Who is McCain? PersonalityTraits

Saint Michael Traveler


Source: McCain Blends Instinct with Political Calculation

Download audio from the above link.

How would he process a national emergency? McCain in his book "Worth the Fighting For," he writes “As a politician, I am instinctive, often impulsive.” He also writes:” "I don't torture myself over decisions. I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can. Often, my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint."

Former Senator Gary Hart (D), a friend of Senator McCain and a groomsman in John and Cindy McCain's wedding describes McCain traits by ” Now, he's a smart guy or he wouldn't be where he is, but I don't think -- I think he'd be the first to say he's not a rocket scientist or a pure analytical brain, if you will. I think he, John, reacts to things.”

Norman Ornstein, American Enterprise Institute says: ”John McCain is a fighter pilot. A lot of his persona comes from being a fighter pilot.
This is a man who not only constantly questions authority, but is fond of making last-minute, from-the-gut, impulsive, risk-taking decisions, and believing to his bones that there may be a risk here, but it will pay off.
An impulsive decision-making style is fine if you're riding a jet. An impulsive decision-making style is fine if you're piloting a jet in combat. It's fine if you're a senator where the consequences are not going to be that long-lasting. It's a real question mark when you move into the presidency.”
Are these traits make Senator McCain fit to be our President?

Iran and Nuclear Fuel Production

Saint Michael Traveler

The whole issue of conflict with Iran is about control of the sources of energy, oil and nuclear fuel. British-American control of the sources of energy, oil, started once the value of oil over coal was demonstrated by German engineers especially for propulsion of ships.

The second main source of energy is nuclear power generation. The efforts to monopolize nuclear fuel production started in 1978, when the Nuclear Suppliers Group tried to impose restrictions on the right of developing countries to enrich their own uranium, a right. Since Article IV of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ensures access to peaceful uses of nuclear technology for non-nuclear weapon states, the technology for uranium enrichment must be permitted to all states under the current nonproliferation regime. Countries like Iran therefore, are permitted to develop their own enrichment technology for peaceful nuclear energy production. Iran has argued for an international nuclear fuel consortium to operate Iranian nuclear enrichment. Iranians assert that this international cooperative arrangement and IAEA oversight together will eliminate USA fear that Iran is attempting to use the technology to develop nuclear weapon.

The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) is a USA initiative that offers an international control over production of nuclear fuel and disposal of the associated nuclear wastes. GNEP-initiative monopolizes nuclear fuel production and waste management infrastructure.

Global Nuclear Power Infrastructure (GNPI) is a Russian initiative.
The Angarsk Electrolyzing and Chemical Combine, a plant created to enrich uranium for the Soviet nuclear program is located in Angarsk in southeastern Siberia, Russia. The international uranium enrichment center" (IUEC) in Angarsk objective is to provide a guaranteed supply of uranium fuel for countries which do not enrich uranium themselves, Iran, India and others. Russia will retain exclusive control of all sensitive enrichment technology.

All these initiatives, both GNEP and GNPI have one thing in common, monopolizing production of nuclear fuel. Any nation who would have nuclear reactor but can not control the supplier of nuclear fuel is not an independent nation. The case of Iran and Russia as supplier of the fuel demonstrates my argument. The Iranian problem for receiving from Russia fuel for Bushehr - Iran Nuclear Reactor was greatly co-opted by the United States forcing Iran to initiate her own fuel production.

McCain and the Republican Party’s puppet dance

Saint Michael Traveler


Senator McCain attempts to divert our attention away from our national problems by creating imaginary threats such as Iran. He forgets that we have seen these puppet masters' works and we have learned about their tricks.

Senator McCain is out of touch with my generation. My generation demanded we should give all children in America the same opportunity irrespective of their gender, color of skin, religion of the parents, and the national origin of the parents, or where they live in America. My generation supported the American workers, farmers, and the middle class.

The Republican Party represents the "me-generation". The life objectives of the “me-generation” are to get money as much as you can and where ever you can, then, use the money to buy more power and self-gratification.

The Republican Party is responsible for the mass migration of the American industry and technical jobs to other countries; they had one objective to maximize their profits using the cheapest labor at the expense of the environment. The Republican Party is responsible for withdrawing investment in our country’s infrastructure and industry so that they can invest the capital in the other countries; they had one objective to maximize their return on investment at the expense of the American future.

The Republican Party and their flag bearer Senator McCain support multi-national corporations whose sole allegiance is to profit at the expense of my children and grand children. The Democratic Party supports the workers, the farmers and the middle class Americans.

The issues are: job, medical insurance, transportation, education, housing, and the national infrastructure. The Republican Administration has been diverting attention from these real issues to fear of vague unsubstantiated international threats. Senator McCain, we have seen the Republican Party’s puppet dance before. It will not work again.

Israel Planned to use Georgian Air Bases to Attack Iran

Saint Michael Traveler

This post is an excerpt of the article published by LibertyForum. The article provides a context to the recent events in Georgia. I find this article to be informative and would provide a wider perspective to our world, not all things are simple as they are tersely reported by CNN or Reuter.
“Georgia became a huge source of income, and military advantage, for the Israeli government and Israeli arms dealers. Israel began selling arms to Georgia about seven years ago,…”

“…Georgia had relatively large budgets, mostly American grants, and could be interested in purchasing Israeli weapons.

The military cooperation between the countries developed swiftly. The fact that Georgia’s defense minister, Davit Kezerashvili, is a former Israeli who is fluent in Hebrew contributed to this cooperation. “We are now in a fight against the great Russia,” he said, “and our hope is to receive assistance from the White House, because Georgia cannot survive on its own. “

Kezerashvili’s door was always open to the Israelis who came and offered his country arms systems made in Israel. Compared to countries in Eastern Europe, the deals in this country were conducted fast, mainly due to the pro-Israeli defense minister’s personal involvement.”

