially Tehran would suffer the worst from any kind of nuclear attack on Israel or any other neighbor.

And as Bush has shown these last horrible eight years, he ignores, insults, maligns those countries he calls allies; he threatens, strong-arms, smears those countries he calls evil; and ... he negotiates with those who are armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons.

So any tinpot dictator has quickly put two and two together, and has proceeded to move heaven and earth and a few centrifuges to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran has been in the cross-hairs of the Bush cabal (and it makes me wonder if they had been aiming for Iran all along if the Iraq War had taken Rumsfeld's projected six weeks...) So it's natural that Iran would do the logical thing and get nukes. Especially after being called one of the axis of evil. Especially because of the ever louder saber-rattling that this White House has been doing.

It's also interesting to note Cheney and Wolfowitz were involved in an earlier deal:

President Gerald R. Ford signs a presidential directive giving the Iranian government the opportunity to purchase a US-built nuclear reprocessing facility...

[snip] (my bold)

The shah has argued that Iran needs a nuclear energy program in order to meet Iran’s growing energy demand. Iran is known to have massive oil and gas reserves, but the shah considers these finite reserves too valuable to be spent satisfying daily energy needs. In a 1975 strategy paper, the Ford administration supported this view saying that “introduction of nuclear power will both provide for the growing needs of Iran’s economy and free remaining oil reserves for export or conversion to petrochemicals.” Top officials in the Ford administration—including Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, Chief of Staff Dick Cheney, and Paul Wolfowitz, who is responsible for nonproliferation issues at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency—are strong supporters of Iran’s ambitions.

Interesting that the very people involved in the control of nonproliferation then are the ones now so very anxious to break the taboo and actually use nukes.

No wonder the Bush administration has tried to shut Sibel Edmonds up

They have been trying for years:

A WHISTLEBLOWER has made a series of extraordinary claims about how corrupt government officials allowed Pakistan and other states to steal nuclear weapons secrets.

Sibel Edmonds, a 37-year-old former Turkish language translator for the FBI, listened into hundreds of sensitive intercepted conversations while based at the agency’s Washington field office.

She approached The Sunday Times last month after reading about an Al-Qaeda terrorist who had revealed his role in training some of the 9/11 hijackers while he was in Turkey.

Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.

Among the hours of covert tape recordings, she says she heard evidence that one well-known senior official in the US State Department was being paid by Turkish agents in Washington who were selling the information on to black market buyers, including Pakistan.

The name of the official – who has held a series of top government posts – is known to The Sunday Times. He strongly denies the claims.

However, Edmonds said: “He was aiding foreign operatives against US interests by passing them highly classified information, not only from the State Department but also from the Pentagon, in exchange for money, position and political objectives.”

She claims that the FBI was also gathering evidence against senior Pentagon officials – including household names – who were aiding foreign agents.

“If you made public all the information that the FBI have on this case, you will see very high-level people going through criminal trials,” she said.

[snip]

Edmonds, a fluent speaker of Turkish and Farsi, was recruited by the FBI in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Her previous claims about incompetence inside the FBI have been well documented in America.

She has given evidence to closed sessions of Congress and the 9/11 commission, but many of the key points of her testimony have remained secret. She has now decided to divulge some of that information after becoming disillusioned with the US authorities’ failure to act.

One of Edmonds’s main roles in the FBI was to translate thousands of hours of conversations by Turkish diplomatic and political targets that had been covertly recorded by the agency.

A backlog of tapes had built up, dating back to 1997, which were needed for an FBI investigation into links between the Turks and Pakistani, Israeli and US targets. Before she left the FBI in 2002 she heard evidence that pointed to money laundering, drug imports and attempts to acquire nuclear and conventional weapons technology.

“What I found was damning,” she said. “While the FBI was investigating, several arms of the government were shielding what was going on.”

The Turks and Israelis had planted “moles” in military and academic institutions which handled nuclear technology. Edmonds says there were several transactions of nuclear material every month, with the Pakistanis being among the eventual buyers. “The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,” she said.

They were helped, she says, by the high-ranking State Department official who provided some of their moles – mainly PhD students – with security clearance to work in sensitive nuclear research facilities. These included the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico, which is responsible for the security of the US nuclear deterrent.

[snip]

She has always claimed that she was victimised for being outspoken and was vindicated by an Office of the Inspector General review of her case three years later. It found that one of the contributory reasons for her sacking was that she had made valid complaints.

The US attorney-general has imposed a state secrets privilege order on her, which prevents her revealing more details of the FBI’s methods and current investigations.

Her allegations were heard in a closed session of Congress, but no action has been taken and she continues to campaign for a public hearing.

