Your Source for Leaks Around the World!

Posts Tagged ‘Iraq’

The Yinon Plan, “Greater Israel”, Syria, Iraq, and ISIS: the Connection

In Archive, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, News, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Syria, Zionism on January 17, 2015 at 7:05 AM

By The Times Of Pol

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East, also known as the Yinon Plan, is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

Reach of a "Greater Israel"When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria, not to mention the process of regime change in Egypt, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. The latter consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli expansionist project. 

“Greater Israel” consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one Shiite and the other Sunni.

The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.

“Greater Israel” requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states. The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must

  1. become an imperial regional power, and
  2. must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states.

Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation… This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.

Viewed in this context, the war on Syria is part of the process of Israeli territorial expansion. Israeli intelligence working hand in glove with the US, Turkey and NATO is directly supportive of the Al Qaeda terrorist mercenaries inside Syria.

The Zionist Project also requires the destabilization of Egypt, the creation of factional divisions within Egypt as instrumented by the “Arab Spring” leading to the formation of a sectarian based State dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Richard Perle.

Similarly, although tweaked, the Yinon Plan is in motion and coming to life under the Clean Break”. This is a policy document written in 1996 by Richard Perle and the Study Group on “A New Israeli Strategy Towards 2000″ for Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel at the time.

Like many in the neoconservative movement, Perle had long been an advocate of regime change in Iraq. In 1998 Perle led an effort known as the Project for the New American Century with close neoconservative allies Wolfowitz, Woolsey, Elliott Abrams, and John Bolton. The Project culminated in a letter sent to US President Bill Clinton calling for the military overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime.

Prior to and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Perle held several exclusive meetings in his home where he discussed issues regarding American foreign policy on Iraq. In an effort to help fund their goals, Ahmed Chalabi an Iraqi-born businessman and founder of the Iraqi National Congress, helped Perle secure millions of dollars from the U.S. government in 1990. Chalabi was one of the key figures driving the war in Iraq and helped transmit important “information” to U.S congress and the public that would successfully help sell the war effort.

One might remember that it was PNAC that also published the now infamous documentRebuilding Americas Defenses” in which the following statement was made:

Further, the process of transformation [of the military], even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”.

Finally, as mentioned above, the Armed Forces Journal published an article in 2006 entitled: “Blood Borders”.

What follows are maps based upon the description in the article. One is the Middle East as it currently exists, and the other is the Middle East according to the suggestions in the article:

Blood borders: before and after.

Blood borders: before and after.

You will note how congruent these divisions are with both the Yinon Plan and “Clean Break”.

You might also note that the advance of ISIS in Iraq, thus far, is congruent with all three documents. They are not engaging the Kurds and have stopped North of Baghdad, thus effectively dividing Iraq into three states as pictured on the map: Free Kurdistan, Sunni Iraq, and the Arab Shia State.

Only time will tell whether ISIS attempts to push into Baghdad, or whether the city, itself, is divided along sectarian lines. As you can see in the image, Baghdad is right on the border of “Sunni Iraq” and the “Arab Shia” State.

Here is a map of recent movements of the ISIS insurgency:

ISIS advance.
Recent ISIS advances. source

You will notice, by comparing them to the map above that they have control over the area depicted as “Sunni Iraq”. With the exception of Kirkuk, you will notice that the territory that they control aligns roughly with the borders of the proposed “Sunni Iraq” in the Blood Borders image above.

The following image is an overlay of the map of ISIS controlled territory over the map of the newly proposed borders of the Middle East to make it easier to see the congruity between ISIS movements and the Yinon plan:

Recent advances of ISIS, overlaid with borders proposed by Yinon plan.
Recent advances of ISIS, overlaid with borders proposed by Yinon plan.

While there are various conceptions of the borders of “Greater Israel” (Eretz Israel HaShlema), here is an overlay of the image of “Greater Israel” (above) on the map of the newly proposed borders of the Middle East to give a sense of the area of balkanized Arab states that Israel would have in its sphere of influence if the Yinon Plan is successfully implemented:

"Greater Israel" overlaid over the proposed borders.
“Greater Israel” overlaid over the proposed borders.

Either the Yinon Plan is actually being implemented, using the sectarian animosity within the Muslim community as the vector or it is phenomenally coincidental that from Sudan, to Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Iraq the essential tenets of the Yinon Plan are being implemented.