“…Among the Israelis who took advantage of the opportunity and began doing business in Georgia were former Minister Roni Milo and his brother Shlomo, former director-general of the Military Industries, Brigadier-General (Res.) Gal Hirsch and Major-General (Res.) Yisrael Ziv.

Roni Milo conducted business in Georgia for Elbit Systems and the Military Industries, and with his help Israel’s defense industries managed to sell to Georgia remote-piloted vehicles (RPVs), automatic turrets for armored vehicles, antiaircraft systems, communication systems, shells and rockets.

The Ministry of Defense of Israel had supplied the Georgian government their Hermes 450 UAV spy drones, made by Elbit Maarahot Systems Ltd, for use, under the strict control of Israeli intelligence units, to conduct intelligence-gathering flights over southern Russia and, most especially into a Iran, targeted for Israeli Air Force attacks in the near future.

Two airfields in southern Georgia had been earmarked for the use of Israeli military aircraft, intended to launch an attack on identified targets relating to Iranian atomic energy projects. This attack was approved by President Bush in an undertaking with the government of Israel signed in Washington, D.C., on July 4, 2006.

The thrust of this top secret agreement was that the Israeli government would have “free and unfettered use” of unspecified Georgian airfields, under American control, onto which they could ferry fighter-bombers which then could fly south, over Turkish territory (and with clandestine Turkish permission) to strike at Tehran. The distance from Georgia to Tehran is obviously far less than from Tel Aviv.

No one expected that these attacks would completely destroy Iranian military or scientific targets, but there would be the element of complete surprise coupled with serious property damage which might well interdict future Iranian atomic development and certainly serve as a serious warning to Iran not to threaten Israel again. Using Georgian bases, with the consent and full assistance of, the United States, would make such an attack much more feasible that attempting to fly from Israeli bases with overflights that might have serious regional diplomatic consequences.

Now, thanks to the irrational actions of the thoroughly unstable Georgian president, all of these schemes have collapsed and it is now believed that the Russian special forces have captured, intact, a number of the Israeli drones and, far more important, their radio controlling equipment.

In the main, Israeli military and intelligence units stationed in Georgia were mostly composed of Israel Defense Force reservists working for Global CST, owned by Maj. Gen. Israel Ziv, and Defense Shield, owned by Brig. Gen. Gal Hirsch. “The Israelis should be proud of themselves for the Israeli training and education received by the Georgian soldiers,” Georgian Minister Temur Yakobashvili.

By this manner, Israel could claim that it had a very small number of IDF people in Georgia “mainly connected with our Embassy in Tiblisi.” The Russians, however, were not fooled by this and their own intelligence had pinpointed Israeli surveillance bases and when they went after the Georgians who invaded South Ossetia, units of the Russian air force bombed the Israeli bases in central Georgia and in the area of the capital, Tbilisi. They also severely damaged the runways and service areas of the two Georgian airbases designed to launch Israeli sir force units in a sudden attack on Iran.

Israel is currently a part of the Anglo-American military axis, which cooperates with the interests of the Western oil giants in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Israel is a partner in the Baku-Tblisi- Ceyhan pipeline which brings oil and gas to the Eastern Mediterranean. More than 20 percent of Israeli oil is imported from Azerbaijan, of which a large share transits through the BTC pipeline. Controlled by British Petroleum, the BTC pipeline has dramatically changed the geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Caucusus:

“[The BTC pipeline] considerably changes the status of the region’s countries and cements a new pro-West alliance. Having taken the pipeline to the Mediterranean, Washington has practically set up a new bloc with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Israel, ” (Komerzant, Moscow, 14 July 2006)

While the official reports state that the BTC pipeline will “channel oil to Western markets”, what is rarely acknowledged is that part of the oil from the Caspian sea would be directly channeled towards Israel, via Georgia. In this regard, an Israeli-Turkish pipeline project has also been envisaged which would link Ceyhan to the Israeli port of Ashkelon and from there through Israel’s main pipeline system, to the Red Sea.

The objective of Israel is not only to acquire Caspian sea oil for its own consumption needs but also to play a key role in re-exporting Caspian sea oil back to the Asian markets through the Red Sea port of Eilat. The strategic implications of this re-routing of Caspian sea oil are far-reaching

What has been planned, is to link the BTC pipeline to the Trans-Israel Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline, also known as Israel’s Tipline, from Ceyhan to the Israeli port of Ashkelon.”

“The unmanned Israeli clandestine surveillance drones are a favorite of intelligence agencies world-wide. Their most popular drone is the Hermes 450 drone aircraft.

The Hermes 450 is a large, capable 450 kg spy drone manufactured by Elbit Systems of Israel. Able to stay airborne for a maximum of 20 hours, it has a 10.5 metre wingspan and is 6.1 metres long. It can carry a variety of different surveillance packages, including the CoMPASS (Compact Multi-Purpose Advanced Stabilised System), which is a combined laser marker and infrared scanner.

Elbit also offers Hermes with the AN/ZPQ-1 TESAR (Tactical Endurance Synthetic Aperture Radar) from Northrop Grumman of the US, a ground-sweeping radar which can detect objects as small as one foot in size and pick out those which are moving from those which aren’t. Radars of this type are essential for full bad weather capability, and help a lot with scanning large areas of terrain. Electro-optical scanners such as CoMPASS tend to offer a “drink-straw” view of only small areas in detail. The TESAR is the same radar used in the hugely successful “Predator” drone, in service for several years now with the US forces."

"...If a highly irate CIA employee, complaining of “excessive Israeli influence” in his agency, had not passed on files of information to the Russians late last year in Miami, in all probability, we would be reading about a stunning Israeli attack on Tehran. Now, the Iranian anti-aircraft missile batteries, supplied and manned by Russian “technicians,” have the probable coordinates of such an Israeli surprise attack, from the north, which would give the defenses of Tehran a vital heads-up.”