She was able to discuss the case with The Sunday Times because, by the end of January 2002, the justice department had shut down the programme.

She has been forced into silence by court order and commands from her bosses. She's been under extreme scrutiny and pressure from those who do not want the truth to get out.

It's time we heard all of what she has to say.

Just in case anyone was wondering

Here's a headline that may change things:

Experts: No evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons program:
WASHINGTON — Despite President Bush's claims that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons that could trigger "World War III," experts in and out of government say there's no conclusive evidence that Tehran has an active nuclear-weapons program.

Just what does it take to start a war around here?

[Insert country of choice] is involved with [weapons of mass destruction-related program activities; a big scary mustached leader; illegal immigration; brown people; voodoo] and even though we are using [all; some; none] of our [well-trained; partisan hack; not sure where the United States is on a map] diplomatic personnel, we need to keep [all options on the table; only one option on the table; total and endless war]:

The US today branded Iran's elite revolutionary guards as a supporter of terrorism as it imposed the toughest sanctions on Tehran since the Islamist revolution of 1979.

The al-Quds unit within the guards corps is accused of providing powerful bomb-making equipment to fighters in Iraq that has led to the deaths of US soldiers. The revolutionary guards as a whole, which have business interests ranging from newspapers to cars, were branded "proliferators of weapons of mass destruction" in reference to its alleged role in developing nuclear weapons.

Three major state-owned Iranian banks, which Washington claims help fund Tehran's alleged support for the Taliban in Afghanistan, Shia militants in Iraq, and Hamas and Hizbullah, are also targeted.

The unprecedented sanctions, which also target the country's defence ministry, will cut off more than 20 Iranian entities, including individuals and companies owned or controlled by the revolutionary guards.

The secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, said today: "What this means is that no US citizen or a private organisation will be allowed to engage in financial transactions with these persons and entities."

"These actions will help to protect the international financial system from the illicit activities of the Iranian government. They will provide a powerful deterrent to every international bank and company that thinks of doing business with the Iranian government."

Ms Rice said the US was "fully committed to a diplomatic solution with Iran" and had "no conflict" with the Iranian people.

But she added: "Unfortunately the Iranian government continues to spurn our offer of open negotiations, instead threatening peace and security by pursuing nuclear technologies that can lead to a nuclear weapon, building dangerous ballistic missiles, supporting Shia militants in Iraq and terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, and denying the existence of a fellow member of the United Nations, threatening to wipe Israeli off the map."

It's deja vu all over again. Now we get to watch how stupid the media really is as they fall all over themselves to agree with the catapulted propaganda.

What happens to those who speak the truth

How many stories are out there like Rich Barlow's?: (Via Kenosha Kid of The Kenosha Kid's Blog)

He was the CIA's expert on Pakistan's nuclear secrets, but Rich Barlow was thrown out and disgraced when he blew the whistle on a US cover-up. Now he's to have his day in court. Adrian Levy and Cathy Scott-Clark report.

[snip]

He prepared briefs for Dick Cheney, when Cheney was at the Pentagon, for the upper echelons of the CIA and even for the Oval Office. But when he uncovered a political scandal - a conspiracy to enable a rogue nation to get the nuclear bomb - he found himself a marked man.

[snip]

In the late 80s, in the course of tracking down smugglers of WMD components, Barlow uncovered reams of material that related to Pakistan. It was known the Islamic Republic had been covertly striving to acquire nuclear weapons since India's explosion of a device in 1974 and the prospect terrified the west - especially given the instability of a nation that had had three military coups in less than 30 years . Straddling deep ethnic, religious and political fault-lines, it was also a country regularly rocked by inter-communal violence. "Pakistan was the kind of place where technology could slip out of control," Barlow says.

[snip]

Barlow was relentless in exposing what he saw as US complicity, and in the end he was sacked and smeared as disloyal, mad, a drunk and a philanderer. If he had been listened to, many believe Pakistan might never have got its nuclear bomb; south Asia might not have been pitched into three near-nuclear conflagrations; and the nuclear weapons programmes of Iran, Libya and North Korea - which British and American intelligence now acknowledge were all secretly enabled by Pakistan - would never have got off the ground. "None of this need have happened," Robert Gallucci, special adviser on WMD to both Clinton and George W Bush, told us. "The vanquishing of Barlow and the erasing of his case kicked off a chain of events that led to all the nuclear-tinged stand-offs we face today. Pakistan is the number one threat to the world, and if it all goes off - a nuclear bomb in a US or European city- I'm sure we will find ourselves looking in Pakistan's direction."