It would certainly explain many of incongruities that we see in US foreign policy, especially with regard to our decision to arm and fund radical Islamic groups in Syria.

Depleted Uranium And The Iraq War’s Legacy Of Cancer

In Archive, Iraq, News, USA on July 3, 2014 at 2:10 AM
Depleted uranium was used in Iraq warzone weaponry, and now kids are playing in contaminated fields and the spent weapons are being sold as scrap metal.

IRaq uranium

As instability in Iraq is forcing the United States to consider a third invasion of the Middle Eastern nation, the consequences of the first two invasions are coming into focus. For large sectors of the Iraqi population, American intervention has led to sharp spikes in the rates of congenital birth defects, premature births, miscarriages and leukemia cases.

According to Iraqi government statistics, the rate of cancer in the country has skyrocketed from 40 per 100,000 people prior to the First Gulf War in 1991, to 800 per 100,000 in 1995, to at least 1,600 per 100,000 in 2005.

The culprit behind all of these health issues is depleted uranium, a byproduct of uranium enrichment. With a mass fraction a third of what fissile uranium would have, depleted uranium emits less alpha radiation — up to 60 percent less than natural uranium, according to the U.S. Department of Defense. This “relative” safety offered a rationale for many nations — particularly, the U.S. — to put the waste material to use.

As depleted uranium is 1.67 times denser than lead, a depleted uranium projectile can be smaller than an equivalent lead projectile but produce similar results. This smaller size means a smaller diameter, less aerodynamic drag and a smaller area of impact, meaning that depleted uranium bullets can travel faster and inflict more pressure on impact, causing deeper penetration. Additionally, depleted uranium is incendiary and self-sharpening, making depleted uranium ideal for anti-tank ammunition. It is also used as armor plating for much of America’s tank fleet.

The problem with using depleted uranium, however, lies in the fact that depleted uranium is mostly de-energized. In practical terms, depleted uranium can have — at a minimum — 40 percent the radioactivity of natural uranium with a half-life that can be measured in millennia (between 703 million to 4.468 billion years). While the depleted uranium presents little to no risk to health via radiation due to its relatively weak radioactivity, direct internal contact with the heavy metal can have chemical toxicity effects on the nervous system, liver, heart and kidneys, with DNA mutations and RNA transcription errors being reported in the case of depleted uranium dust being absorbed in vitro.

While depleted uranium is not as toxic as other heavy metals, such as mercury or lead, pronounced toxicity is still possible through repeated or chronic exposure.

The politics of depleted uranium

With the Iraqi government currently crippled by the insurgency efforts of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria — a group requesting that it be known simply as “the Caliphate” or “the Islamic State,” reflecting its perceived lack of challenge to its claims — and with the U.S. and the United Kingdom holding to the stance that depleted uranium presents no direct threat to Iraqi civilians, there is no active effort to properly dispose of the material.

As little information on the dangers of the material has been shared with the Iraqi people, depleted uranium and depleted uranium-tainted metals are regularly sold for scrap metal and re-used for any numbers of purposes — including machinery parts, cookery implements and home furnishings. Children play in depleted uranium-contaminated fields, which presents a heightened risk of unintentional ingestion due to hand-to-mouth activity. Abandoned vehicles salvaged for metal present a particularly high risk, as depleted uranium dust could accumulate from depleted uranium munitions, without access to an active airflow to dissipate it.

This lack of shared information may be intentional, though. The U.S. and the U.K. are actively blocking or opposing a binding international response to or study of the use of depleted uranium in warzones. Citing previous studies from the World Health Organization, NATO and the International Atomic Energy Agency, France, the U.S. and the U.K. — the world’s primary users of military-grade depleted uranium — argue that future studies are unnecessary and are being requested in a bid to ultimately hold the U.S. and its primary allies responsible for a health situation in Iraq that may have nothing to do with those countries. This, despite the fact that the studies cited by the U.S., the U.K. and France in their rebuttal did not look into the health implications of depleted uranium exposure, but simply depleted uranium radiation.

Depleted uranium is commonly used in the civilian market — from the triggering sensor in smoke detectors to a colorant used in dental porcelain. As it is weakly-radioactive, the radiation exposure danger of the metal does not typically exceed the ambient radiation normally present at sea level. It is believed that it would take more than 200 years for the radioactivity from a piece of depleted uranium to penetrate a person’s skin if that person was grasping the metal in his bare hand. This, however, does not mitigate or dismiss risk the metal poses to internal organs.

