Saturday, September 07, 2013

The Framing of Bashar Assad

They Don't Want Us to Know About Israel's Nukes (September 06, 2013 15:51)  Stuart Littlewood

So let's ask about the rogue state's chemical weapons...

 (LONDON) - UK Foreign Office ministers seem to have great difficulty answering simple questions about Israel’s terror capabilities. It’s as if they don’t want to admit to the awful truth about the violent and lawless regime to which they’ve pledged everlasting support. Here’s a very recent example. Another “Dear Henry....” To: Henry Bellingham MP, North West Norfolk 6 September 2013 Dear Henry, Thank you for asking the question about Israel's nukes.

 Mr Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the likelihood of the Government of Israel having a nuclear weapons programme; and if he will make a statement. [167222] Alistair Burt: We have regular discussions with the Government of Israel on a wide range of nuclear-related issues. Israel has not declared a nuclear weapons programme. We encourage Israel to sign up to the non-proliferation treaty and call on them to agree a Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Mr Burt insults the whole nation with the same empty and dismissive reply he gave Sir Bob Russell two months ago, and which prompted your further question (please see my email of 13 July below for comparison). What the British public (and indeed their elected representatives) need is an estimate of Israel's nuclear weapons capability by our own and international intelligence sources. May I ask you please to repeat the question, and keep repeating it, until we get some sense from Mr Burt? Turning to the chemical weapons issue, the allegations against the Assad regime in Syria and the West's threats of punitive action, foreign secretary William Hague misled the country when he stated on the FCO website : "This is the first use of chemical warfare in the 21st century. It has to be unacceptable, we have to confront something that is a war crime, something that is a crime against humanity. If we don’t do so, then we will have to confront even bigger war crimes in the future. “So we continue to look for a strong response from the international community that is legal, that is proportionate and that is designed to deter the further and future use of chemical weapons.... It’s very important for a regime like the Assad regime to know that there is a clear response when they cross such an important line. As I say, this is the first use of chemical warfare in this century.” Hague knows, or should do, that white phosphorus was used by Israel against the densely-packed civilian population of Gaza in 2008/9. We didn't hear him or Cameron or Burt urging punitive strikes against Tel Aviv. As they now crank up talk of military intervention in Syria we're told that Syria has not signed the Chemical Weapons Convention, as if that settles any doubt about Assad's culpability. But neither has Egypt and she still receives massive military aid from the US. The CWC declares that "all States Parties have agreed to chemically disarm by destroying any stockpiles of chemical weapons they may hold and any facilities which produced them, as well as any chemical weapons they abandoned on the territory of other States Parties in the past." The Israeli regime still hasn't ratified the treaty, showing the same contempt for chemical weapons control as for nuclear non-proliferation. The US is a signatory but also a major violator of the CWC while Israel won't open its chemical weapons facilities (or nuclear programmes) to international inspection. As I write, incontrovertible evidence seems hard to come by, the UN inspectors' findings are awaited so the jury is still out on who was responsible for the poison gas atrocity in Syria. Many people suspect that the real 'axis of evil' - i.e. the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel - are the likely perpetrators. After all, they are the region’s chief troublemakers. And Israel has appalling 'form'. In its 1982 war on Lebanon an international commission concluded that the Israelis “committed acts of aggression contrary to international law", that the government of Israel had no valid reasons for invading Lebanon, and that Israel was responsible for the killings in Sabra and Shatila, which the United Nations General Assembly declared an act of genocide. In Israel's 2006 war on Lebanon, Amnesty International noted the destruction of entire civilian neighbourhoods by Israeli forces, attacks on bridges with no apparent strategic value, and attacks on infrastructure indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. AI also highlighted the IDF’s use of white phosphorus shells (a crime repeated in Gaza in 2008/9). After the ceasefire some parts of southern Lebanon were uninhabitable for a long time due to unexploded cluster bombs left lying around by the Israelis. Would you please, therefore, put another Parliamentary Question, this time requesting British and allied intelligence assessments of Israel's chemical weapons capability and asking what pressure is being exerted to persuade the Israeli regime to ratify the CWC and open itself to international inspection? The same question should also be raised about Saudi Arabia as that obnoxious regime actually signed the CWC. Then we might all begin to see the picture more clearly. I was unable to find your name on the Commons voting lists after last week's debate. Were you present? With thanks again for your efforts, and kind regards… Read more at

1 comment:


    Get professional trading signals delivered to your cell phone daily.

    Start following our signals right now and profit up to 270% per day.