[snip]

Even with Barlow out of the picture, there were still analysts in Washington - and in the Bush administration - who were wary of Pakistan. They warned that al-Qaida had a natural affinity with Pakistan, geographically and religiously, and that its affiliates were seeking nuclear weapons. Some elements of the Pakistan military were sympathetic and in place to help. But those arguing that Pakistan posed the highest risk were isolated. Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were in the ascendant, and they returned to the old agenda, lobbying for a war in Iraq and, in a repeat of 1981 and the Reagan years, signed up Pakistan as the key ally in the war against terror.

Contrary advice was not welcome. And Bush's team set about dismantling the government agency that was giving the most trouble - the State Department's Nonproliferation Bureau. Norm Wulf, who recently retired as deputy assistant secretary of state for non-proliferation, told us: "They met in secret, deciding who to employ, displacing career civil servants with more than 30 years on the job in favour of young, like-thinking people, rightwingers who would toe the administration line." And the administration line was to do away with any evidence that pointed to Pakistan as a threat to global stability, refocusing all attention on Iraq.

The same tactics used to disgrace Barlow and discredit his evidence were used again in 2003, this time against Joseph Wilson, a former US ambassador whom the Bush administration had sent to Africa with a mission to substantiate the story that Saddam Hussein was seeking to buy material to manufacture WMD. When Wilson refused to comply, he found himself the subject of a smear campaign, while his wife, Valerie Plame, was outed as a CIA agent. Libby would subsequently be jailed for leaking Plame's identity (although released on a presidential pardon). Plame and Wilson's careers and marriage would survive. Barlow and his wife, Cindy's, would not - and no one would be held to account. Until now.

When the Republicans lost control of both houses of Congress in 2006, Barlow's indefatigable lawyers sensed an opportunity, lodging a compensation claim on Capitol Hill that is to be heard later this month. This time, with supporters of the Iraq war in retreat and with Pakistan, too, having lost many friends in Washington, Barlow hopes he will receive what he is due. "But this final hearing cannot indict any of those who hounded me, or misshaped the intelligence product," he says. "And it is too late to contain the flow of doomsday technology that Pakistan unleashed on the world."

What we've known all along, part two

Marjorie Cohn of the Huffington Post:

My cousin Larry Russell, a travel writer, spent three weeks (May 11 through May 31 of 2007) in Jordan as a guest of the Jordanian Tourist Board. He was invited to dinner at the home of Karim Kawar, Jordan's ex- ambassador to the United States (2002-06), in Amman. Dick Cheney and his daughter were Kawar's guests two nights before Larry arrived. Kawar confided to Larry that "Cheney's mission was to sound out the reaction to a forthcoming bombing of Iran's nuclear sites (no ground invasion planned) by the U.S. from Jordan's King Abdullah and President Mubarak of Egypt. They both rejected the idea."

When Larry pointed out that Jordan and Egypt receive regular economic and military equipment assistance from the United States so any resistance to this plan on their parts would probably be of a token nature at best, Kawar just smiled.

I doubt Cheney was asking permission as much as telling them what was going to happen. Is this what Cheney was being told to do when he was commanded to report in Saudi Arabia?

Cheney's plan for carpet bombing Iran

Now involves Syria?

ROME - A senior U.S. nuclear official said Friday that North Koreans were in Syria and that Damascus may have had contacts with "secret suppliers" to obtain nuclear equipment.

The neocons obviously realize the jig is up and they will never again be so close to their dreams of imperial superpowerdom. In for a penny, in for a pound. Might as well go for broke...

The next step will be blowing everything up as a distraction for the next administration to deal with as they leave out the back door with the last of the treasury and the PNAC plans to rule the universe tucked under their shirts.

Update: Tom Legg of The Daai Tou Laam Diary catches Tom Friedman criticizing China for not throwing their weight around in support for economic sanctions on Iran:

Josh at ChinaExpat has some further thoughts on Friedman's time at Dalian.

His most recent pronouncement, lecturing Beijing about Iran and Sudan, looks strangely like a false argument that he has been persistently making over the years. According to RConversation he lectured Chinese officials that the country is "a freeloader" on the diplomatic front. He argues that they let the US work to solve the world's problems while China does nothing, and that Beijing will live to rue the day they made this choice.

This sounds just like an argument that he was making just before the Iraq invasion: "China is behaving as if the Iraq crisis were for America to resolve. That is a serious mistake."

That thought must make the neocons salivate ... having the towering presence of China behind their threats. I think China would rather sit back and watch the neocons completely unravel and take the U.S. down with them than join us in our self-made quagmire.

Whoever goes along with Bush and Cheney's attack on Iran

Could be found guilty of war crimes, besides making the United States a terrorist rogue nation, and causing the world to rise up in horror and indignation. This action does not even take into consideration the extreme danger our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan would be placed in, nor the inflaming of the entire Islamic world, nor the utter ruin of our military.