A known problem

However, according to Wim Zwijnenburg, policy advisor for security and disarmament for PAX, a Dutch pro-peace organization, and author of the paper “Laid to Waste: Depleted uranium contaminated military scrap in Iraq,” the U.S. is aware of the dangers of depleted uranium because the country has spent millions safeguarding its bases and military personnel from it.

As of 1999, military regulations on how to deal with vehicles contaminated with depleted uranium have been implemented, and in 2005, the General Accounting Office alleged that the Department of Defense was not monitoring the soil in Iraq to ascertain exposure to hazardous materials by American service members. At the time, however, a number of states, Congress members and military service organizations were actively challenging the Defense Department’s assertions that depleted uranium had minimal effect on the lives of the Iraq War veterans claiming depleted uranium poisoning.

“In regards to the U.S. responsibility for the depleted uranium, the Iraqi government has been put under pressure by the U.S. government not to publish too much information about it or to speculate on what it thinks has happened and to limit government resources to this issue,” Zwijnenburg told MintPress News, “as the Iraqi government still receives a lot of support from the U.S. government. Additionally, the Iraqi government does not want to scare off investment, particularly in the south, such as oil investors who may be scared off with talk of depleted uranium contamination.

“Also, the Saddam Hussein regime used depleted uranium use as a propaganda tool against the U.S. So, there is a generation of Iraqis that — in large portions — believe that the Americans gave them these diseases, including cancer. While there is an increase in the rise of cancer in Iraq, it cannot be easily attributed to [depleted uranium] use. However, the difficulty in studying the effects leave the issue in contention.”

Heavy metal America

The U.S. has suffered from its own heavy metal contamination crisis. Steve Fetter, professor at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy and co-author of the paper “The Hazard Posed by Depleted Uranium Munitions,” suggested to MintPress an analogous comparison to the use of depleted uranium in Iraq in order to highlight the danger of the depleted uranium.

From the 1920s to the mid-1970s, tetraethyl lead was added to gasoline to boost octane and increase fuel economy. The problem is that tetraethyl lead is toxic. The patent holders knew it was toxic, but used it anyway, despite the fact that ethanol was widely available at the time and was also known to be an octane booster.

The choice between tetraethyl lead and ethanol was a question of profit. At the time, ethanol was commonly distilled in backyard stills and mixed with gasoline to prevent “knocking,” or the misfiring of an engine’s cylinder before the air-gas mixture is properly compressed. As the use of ethanol in gasoline was a known procedure, it was not patentable, and therefore, not controllable.

As tetraethyl lead had the added benefit of sealing the microwelds used for the cylinder heads of early cars — extending the life of the car — the additive was pushed through. Although, this was done despite the fact that a collaborator on the development of the chemical wrote that “it’s a creeping and malicious poison.” During its first three years of production, eight workers died from lead poisoning at DuPont’s manufacturing plant in Deepwater, New Jersey, and another five died and 45 were hospitalized from the Baywater, New Jersey, Standard Oil plant.

Despite the known dangers, the Public Health Service ruled that the need for fuel outweighed the danger to people or the environment, and it allowed leaded gasoline to be sold until the Environmental Protection Agency ordered a scheduled phase-out of tetraethyl lead in 1974. Auto manufacturers ultimately backed this move when it was discovered that leaded gasoline clogged catalytic converters.

During the 50 years of leaded gasoline use, lead concentration in the blood rose 400 percent. As car use is heaviest in urban centers, the inner city and the populations that live there — the poor, blacks, Latinos and migrant populations — experienced the effects of lead toxicity the most. These effects include mental retardation; high blood pressure; neurological issues, including spasms, mood swings, memory loss, tingling and/or numbness in the extremities, muscle weakness and headaches/migraines; miscarriages or premature births; reduced or mutated sperm; and severe bodily pain.

As lead is naturally-occurring and a stable, non-decomposing element, lead concentration inside the body will not diminish under normal processes. If someone was exposed to lead, then, the effects of the metal could continue to cause harm even after the source had been cut, and for women of child-bearing age, the contamination could be transferred in vitro.