“…War in the Caucasus is as much the product of an American imperial drive as local conflicts. It’s likely to be a taste of things to come.”

The American Foreign Policy in the Middle East: Jewish Neoconservatives

Saint Michael Traveler

Do American people have any understanding about the negative influence of Jewish Neoconservatives on the US foreign policy? Their influence has been greatly responsible for the negative international image of the United States. The Neoconservatives have followed Israel and in some cases have initiated the negative perception about the Muslim world, specifically Iran.

This negative influence has resulted wasting about 30 years not using effective diplomatic interaction with Iran. Foreign Policy of President Bush and Iran , dictated by neoconservative advisers had been to sabotage the basic premise of diplomacy by under cutting the actions of European Union foreign policy Chief Javier Solana.

Undersecretary of State William Burns attended the Geneva meeting, the first direct meeting between USA and Iranian representatives. We had build up the expectations before the meeting that mere presence of Burns would stop Iranian producing nuclear fuel; we completely ignored the diplomatic rule of engagement and expected an instant result.

Before we could be effective in our interactions with Iran, we would need to have an understanding of their interests and positions, fears and expectations. To start we would need to know what Iran wants.

What would you do if you were the president of Iran?
What does Iran Want?
Before drawing a red line with Iran, we must be clear about our own motivations and the expected outcomes.

We have multiple options in our relationships with Iran. Among them would be the continuation of the present status, or a robust start of diplomatic interaction. Anatol Lieven and Trita Parsi recent article: Drawing a red line with Iran provides a realistic expectation for both USA and Iran. Let us stay cool and use diplomatic rules of engagement and talk with Iran.

Similar to the past 45 years, Israel would continue to be a negative influence in our relationship with Iran. This problem is not knew, even during Mohammad Reza Pahlavi Iran suffered in her interaction with US due to the negative influence of Israel and her lobbies.
_________________________________________
Please read: "Blowing His Top" by Joe Klein, Time magazine, August 4, 2008, page 31. This article should be read by all those who support Neo-conservatism in America.

and
Joe Klein on Neoconservatives and Iran
"They pick Ahmadinejad specifically because he's the guy making the wildest antisemitic statements. I think that's being done for political purposes, to scare the shit out of my parents. It's a Broward County strategy, it's a Florida strategy. On Iran, I think that it's a love/hate relationship, since Iran and Israel are natural allies. You know, when I was in Iran, I'd talk to people. I was talking to one right-winger, and I said, "You know who your natural ally is?" and I was thinking the United States and he said, "Oh, yeah, Israel." I think that my reading on the nuclear issue is, given the level of threats that they've been getting from the United States, and from Israel, it's a logical thing for Iran to want nuclear weapons as a deterrent. I don't think they'd ever actually use it. First of all, they don't actually have it, but if they did have it, they'd contaminate at the very least the third most holy site in Islam, and they'd kill a hell of a lot of Muslims. So I think that they want it as a matter of deterrence and a matter of prestige. When you look at Iran's behavior, it has not been irrational."

What would you do if you were the president of Iran? What does Iran Want?

I think more than anything to be able to defend their country. Iran wants the same things as Israel, security. Who can they trust?

They remember 1979; Arabic nations who supported Iraq against Iran. The integrated financial, technical, and armaments that were provided by many Arab countries to support Arabic Iraq against non-Arab Iranians was responsible for death of about 500,000 Iranians and injury of several millions.




They remember our financial and technical support of Sadam Hossein to use chemical bombs against Iranians.

They remember 1988 unprovoked attack of the United State on a civilian Iranian airliner. Iran civilian airliner Flight 655 was shot down by the US Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes on Sunday July 3, 1988, killing all 290 passengers, including 66 children, and crewmembers onboard.















An Airbus A300

The civilian airliner, carrying passengers from Iran, Italy, the UAE, India, Pakistan and the former Yugoslavia, was en route from Iran's southern city of Bandar Abbas to Dubai when it was hit by two SM-2MR surface-to-air missiles launched from the warship commanded by Captain William C. Rogers III.

The aircraft was flying within the Iranian airspace and did not have an attack profile. The plane was identified by Vincennes crew as a passenger aircraft. The objective was to teach Iran to capitulate in war with Iraq; otherwise more punishments were to be expected, such as U.S. Attacks on Iranian Oil Platforms in 1987-1988.

The Vincennes crew received combat-action ribbons. Lieutenant Commander Scott Lustig, air-warfare coordinator on the Vincennes, was awarded with the Commendation Medal for 'heroic achievement'.

Iranians remember summer of 1953.

President George Bush often states that Iran is threatening the interests of the Unites States in Persian Gulf! What are the interests of England and the United States in Persian Gulf, the Persian front door to Iran?
A primer for discussion of these issues must start with review of British and the United States policies relative to the Persian Gulf region. Stephen Kinzer, a veteran New York Times correspondent, in his book “All the Shah’s Men, an American coup and the roots of Middle East Terror”, published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003, brilliantly reconstructs the events leading to the present dilemma of the United States in the Middle East. The events described in this marvelous book are not fiction; the events actually happened during the summer of 1953 in Tehran, Iran.

The United States Central Intelligence Agency operation Ajax staged coup d’état in 1953 against democratically elected Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh. Democracy was substituted with the despotic regime of Mohammad Reza Shah. The dawn of democracy in Iran, started in late 1880, flickered by democratically elected Mossadegh, was extinguished. This was the beginning of Iranian servitude once more to the interests of England and the United States. During his last years, Shah did not trust Iranian people; his inner palace was guarded by Israel commandos. Since 1979, the United States has been punishing Iranian people for ousting the immature, weak, despotic Mohammad Reza Shah. This punishment, Iranian assert, included Iraq invasion of Iran instigated by President Regan. During this war, the United States and her satellite nations helped materially and logistically Iraqi military forces to invade Iran and use chemical and biological weapons on Iranian population.

Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh

In the preface of his book, Kinzer recalls his conversation with an Iranian lady about Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh. He asked her: “What do you remember…about the coup against him?” She responded:













“Why did you Americans do that terrible thing? We always loved America. To us, America was the great country, the perfect country, the country that helped us while other countries were exploiting us. But after that moment, no one in Iran ever trusted the United States again…”

This un-American act was instigated by Winston Churchill-Anthony Eden of England and two American brothers John Foster Dulles (US Secretary of State) and Allen Dulles (Director of Central Intelligence Agency). The primary reason for this regime change was to subordinate Iranian people and exploit the Iranian natural resources.

Harry Truman once said: "There is nothing new in the world except the histories you don not know.” Have we learned from our past mistakes committed during 1953 not to repeat it once more? This time the price would be much greater for both the Iranian and our American societies! We must stop George Bush with his neocolonialism.

If you were the President of Iran, what would you do for your country?


Please read Persian Paradox http://www.geocities.com/stmtraveler/PersianPardox.htm.

Israel, cool it! Israel, let USA establish diplomatic relation with Iran.

Experience and Vision for President-Elect

Why are we making so much fuss about the foreign experience of the candidates for the president? President elect list of priority tasks for his or her administration is greatly influenced by his vision of the future for America and the world. The president-elect, if he or she is a good administrator, will always choose competent members for his cabinets and advisors. The president-elect will not encircle himself with a group of "yes Sir" men or women.

The most important characteristic of a good president-elect would be a good listener, analyzer, and user of deliberate process for action making. As such, he can utilize centuries of experience and knowledge in diverse field to advance his mission for the nation. A democratic process, unlike a dictatorial system, is slow and would require the consensus of those who had elected the president. A good president would work with the representatives of the people and with deliberate attempt to listen to both sides of the isles.

The worst type of a president is an ideologue responding to only very limited sector of the American people.
















Persian Art
Omar Khayyam's Rubiat

Would but the Desert of the Fountain yield
One glimpse -- If dimly, yet indeed, reveal'd
To which the fainting Traveler might spring,
As springs the trampled herbage of the field!


Who would make a better president, Senator McCain or Senator Obama? Each represents a philosophy inherent in the two party system, Republican or Democratic, a Hamiltonian President McCain or a Jeffersonian President Obama.

Is Military Sevice Enough to be Qualified as our President?

Saint Michael Traveler

Is that enough to be qualified as our President?

We all serve, or have served this nation as professional military men and women, teachers, firemen, policemen, postal servicemen, engineers, doctors, scientists and many others. In my opinion, the candidate’s vision for the nation, educational trainings, and experiences are more important than being a prisoner of war as a qualification for the office.
















I agree with General Wesley Clark’s remark: "riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is not a qualification to be president." I am surprised with over reaction of McCain. Senator McCain should know better to question General Clark’s comment; unless all he has to offer is his military service record. Is that enough to be qualified as our President?

I personally prefer a non-professional military candidate for the office of the president, unless he would be a man advocating peace having learned that killing people is much too uncivilized in this modern world.

Are our Congressional Representatives Leading us to War with Iran?

Saint Michael Traveler

Based on Yes Magazine, a recent story on CBS News, the answer seems to be a full-court press by the government of Israel and the American-Israeli lobby AIPAC. CBS ran the story Tuesday as Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen was on his way to the Middle East to confer with Israeli government officials. "Israelis are uncertain about what would be the policies of the next [U.S.] administration vis-à-vis Iran," CBS consultant Michael Oren says in the report.

“As has become the norm lately, the most sane policies are coming not out of Washington, DC, but out of state and local government. In her article in YES! With Ben Manski, Karen Dolan, of Cities for Peace, shows local governments setting a different direction on issues ranging from climate change to foreign policy; in her recent op-ed, she tells of the 32 U.S. mayors who have passed resolutions opposing war on Iran.”

“There are alternatives to attacking Iran and killing Iranian people. In his article in the foreign policy issue of YES! Magazine, Robert Naiman, of JustForeignPolicy.org shows that we avert the killing and maiming of Iranian civilians, by talking with Iran instead of bombing their country. Doing that could avert taking Middle East mayhem to a new level. Even better, we could actually work with Iran in an international effort to bring stability back to the region.”

Foreign Policy of President Bush and Iran indicated that Iran had submitted a package to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in mid-May 2008 as well as to world powers, including Russia and the United States. The proposal suggests "the creation of uranium enrichment consortiums in various countries, including Iran." It also requires that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) step up its supervision of nuclear sites around the world and asserts that more should be done to ensure nuclear programs would not diverted materials for fabrication of nuclear bomb.

The article "Preparing the Battlefield,
The Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran",
Seymour M. Hersh, July 7, 2008, Annals of National Security, The New Yorker magazine, reveals some of the actions committed by our Administration in our name.

Some congressional representatives have singed to vote for Bill Number: H.CON.RES.362. The bill authorizes Navy to blockade Iran in Persian Gulf; you know this is declaration of war.

Members of AIPAC (Israel Lobby in the United States) are gunning for another war, this time with Iran. The same band of people instigated USA attack on Iraq.

Iran is 7500 miles away from the United States. It is recovering from years of subjugation by USA and Europeans. We tend to associate Iran with their recent president as the people of the world associate USA with President Bush. Neither one is a truce representative of the two societies.

We are good people, like most Iranians, who have many problems of our own, feeding our children, educating them, hoping they would find a job, medical insurance, and could support their own families. Most of those who have retired are struggling to survive after years of serving our country. The president and his administration have taken USA with a surplus to fully indebted to foreign nations.

Republicans and Democrats are often deluded during election and not smart. How could we be smart if we elect the same type of people over and over again? We are fooled by their appeasing words, the words we like to hear. For example, we don't like to kill and make wars on other nations. We are good people. We have problem housing, feeding, and educating our children. We tell our problems to our congressional representatives. But what do they do; authorize more war borrowing money from other nations expecting our children and grand children to pay for it. Is that smart?

Our administration and congressional representaives should look at home, and at our problems; please do something about them. Let Iran be.

Foreign Policy of President Bush and Iran

President Bush has repeated the hollow statement that he will give diplomacy a chance to resolve the dispute with Iran on their nuclear fuel cycle. In the same time he has sabotaged the basic premise of diplomacy by under cutting the actions of European Union foreign policy Chief Javier Solana.














Tehran at Sunset


Iran submitted a package to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in mid-May 2008 as well as to world powers, including Russia and the United States. The proposal suggests "the creation of uranium enrichment consortiums in various countries, including Iran." It also requires that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) step up its supervision of nuclear sites around the world and asserts that more should be done to ensure nuclear programs would not diverted materials for fabrication of nuclear bomb.

"Thomas Pickering, the US ambassador to the United Nations under President George H.W. Bush, endorsed the idea of such a consortium in a March article in the New York Review of Books." And the plan is "getting increased interest from senior members of both parties in Congress and nonproliferation specialists"[Boston Globe June 10].

Senators Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, and Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, have said publicly that the consortium plan should be explored. Representative Edward J. Markey, a Malden Democrat, went further, calling the plan "a creative, thoughtful, and productive potential solution."

Robert Naiman, Tue Jun 17, 3:08 PM ET, NYT Exposes Fraud of "Generous Offer" to Iran reported: “The same PIPA poll found that 58% of Iranians support the idea of making a deal with the UN Security Council that would allow Iran to have a full-cycle nuclear program while giving the International Atomic Energy Agency "permanent and full access throughout Iran to ensure that its nuclear program is limited to energy production" and not producing nuclear weapons. PIPA notes that in a March 2008 poll for the BBC World Service 55% of Americans approved of such a deal.”

“In April, the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland published a poll of Iranian public opinion. PIPA found that 81% of Iranians consider it "very important" for "Iran to have a full-fuel-cycle nuclear program" which would give Iran the capacity to produce nuclear fuel for energy production. Four out of five. Only 5% think Iran should not pursue a full-fuel-cycle program.”
If the basis for the 6-nation negotiation with Iran over her nuclear fuel cycle is enforcement of the United Nations Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), then the Iranian proposal has fully achieved the objective.

President Bush often stated that everything is on the table unless Iran stops nuclear fuel cycle activities. He further has asserted that his administration would only talk with Iran after the nuclear fuel cycle activities verifiably had been stopped. Iranian people have consistently rejected his precondition for diplomatic negotiation. He is using the 6-nation as a fake diplomacy knowing that Iran will not stop her nuclear fuel cycle activities. Iranians consider the nuclear fuel cycle a part of their national energy independence.

Israel and the United States advocate that Iran would be dangerous learning about nuclear technology; what if they use this knowledge sometimes in the future and make nuclear bombs. Israel, whose nuclear arsenals and airplane to deliverer the devices were subsidized mostly by USA, has been assured by both Republican and Democratic candidates that if Iranians would ever develop any nuclear bomb and if she would use the bomb on Israel, we will obliterate Iran to dust.

Israel and USA are insisting that unless Iran stops their nuclear fuel cycle, jointly they will destroy their country. It is reported that President Bush may not allow Western-made technology required for Iran's oil industry, creating bottlenecks in Iran's oil production. This action will result in increase of price of gas to a $10 per gallon and disruption of the International market. Also, it is reported that President Bush may consider a naval embargo of the Persian Gulf. This action is declaration of war and attacking Iran, the beginning of the World War III.

Nuclear Fuel Cartel and Iran

Israel advocates that Iran would be dangerous learning about nuclear technology; what if they use this knowledge sometimes in the future and make nuclear bombs. Israel, whose nuclear arsenals and airplane to deliverer the devices were subsidized mostly by USA, has been assured by both Republican and Democratic candidates that if Iranians would ever develop any nuclear bomb and if she would use the bomb on Israel, we will obliterate Iran to dust. All is fair. But, Iranians are not that stupid to risk their existence to a trigger happy Israel.

They have said multiple times they are not developing nuclear bomb. They even have asked us to join them in an international consortium in their nuclear fuel cycle. Iran submitted a package to the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in mid-May 2008 as well as to world powers, including Russia. The proposal suggests "the creation of uranium enrichment consortiums in various countries, including Iran." It also requires that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) step up its supervision of nuclear sites around the world and asserts that more should be done to ensure nuclear programs would not diverted materials for fabrication of nuclear bomb. They want to generate electricity.

Based on GlobalSecuirity.Org, in 1974, the German contractor Siemens began construction of two 1,200-1,300 megawatt electric (MWe) pressurized water nuclear reactors near Bushehr. The German program included 2100 German workers and roughly 7000 Iranian workers. The Shah of Iran intended that this program would provide Iran with the infrastructure essential for industrializing the country.

During the Iran-Iraq War, Iraqi strike aircraft partially damaged both reactors despite reported Iranian efforts to deter such an attack by moving reactor fuel to the site. Iraqi warplanes first struck the Bushehr reactor on 24 March 1984, inflicting light damage. Two more Iraqi air strikes took place in 1985, one in 1986, two in 1987, and a final raid occurred in 1988.

We were responsible for Iranian difficulty to rebuild and fuel their old nuclear reactor. Further Iran had serious difficulty to purchase fuel for their Russian rebuilt nuclear reactor. Iranians learned that their national energy independence demanded home grown nuclear fuel cycle development.

But we have another way to look at this problem:
USA indicates that would ever Iran need nuclear fuel, we will sell them at our price and our time. You know nuclear fuel is the oil of tomorrow. We want to keep our own nuclear fuel cartel. Wait until their oil wells go dry sometimes before 2025, they will come to USA begging for nuclear fuel, i.e. if we would allow them to have any nuclear reactor. We would not even allow them to have a Geiger Muller counter.

Israel and USA are insisting that unless Iran stops their nuclear fuel cycle, jointly they will destroy Iran.

Be serious. It is all about management of international resources.

Diplomacy with Iran

Robert Naiman in Just Foreign Policy Blog "Kinzer Goes to Washington, Seeking Real Diplomacy with Iran" stated that: “The Bush Administration’s conception of “diplomacy” with Iran on the nuclear file is: how can we compel the Iranian leadership to abandon the enrichment of uranium on Iranian soil?” But the Bush Administration’s direction is not limited to uranium enrichment; the Bush Administration wants a system like Iranian pre-revolution government under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Pre-1979, the majority of Iranian foreign policies and many domestic policies were either dictated, or had to have approval from Washington. The Bush Administration wants to revisit 1953 regime change in Iran. Even then, Shah was frustrated with the Israeli Lobby influence in Washington.

Majority of Americans reject President Gorge Bush national and foreign policies. Many Americans would not approve President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's outspoken approach to Iranian foreign policy. But these two men are not the nations; they have limited terms of office.

Our present policy using the financial leverage and threat of physical attack has backfired over the last 20 years. This policy has promoted an opposite effect to the response we had anticipated; it has mobilized Iranian people in support of their government

Our national interests dictate that we start a frank dialogue with Iranian people and reestablish diplomatic relations. The negotiations are not between President George Bush and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is between American and Iranian people. Both nations have competent diplomatic corps.

Iranian people all along have expressed their friendship toward the American people; while strongly have rejected the bullying policy toward their country.

Dialogue and frank diplomacy should create a positive response from Iranian people.

American Foreign Policy and the World: A New Direction

1. Our recent foreign policy has adversely affected our international respect and leadership by our unilateralism and over use of our military power. We have replaced dialogue and diplomacy with invasion and subversions.

2. We have diminished the effectiveness of the United Nations and World Court.

3. We have over-vetoed against the United Nations resolutions where we should have supported the actions. These vetoes have castigated the United States as obstructionist in resolving many of the world problems.

Agenda for the New National Policy:

• US Foreign Policy must be a Reflection of Our National Character: Justice, Peace, Respect for Human Life, and Fair Treatment of all Other Nations.

• The future of our civilization is at risk of global annihilation by nuclear, biological and chemical arsenals of nations. For the civilization to survive, we must eliminate the nuclear arsenals.

• We must rely on the International Court and the United Nations to resolve the regional conflicts.

• The global environment must be protected and the adverse effect of human activities reversed or repaired.

• The global natural resources are diminishing rapidly by the world over population, over harvesting and destruction. These resources include fresh water and agricultural resources for production of food. World has to create equitable management of these resources. The United States must take the leadership position in these areas.

Federal States of Israel and Palestine as One Nation

We have had 60 years of experimenting about the Israeli-Palestinian struggle. The region would need help before we will be dragged into a World War III.

We have been forced into one box by the Israeli Lobby; we need to look outside of this box. We can’t fight wars after wars to support a non-working model of a two state solution. We can’t afford war after war to support a failed two state model.

Options for Israeli-Palestinian struggle?

The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel were resettled in 722 B.C. in Iran. Assyria, the nation that is now Iraq, took the 10 tribes captive and relocated them in Iran (historic Persia). Iranian Jews are descendent of these exiled tribes. Their exile is a historical fact. Often, the people defeated were scattered and exiled. Judah and Benjamin, two tribes later known as the Jews, claim Israel as their as their ancient homeland.

Jews and the Palestinians, whatever they were called then, were both in Middle East at the same time. Both Arabs and Jews have historical claims to the land.

No one can reject the fact that creation of Israel on the Palestinian land has created tremendous political and economical problems for the United States and the world. World (the United Nation) may have to look outside of the box to diffuse the problems.

One solution would be for Israel joining us as a member of the Unites States’ Common Wealth. The United States are already supporting Israel economically, politically and by sharing intelligence and military hardware. In addition, some Israeli Americans with both Israeli and American citizenships serve in the Israeli Armed Forces. Our great American Armed Forces will protect the common wealth as they would the homeland.

Would it be politically more advantages for the United States to manage the Jewish state as a member of our Common Wealth?

The Israeli Common Wealth will be free to exercise the religious freedom that our great nation would offer without being isolated among the hostile Arabs.

The Common Wealth would have to include the Arabs who were forced to leave the land when Zionist invaded the land. It should also include all of the land called by Palestinian as their homeland and by Israeli as their state. I don't suggest this proposal would work or be acceptable by Israel. In my opinion, this may be more destructive for the USA and would not help the Middle Eastern conflict in the future.

Then, what next?

Would really two nation model for Palestinian and Israeli work in the future? Many experts on the Middle Eastern politics and people would suggest that a two state solution in not viable model. We have struggled with it for nearly 60 years.

Should we be looking at the region as a Federal States with one government elected by all of the people? This model may have a much better chance of survival as a solution for both Israeli and Arabs.

Both Jewish and Palestinians have paid a high price for a failed system to consider the human side of the Israeli-Jewish struggle for a lasting peace.

I suggest that only as one nation, Federal State of Israel-Palestine, the peace may endure. We, Americans, have failed to see the both side of the struggle for a lasting peace. The two cousins may have to kiss and forgive for all the hurt they have caused and endured. As Semitic people, they have common historical and religious heritage.

Admiral Mullen: lethal and malign influence in Iraq

The nation's top military officer said yesterday that the Pentagon is planning for "potential military courses of action" as one of several options against Iran, criticizing what he called the Tehran government's "increasingly lethal and malign influence" in Iraq. Why should Iran not have influence in Iraq? A large population of Iraq has either Iranian ancestry or is related to someone in Iran. The two nations have historical links spreading over several thousands year.

What are we doing in Iraq? Why are we in Iraq? We have military presence in Afghanistan, Iraq and military bases in several locations in Persian Gulf. Why are we there? These locations are not in our hemisphere.

What are we doing in Persian Gulf the front door to Iran a country 7500 miles from home? Please don’t report the same often stated phrase, we are there to protect our national interests. What national interests? “We are there to protect the Persian Gulf”, we have said. Are we protecting the region against England or France? Iran has not attacked any country during previous 250 years; she has been attacked, bombed, and threatened during this last 150 years.

Iranian dilemma has not changed over the last 150 years; still Iran is one step away from being dismembered, colonized and humiliated. Time magazine in an article named Persian Paradox (Monday September 08, 1941) reported:

“As for the poor Persians, their attitude was aptly summed up in a Punch cartoon of the period. It showed a Persian cat apprehensively sitting between a lion and a bear. "I will pat its head," says the bear, "and you shall stroke its tail." Pleads the cat: "But I have not been consulted!"

Today, the same game is being played with Iranian people; the players are the same actors, the same motivations. Have we not killed enough during this last 100 years? Yes, we have.

Our own national problems include: over burdened education costs, lack of professional employment opportunity, unaffordable health insurance, crumbling infrastructures, and failing of our national banks. We have very serious problems in our own hemisphere!

Please come back home! Our own problems at home are much more serious than interventions in the Middle East.

Charles Krauthammer: Entering a new arms era

The nuclear bomb age was restricted to US, Russia, France and England during the earlier period after the World War II. The era of non-proliferation was over once Israel, Pakistan and India, and China developed nuclear bombs. In Recent years, North Korea developed and tested nuclear device. In all these cases, the bomb was developed due to fear of attack from their adversaries.

Charles Krauthammer, an advocate for Israel, suggested four ways to stop other countries developing nuclear bomb: pre-emption, deterrence, missile defense and regime change. Krauthammer is not an anti-nuclear advocate; he has not rejected Israeli’s nuclear bomb, but lobbies fervently against Iran nuclear fuel cycle.

Iranian nuclear fuel cycle activities are limited to processes for nuclear reactor fuel; the opertions are monitored by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). IAEA is a section of the Unites Nations. IAEA has not identified any diversion of fuel cycle activities in Iran.

justifiably Iran would not intend to abrogate her rights for development of nuclear fuel cycle. Iran had suggested an international joint operation of her nuclear fuel cycle to allay the fear of Israel and the United States. Iran is open to other nations joining her nuclear fuel cycle program. By participation of other nations and unannounced IAEA inspection, Iran would not be able to divert nuclear materials. It is imperative we accept the invitation; it is face saving for Iran and those who would demand a non-military application for her nuclear fuel program.

Charles Krauthammer had previously advocated pre-emption killing a large Iranian population in order to destroy Iranian fuel cycle operation. He rejects that Iran can be deterred from their legal rights to use their operation for generating electricity.

Krauthammer concept of deterrence is identical to those used during the cold war between the Soviet Union and the United States, each equally capable to destroy the other by their awesome nuclear arsenals. Krauthammer, however, forgets that Iran does not have any nuclear bomb in contrast to Israel’s over 200 nuclear bombs as reported by the Unites States government.

Krauthammer advocates: “Begin by making the retaliatory threat in response to Iranian nuclear aggression so unmistakable and so overwhelming that the non-millenarians in leadership would stay the hand or even remove those taking their country to the point of extinction.” Excuse me, Charles! Iran does not have nuclear bomb, Iran has accepted addition protocol for IAEA monitoring of their operation. Iran is a member of Non-Proliferation Treaty of the United Nations (NPT). But Israel has nuclear bombs; she is not a member of NPT. Now, allow Israel, she will find some another pretext and would attack Iran to extinction. Charles, please don't smile! Killing people is not a cause for smiling!

Mr. Krauthammer last suggestion is “Total safety comes only from regime change.”
We did it in Iran (1953) and at present in Iraq, among other places. If Israel does not like some other nations, just let us go and change their government.

We must not forget our own national interests, US comes first. We must stop following Israel.

Mike Wallace interviewed Shah of Iran about Israel and the Unites States. What Shah said then is even truer today.

England, Russia and the United States: Persian Cat

Iranian dilemma has not changed over the last 150 years; still Iran is one step away from being dismembered, colonized and humiliated. Time magazine in an article named Persian Paradox (Monday September 08, 1941) reported:

“As for the poor Persians, their attitude was aptly summed up in a Punch cartoon of the period. It showed a Persian cat apprehensively sitting between a lion and a bear. "I will pat its head," says the bear, "and you shall stroke its tail." Pleads the cat: "But I have not been consulted!"



Sassy the Persian Cat

Today, the same game is being played with Iranian people; the players are the same actors, the same motivations. It is not about nuclear fuel cycle; Iran already has provided a procedure for monitoring of their nuclear fuel activities.

Iran and Israeli International Lobby

Switzerland and Iran signed a contract for the supply of Iranian natural gas to Europe. This contract sparked harsh criticism from the United States and Israel. The New York-based Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has condemned a Swiss-Iranian natural gas export contract.
Former Swiss ambassador François Nordmann indicated that the ADL response was a "cry of indignation, an individual reaction" to the deal. "It is …attempt to influence public opinion and discredit Switzerland and its foreign ministry".
Iran under Shah and the United States had a very cordial and cooperative relationship over a 30 year period. Even during this period Israeli’s interests, dictated through the Israeli Lobby in the United States, controlled the American foreign policy. The following was reported by Parsin (wordpress.com):

Shah of Iran on Persian Gulf, and American Jewish Lobby

"This is very interesting, because Shah was a very close friend to both of them, the US government and the Zionist regime (Israel)! These words are not made by Ahmadinejad!! These are what Jimmy Carter and free thinkers of the world are saying too! US Jewish Lobby is responsible for the whole crimes and brutalities of the Israeli Regime. They are the ones who use US for their dirty objectives!"