But when has the Bush administration ever considered the consequences of their actions? Full speed ahead.

THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.

Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: “Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.” It was, he added, a “very legitimate strategic calculus”.

President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week, accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust”. He warned that the US and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late”.

Musharraf tries to hang on to power

By saying no:

Islamabad, August 26: Refusing to abide by the recent Supreme Court judgement, President Pervez Musharraf has said that exiled former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would not be allowed to return to Pakistan to take part in the general elections slated for later this year.

"The government will neither allow the Sharif brothers to come back nor would they be given a free hand if they chose to return. If Nawaz Sharif is not honouring his 'exile' deal, the government will put him behind bars or send him back to Saudi Arabia," The News quoted Musharraf as saying here.

Considering petitions filed by the deposed Premier and his brother Shahbaz Sharif, the apex court had ruled on Thursday that they were free to return to the Islamic nation after seven years in "forced" exile.

Musharraf yesterday held an emergency meeting of the ruling party MPs at the Presidency here amid reports that Sharif might return home possibly by next month to lead Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz's campaign in the general polls in Pakistan.

A little bit of history to explain the animosity between Musharraf and Sharif:

Sharif came to power in 1990, running on a platform of conservative politics with the intentions of wiping out corruption in Pakistan. But his term was cut short in 1993 when the presiding president of Pakistan, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, dissolved the National Assembly and placed his own caretaker prime minister in Sharif's place. Although the Supreme Court eventually overruled this move by Khan, Sharif was indignant and resigned, leaving the way open for the election of the first woman prime minister of Pakistan- Benazir Bhutto, in 1993.

The nature of Pakistani politics is less than transparent and corruption is endemic- no matter who sits in the executive mansion. Within a few years, Bhutto had also fallen out of favor- corruption being the common parole at election time- and Sharif was returned to power in an overwhelming vote of support in 1997. This time, the returning prime minister left nothing to chance, and proceeded to alter the constitution in a way that left virtually no possibility of removing him in a vote of no confidence. Securely in his position, it was Sharif who pursued the ultimate achievement of Pakistani foreign policy: on May 28, 1998, he oversaw the explosion of the country's first nuclear device, which was an act of retribution for India's trial explosion two weeks earlier, and it was with this event that Sharif's height of power was achieved.

It was also the zenith of his popularity, for after this, it was all down hill for Sharif. Over the course of his term of office, he had fallen out with several army officers who were trying to reassert military prominence in the decision-making process in Pakistan's highest office. Sharif dismissed them all, and finally he replaced the incalcitrant generals with the one person who would orchestrate Sharif's downfall: General Pervez Musharraf.

Following the nuclear tests, financial deterioration set in as President Clinton was forced to introduce sanctions on Pakistan for its nuclear crime. As a result, it was widely believed that the military would intervene in politics, and Sharif decided to counter any such move by relieving Musharraf of his duties while he was out of the country. Having heard of his termination, Musharraf boarded a commercial airliner and returned to Pakistan, but Sharif ordered the airport to deny landing rights to the plane. Musharraf was able to contact key officers on the ground, and within hours they had successfully overthrown Sharif and Musharraf landed safely but with little fuel to spare.

Thus defined, we can now understand the animosity shared between the two men, but we must also add that Musharraf had seen to the conviction of Sharif for crimes against the state, but it was decided to trade the sentence of life imprisonment for political exile in Saudi Arabia. But Musharraf's power has since then waned- evident in the court's overturning of the sentence of exile- and Sharif is due to return to Pakistan to wide public jubilation. He has allied himself with conservative Muslim groups who are miffed at the country's close ties to the US, and with the support of his native state of Punjab, Sharif looks like a candidate to be reckoned with.

As other ex-leaders circle around:

Washington, August 25: Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has said that in the event of the much touted 'deal' with President Pervez Musharraf failing to materialize, she might join hands with PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif if he agrees to part ways with the Islamist Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal.

Musharraf may not last much longer, especially when the U.S. is stepping back:

Bush administration is prodding Pakistan's Pres Gen Pervez Musharraf, who is mired in political crisis, to share authority with his longtime rival and former Prime Min Benazir Bhutto; Musharraf has lost so much domestic support that administration thinks alliance may be his best chance for remaining president; many in Pakistan voice doubts about workability and political wisdom of such deal; US officials say power sharing that might install Bhutto as prime minister could help defuse confrontation in which Musharraf has already considered invoking emergency powers; say they fear that Musharraf could eventually be replaced by leader who is less reliable ally.

Just remember why the U.S. is mucking about with Pakistan... Pakistan has an active Islamic militant faction, a corrupt government, a porous border, ongoing arguments with all its neighbors especially India, and ... nukes.