While comparing the United States’ use of leaded gasoline to Iraq’s depleted uranium is not a perfect analogy — lead is more toxic than uranium, for example, and there is an estimated 440,000 kilograms of depleted uranium in Iraq, compared to over a million tons of lead per year by the time the rollback began — the moral parallels are striking.

In the aftermath of leaded gasoline — which is still sold in the U.S. for non-consumer automotive uses — the U.S. is still dealing with entire socioeconomic groups affected by lead poisoning. The negative effects have manifested in a host of illnesses and disabilities in the black community and have been pointed to as a likely cause for the spike in criminality in the inner city.

When looking at the potential of inflicting the same level of hardship on the Iraqis, caution indeed becomes the better part of virtue. While it can be argued that depleted uranium is likely not a threat to the Iraqis, the danger of the chemical should not be dismissed. (It should be noted, too, that early testimony for leaded gasoline similarly suggested that there was no risk to the public.)

“Contaminated vehicles and fragments of depleted uranium penetrators abandoned on the battlefield represent an ‘attractive nuisance.’ Curious passers-by, both adults and children, will enter the vehicles and thereby be subject to potentially significant levels of uranium exposure from resuspended and ingested aerosols. Fragments of penetrators may be picked up and taken home as souvenirs,” read the conclusion to “The Hazard Posed by Depleted Uranium Munitions.”

“In the absence of more costly decontamination efforts, we would propose that all [depleted uranium]-contaminated vehicles be filled with concrete and buried and that [depleted uranium] penetrator fragments be picked up and buried as low-level radioactive waste.”


Did The CIA Rape Iraqi Children in Front of Their Parents?

In News on March 15, 2014 at 11:10 AM

via 4thAnon

Pic: Institute for Policy Studies (CC)
Pic: Institute for Policy Studies (CC)
By Good German/DisInformation

Seeing as how questions about the CIA’s torture program(s) and what crimes they’re attempting to cover up are in the news again, it seems like a good time to pull an old Seymour Hersh quote out of the Memory Hole:

“Some of the worst things that happened that you don’t know about. OK? Videos. There are women there. Some of you may have read that they were passing letters out, communications out to their men. This is at [Abu Ghraib], which is about 30 miles from Baghdad — 30 kilometers, maybe, just 20 miles, I’m not sure whether it’s — anyway. The women were passing messages out saying please come and kill me because of what’s happened. And basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children, in cases that have been recorded, the boys were sodomized, with the cameras rolling, and the worst above all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking. That your government has, and they’re in total terror it’s going to come out. It’s impossible to say to yourself, how did we get there, who are we, who are these people that sent us there.”

Information Clearing House: Seymour Hersh : The US government has videotapes of boys being sodomized at Abu Ghraib prison.

Just my little piece of the world: In 2004 Seymour Hersh Told a Story, But No One Listened

Infowars: Hersh: children raped at Abu Ghraib, Pentagon has videos

Iraq – incoming missile

In Activism, Al-Qaeda, Iraq, LEAKSOURCE ORIGINAL NEWS, Military, World Revolution on January 6, 2014 at 3:01 AM

via digitalfolklore

On Sunday an Iraqi missile strike was released showing an explosion which killed twenty-five militants. US Forces have been quick to support Iraq with drones and missiles, but at this stage have ruled out “boots on the ground”.

ISIS have emerged as another force in the sectarian violence which was expected after the US withdrawal and the reciprocal power shift between Sunni and Shia factions.


Fighting drone wars behind our back: cheap, invisible and risk-free mass murder

In Afghanistan, Britain, Drones, Iraq, News, Pakistan on April 16, 2013 at 3:05 AM

The great advantage of drones for western governments is they can be used without domestic casualties and therefore, they hope, without the risk of popular opposition or protest.

RAF Waddington will soon be the control centre for British drone warfare. It may already be, we can’t be sure.

The fact we don’t know testifies to the secrecy that surrounds the operation of these remote control killing machines. Drones embody the sinister shift that has been taken in the West’s wars post Iraq.

They blur the distinction between war and state execution, with no chance for public scrutiny.
Britain has been using drones in Afghanistan for some years. But by developing its drone capability, the British government is now stepping up its global ability to conduct arbitrary assassinations.

Official US language shows drones are normalizing such behaviour. There has been next to no public discussion about their use in Britain, but in the US drones are actually justified as precision weapons of international assassination. Their supporters say they are capable of surgically removing terrorist targets, so ‘cleansing’ weakened states of extremist leaders.

