BBC, British Brainwash Corporation, NWO Order out of Chaos

Nuclear security summit hears of terror risk

The US and Russian presidents are at the summit fresh from a new treaty

World leaders at a summit on nuclear security in Washington have heard dire warnings of the danger of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands.

President Barack Obama, opening the biggest international meeting hosted by the US since 1945, greeted leaders from nearly 50 countries.

Officials said more should be done to prevent theft or smuggling.

Meanwhile France's leader stressed his country could not give up its own nuclear weapons.

The US welcomed a Ukrainian pledge to eliminate its stockpile of highly enriched uranium by 2012.

The two-day summit is taking place without representatives of Iran and North Korea, neither of whom were invited by the US because of the disputes over their nuclear programmes.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dropped plans to attend the summit, reportedly because of concern that Muslim states planned to press for Israel to open its own nuclear facilities to international inspection.

'Proliferators not welcome'

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ikia Amano, said that nuclear powers needed to do more to protect nuclear materials.

MARDELL'S AMERICA Perhaps some threats seem too much like fiction to be taken seriously Read Mark's thoughts in full

"The problem is that nuclear material and radioactive material are not well protected and member states need to better protect these materials against the theft or smuggling," he told the BBC.

"On average every two days we receive one new information on an incident involving theft or smuggling of nuclear material."

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said that nuclear nations like Pakistan were vulnerable.

"The message from this summit is that any country can be treated as a normal country on nuclear matters if it behaves like a normal country," he said.

"Proliferators are not welcome in the modern world, nuclear proliferators especially, and I think it's a very clear message to the Iranians and others that there is an international desire to use civilian nuclear power for beneficial purposes, but not to allow it to leech into a military weapons programme that could be so dangerous, especially in a region like the Middle East."

A senior American counter-terrorism expert, John Brennan, warned that al-Qaeda had been seeking material for a nuclear bomb for more than 15 years.

"There have been numerous reports over the past eight or nine years of attempts to obtain various types of purported material," he told reporters.

"We know al-Qaida has been involved a number of times. We know they have been scammed a number of times."

President Obama and his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao reportedly agreed at pre-summit talks to step up pressure on Iran over its atomic plans.

"The Chinese very clearly share our concern about the Iranian nuclear programme," said Jeff Bader, Mr Obama's senior director for Asia on the National Security Council.

"The two presidents agreed the two delegations should work together on a sanctions resolution in New York."

Ukrainian precedent

Just before the summit opened, Ukraine agreed to eliminate its stockpile of weapons-grade nuclear material which, the US said, was enough to build "several weapons".

White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs: "Ukraine announced a landmark decision"

US officials said Ukraine's highly enriched uranium would be removed with some US technical and financial help.

Ukraine's agreement sets a precedent that Mr Obama would like other countries to follow, the BBC's diplomatic correspondent, Jonathan Marcus, reports from Washington.

It is estimated there are about 1,600 tonnes of highly enriched uranium in the world - the type used in nuclear weapons.

Experts agree that virtually all of it is held by the acknowledged nuclear-weapons states, most of it in Russia.

Speaking in an interview before the summit opened, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said his country would not give up its nuclear weapons because to do so would be to jeopardise national security.

"I cannot jeopardise the security and safety of my country," he told CBS News.

"I have inherited the legacy of the efforts made by my predecessors to build up France as a nuclear power and I could not give up nuclear weapons if I wasn't sure the world was a stable and safe place."

Last week, the US and Russia signed a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, reducing each country's deployed nuclear arsenal to 1,550 weapons.

Mr Obama has also approved a new nuclear policy for the US, saying he plans to cut the nuclear arsenal, refrain from nuclear tests and not use nuclear weapons against countries that do not have them.

North Korean Test Bomb or a Setup for War in Asia?

Ken,

North Korea May 25 2009 blast centerOn IRIS Seismic Monitor, the Atomic Bomb Test of May 25 2009 at 00:54:43 Zulu was on the surface not underground as reported. The reading of 4.7 on the Richter scale is in the megaton yield range not the kiloton range as reported on the news.


The coordinates Latitude 41.33 North and Longitude 129.01 East places the explosion in the Hamgyong-Sanmack Mountains of North-eastern North Korea. The town of Hapsu may be gone.

A bomb in the megaton range. This is not a North Korean bomb.

The mushroom cloud would have been huge. Fallout will cover Japan.

This is a deliberate attempt to create a war involving most of Asia.

The first bomb North Korea was supposed to have detonated destroyed a train station and small town [Ryongchon, N. Korea] near the Chinese border a few years ago. Some internet articles broached the possibility that the explosion was caused by a Tomahawk cruise missile. This is a type of tactical nuke called a bunker buster used in Baghdad and in the mountains of Afghanistan.

May 25 2009 North Korea blast location from 10 km altitude Iran has sent six ships into international waters, the Gulf of Aden.

Something is happening, a trap is being set.

Zuerrnnovahh-Starr Livingstone

© Copyright 2009 Educate-Yourself.org All Rights Reserved.

My personal note:

William Shakespear aka Sir Francis Bacon

All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women
merely players.

Yes We Can!

Sheryl Gay Stolberg – New York Times May 20, 2009

President Obama told human rights advocates at the White House on Wednesday that he was mulling the need for a “preventive detention” system that would establish a legal basis for the United States to incarcerate terrorism suspects who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried, two participants in the private session said.

The discussion, in a 90-minute meeting in the Cabinet Room that included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and other top administration officials, came on the eve of a much-anticipated speech Mr. Obama is to give Thursday on a number of thorny national security matters, including his promise to close the detention center at the naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

Human rights advocates are growing deeply uneasy with Mr. Obama’s stance on these issues, especially his recent move to block the release of photographs showing abuse of detainees, and his announcement that he is willing to try terrorism suspects in military commissions — a concept he criticized bitterly as a presidential candidate.

The two participants, outsiders who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the session was intended to be off the record, said they left the meeting dismayed.

They said Mr. Obama told them he was thinking about “the long game” — how to establish a legal system that would endure for future presidents. He raised the issue of preventive detention himself, but made clear that he had not made a decision on it. Several senior White House officials did not respond to requests for comment on the outsiders’ accounts.

“He was almost ruminating over the need for statutory change to the laws so that we can deal with individuals who we can’t charge and detain,” one participant said. “We’ve known this is on the horizon for many years, but we were able to hold it off with George Bush. The idea that we might find ourselves fighting with the Obama administration over these powers is really stunning.”

The other participant said Mr. Obama did not seem to be thinking about preventive detention for terrorism suspects now held at Guantánamo Bay, but rather for those captured in the future, in settings other than a legitimate battlefield like Afghanistan. “The issue is,” the participant said, “What are the options left open to a future president?”

Mr. Obama did not specify how he intended to deal with Guantánamo detainees who posed a threat and could not be tried, nor did he share the contents of Thursday’s speech, the participants said.

He will deliver the speech at a site laden with symbolism — the National Archives, home to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Across town, his biggest Republican critic, former Vice President Dick Cheney, will deliver a speech at the American Enterprise Institute.

Mr. Cheney and other hawkish critics have sought to portray Mr. Obama as weak on terror, and their argument seems to be catching on with the public. On Tuesday, Senate Democrats, in a clear rebuke to the White House, blocked the $80 million Mr. Obama had requested in financing to close the Guantánamo prison.

The lawmakers say they want a detailed plan before releasing the money; there is deep opposition on Capitol Hill to housing terrorism suspects inside the United States.

“He needs to convince people that he’s got a game plan that will protect us as well as be fair to the detainees,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who agrees with Mr. Obama that the prison should be closed. “If he can do that, then we’re back on track. But if he doesn’t make that case, then we’ve lost control of this debate.”

But Mr. Obama will not use the speech to provide the details lawmakers want.

“What it’s not going to be is a prescriptive speech,” said David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser. “The president wants to take some time and put this whole issue in perspective to identify what the challenges are and how he will approach dealing with them.”
www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.html?_r=2
Max Igan



watch the other parts on youtubinazi while you still can
Much love to all

John Harris: History From A Different Perspective