Nuclear: Iran

Some of our scientists after detonation of first nuclear bomb had suggested an international management agency to control mining and milling of uranium, enrichment process, fuel fabrication, and waste management of spent fuel. They suggested that the procedure for management and inspection must not be subject to veto power by any nation. An international management of fuel production, they indicated would stop future nuclear arm competition.

Presidents Truman and Eisenhower did not appreciate the concept of an international management for nuclear fuel cycle. Stalin shortly after the first nuclear bomb test in Alamogordo, New Mexico, started the Soviet Union nuclear bomb development. We and Soviet Russia both developed shortly after enhanced nuclear bombs (hydrogen bomb). Both nations recognized that a nuclear war would destroy both nations unlike all the other wars.

The United States feared Hitler may first develop nuclear bomb during the World War II; this fear lead to creation of Manhattan Project and development of nuclear bombs. The bombs and use on Japan changed the balance of power. The power, US did not want to share with anyone including her own allies.

Russia (US threat), China (Russia and US threat), India (Chinese threat) and Pakistan (Indian threat) developed their nuclear bomb to reduce the threat of nuclear bomb by their adversaries. Israel developed nuclear bomb to decrease threats from her Arabic neighbors.

To limit further spread of nuclear bombs, the United Nations non-proliferation treaty (NTP), July 1, 1968 was started; 189 nations are member of this treaty. NPT, the treaty is nevertheless sometimes interpreted as having three pillars: non-proliferation, disarmament, and the right to peacefully use nuclear technology.

The objective of non-proliferation act is to stop diversion of nuclear materials for making bomb. However, this rule does not apply to US, Russia, England, France, China, India, Israel, and Pakistan; the nations who already have nuclear bombs. These nations India, Israel, Pakistan and North Korea, are not member of non-proliferation treaty, thus they are not subject to its requirements. The procedure for non-proliferation management was not intended to interfere with the rights of nations to develop fuel cycle for non-military purposes. IAEA has the authority to inspect fuel cycle activities of each nation to show compliance with the non-proliferation requirements.

Iran has been developing nuclear fuel cycle for electric power generation. Israel and the United States had indicated that the knowledge of the nuclear fuel cycle will allow Iran in the future to develop ability to produce nuclear bomb. They demand Iran must stop development of her fuel cycle activities. Iran has already acquired the knowledge.

Iran justifiably would not intend to abrogate her rights for development of nuclear fuel cycle. Iran had suggested an international joint operation of her nuclear fuel cycle to allay the fear of Israel and the United States. Iran is open to other nations joining her nuclear fuel cycle program. By participation of other nations and unannounced IAEA inspection, Iran would not be able to divert nuclear materials. It is imperative we accept the invitation; it is face saving for Iran and those who would demand a non-military application for her nuclear fuel program.

This joint multi-nations mode of nuclear fuel cycle production may be emulated by other aggregates of nations. It is a first step to a full international management of all fuel production, use, and waste management.

President Truman said: “Starting an atomic war is totally unthinkable for rational men.”

Enter your search terms

Submit search form

The Iran Counter-Proliferation Act

The US “Iran Counter-Proliferation Act” a pending legislation being rushed in the Senate by the Israeli Lobby and neoconservative supporters. This Act threatens a cultural embargo on all things Iranian and safety of international air trasportation. This act along with a proposed third round of U.N. sanctions are marshaled by our Administration against Iranian people.


It is irrelevant that IAEA and our own US intelligence agencies have stated that Iran is not developing nuclear bomb and had stopped the process since 2003. Our national experts know well that Iran is not capable to make nuclear bomb; Iran had not have enriched uranium (80% or higher U-235 to U-238 isotopes). IAEA had stated that Iran has enriched small quantities of natural uranium to less than 5%. This is the enrichment level required for a civilian nuclear power plant.

Then what is the objective of the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act?

The objective of this Act is to pressure Iranian people to stop nuclear fuel cycle activities. The function of nuclear fuel cycle is production of fuel for power plants producing electrical energy and radioactive isotopes for use in medicine, agriculture, and educational research. The present US administration asserts that once Iranian people have learned about use of the fuel production technique for fuel production, it would be a smaller step to enrich the fuel from less than 5% to more than 80% and make nuclear bomb. Thus, the title of the act “counter-proliferation” refers to stopping Iranian people to learn about nuclear physics, nuclear chemistry and engineering. But, Iranian scientists and engineers already know the nuclear science and engineering of uranium fuel cycle.

Our government rationale is comparable to arguing that teaching sciences in our high schools and colleges would give students the knowledge to make bomb. Thus, if we follow the purpose of the counter-proliferation logic, all teaching of sciences should be stopped!

Will the act stop Iranian people to advance in science and engineering of nuclear fuel cycle? No. The Act will only make life harder for some of the people in Iran. The Act will adversely affect any civilized political rapprochement between our government and Iranian people. Many experts in international politics suggest:

1. Stop harassing Iranian people, threatening them, and making life harder for the ordinary people.
2. Start talking unconditionally with Iranian government. Our actions only further embed Iranian government into Russian and Chinese spheres of influences.
3. Instability in Iran will drag the entire Middle East into very unstable region. Israel and the United States would not benefit from this instability.
4. Iranians are friendly to the people of the United States; escalation of hostility will change the friendly to very unfriendly people.
5. Israel, backed by the United States, must stop threatening Iran. These threats will adversely affect Israel. Survival of Israel is dependent on stability of the Middle East.