In a half-hearted attempt to provide a legal framework, the Obama administration has claimed that drones are justified because they are used only against “specific senior operational leaders of al Qaida and associated forces” involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks who are plotting “imminent” violent attacks on Americans. The US is still at war against Al-Qaeda, the argument goes, so such lethal incursions into foreign territory are legal.

“It has to be a threat that is serious and not speculative,” President Barack Obama said in a Sept. 6, 2012, interview with CNN. “It has to be a situation in which we can’t capture the individual before they move forward on some sort of operational plot against the United States.”

But the evidence is unchallengeable: this is nonsense. Recent reports suggest that just 1.5% of the estimated 3,100 that have been killed by US drones in Pakistan were identified by US officials as ‘high-profile targets’. The US categorises victims as children, civilians, “high-profile,” and “other.” “The ‘other” grey zone comprises males of fighting age.

The Obama administration assumes that these are legitimate targets even though there is no information as to their affiliation. But the Washington Post reported in February that most attacks now are “signature strikes,” in which targets are selected based on suspicious patterns of activity and the identities of those who could be killed is not known. In 2012, the New York Times paraphrased a view they said was shared by several officials that “people in an area of known terrorist activity, or found with a top Qaeda operative, are probably up to no good.”

Their crime in other words was to have been young, male and in the area.

But it’s not just that fantasies are being peddled about drones’ technical ability to single out their targets. Their strategic role is being obscured too. In reality drones are not used simply as surgical weapon to pre-empt a possible attack. Partly their adoption has been driven by the unpopularity and the manifest failure of the conventional wars that have been fought under the rubric of the war on terror over the last twelve years.

The great advantage of drones from the point of view of western governments is that, at least while the West has the technological edge over competitors, they can be used without domestic casualties and therefore, they hope, without the risk of popular opposition or protest.

Another advantage of drones is that they are a relatively cheap way of killing people, important at a time of spending cuts. They are a way of continuing foreign wars while slimming budgets.

Drones are no more part of a rational policy of self-defence than the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. And nor do they mark a drawdown in US military ambitions. They are in fact being used as a surrogate for conventional military operations. White House senior counterterrorism adviser John Brennan defended drone strikes in April 2012 by comparing them to “deploying large armies abroad” and “large, intrusive military deployments.”

The fact the US has used drones in Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan and very likely in Mali as well as Iraq and Afghanistan, testifies to the fact that drones are integrated into the US’s wider war strategy. They are being used to destabilise enemy governments and shore up allies.

The conditions that led to the war on terror are still in place. The US faces growing economic challenges while it retains enormous military predominance. The chaos and volatility created by the failed wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the rise of Chinese power in influence in the Pacific, in Africa and elsewhere make the global situation is, if anything, even more tense than at the beginning of the last decade.

The US military is explicit that the war goes on. In January, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told Ted Koppel that even after 2014, “Our war in Afghanistan will be complete, but no one has ever suggested that that will end the war.” Secretary Panetta is just as clear: “We are in a war. We’re in a war on terrorism and we’ve been in that war since 9/11.”

In a process that the experts call ‘monopoly erosion’, drone use is spreading fast, confirming that they are becoming the new face of modern warfare. A 2012 survey showed that 11 countries had functioning drone systems, including France, Germany, Israel, Turkey, India and China. Other countries are rushing to catch up. We already face a frightening situation in which great powers are confronting each other with these ‘easy to use’ ‘low cost’ killing systems.

A US study based on extensive research in Pakistan gives some inkling of the impact of this remote control imperialism:

Drones hover twenty-four hours a day over communities in northwest Pakistan, striking homes, vehicles and public spaces without warning. Their presence terrorizes men, women and children giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities. Those living under drones have to face the constant worry that a deadly strike may be fired at any moment, and the knowledge that they are powerless to protect themselves.

One man interviewed by the researchers described the reaction to the sound of the drones as “a wave of terror” coming over the community. “Children, grown-up people, women, they are terrified. . . . They scream in terror.” Another “God knows whether they’ll strike us again or not. But they’re always surveying us, they’re always over us, and you never know when they’re going to strike and attack”.

The opposition to our government’s foreign wars must continue – we mustn’t let them keep fighting behind our backs.


%d bloggers like this: