IAEA: Zionist Nazis have 500 nukes

[Nahraf]

German newspaper highlights IAEA chief's senseless Israel trip | TwoCircles.net


German newspaper highlights IAEA chief's senseless Israel trip
Submitted by admin2 on 28 August 2010 - 7:34pm.

Berlin, Aug 27, IRNA -- The German daily Frankfurter Rundschau on Friday pointed to the senseless trip of the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Yukiya Amano to Israel as he wasn't able to achieve his objectives.

The paper said the first visit of an IAEA chief to Israel since 1998 did not go well, as leaders of the Isreal refused to meet him. 'Many observers view Israel's stance towards the UN nuclear watchdog as an affront,' according to the daily. It also cited Israel's refusal to show Amano its controversial Dimona nuclear reactor as an example of the IAEA official's worthless trip.

The daily seriously questioned whether Amano's visit to Israel made any sense since he was not able to tour Dimona or meet any other Israeli ministers. The Frankfurt-based paper said Israel's nuclear ambiguity tactics had also reached 'the end of its effectiveness' as international pressure on the the Isreal regime is intensifying to come clean on its disputed nuclear program.

Amano's visit to the Jewish state comes against a backdrop of demands by some IAEA members that Israel, generally considered to be the Middle East's sole if undeclared nuclear-armed power, sign up to the international Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Israel's nuclear project has also been thorny for its closest allies, the United States and Germany since other countries, especially Muslim and non-aligned ones, accuse the West of hypocrisy in tolerating Israel's atomic buildup while condemning Iran for its nuclear activities which is under the full control of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

In one of the world's worst-kept secrets, Israel has become a nuclear giant. It is estimated to have hundreds of atomic weapons, an arsenal that ranks it fifth among nuclear powers and dwarfs the programs of India, Pakistan and North Korea.

Though warning of the danger from other countries, Israel is the only state that has ever brought the Mideast to the brink of nuclear war. Yet it has maintained a policy of 'deliberate ambiguity' about its own nuclear capabilities even as it bombed an Iraqi reactor in 1981 and pressured other countries to disarm.

 

[Nahraf]

IAEA chief focuses on Israel - Israel News, Ynetnews

IAEA chief focuses on Israel

Yukiya Amano sends letter to International Atomic Energy Agency member states' foreign ministers asking for advice on ways to persuade Israel to join Non-Proliferation Treaty

Associated Press
Published: 05.05.10, 23:37 / Israel News

Share on TwitterShare on Facebook
share

The head of the UN atomic watchdog is asking for international input on how to persuade Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, in a move that is sure to add pressure on the Jewish state to disclose its unacknowledged nuclear arsenal.



In a letter made available Wednesday, Yukiya Amano asked foreign ministers of the International Atomic Energy Agency's 151 member states to share views on how to implement a resolution demanding that Israel "accede to the" Non-Proliferation Treaty and throw its nuclear facilities open to IAEA oversight.
United Front
US, other big powers back Mideast nuclear arms ban / Reuters
Five permanent UN Security Council members issue unanimous statement saying, 'We are committed to full implementation of 1995 Non-Proliferation Treaty resolution on Mideast' which calls for making region zone free of nuclear arms
Full Story



The letter was shared with The Associated Press amid renewed Arab criticism of Israel during an international conference at UN headquarters in New York. Islamic nations used the second day of the non-Proliferation meeting Tuesday to call for a nuclear-free Middle East, while criticizing Israel for not divulging its nuclear capabilities and refusing to sign the nonproliferation treaty.



Amano's April 7 letter comes seven months after IAEA member states at their annual conference narrowly passed a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program, with 49 of the 110 nations present backing the document, 45 against and 16 abstaining.



The result was a setback not only for Israel but also for Washington and other backers of the Jewish state, which had lobbied for 18 years of past practice - debate on the issue without a vote. It also reflected building tensions between Israel and its backers and Islamic nations, supported by developing countries.



The resolution "expresses concern about the Israeli nuclear capabilities," and links it to "concern about the threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons for the security and stability of the Middle East."



The US and its allies consider Iran the region's greatest proliferation threat, fearing that Tehran is trying to achieve the capacity to make nuclear weapons despite its assertion that it is only building a civilian program to generate power.



But Islamic nations insist that Israel is the true danger in the Middle East, saying they fear its nuclear weapons capacity. Israel has never said it has such arms, but is universally believed to possess them.



The Muslim countries enjoy support from developing nations. These are critical of the US and other nuclear weapons nations for refusing to disarm, and suspects that developed nations are trying to corner the market on peaceful nuclear technology to their disadvantage - themes likely to surface not only at the now ongoing Non-Proliferation Treaty conference, but at the next IAEA general conference in September.



With divisions deep on Israel, Amano's letter asking IAEA member states for input on the issue foreshadowed intense feuding at that September conference.



"It would be helpful to me if Your Excellency could inform me of any views that your government might have with respect to meeting the objectives of the resolution," according to his half-page letter.



A senior diplomat from one of the IAEA member countries confirmed that his government had received the letter. He and an official from another IAEA delegation said that to their knowledge the agency was still awaiting responses. Both asked for anonymity because their information was confidential.

 

[Nahraf]

IAEA chief focuses on Israel - Israel News, Ynetnews

IAEA chief focuses on Israel

Yukiya Amano sends letter to International Atomic Energy Agency member states' foreign ministers asking for advice on ways to persuade Israel to join Non-Proliferation Treaty

Associated Press
Published: 05.05.10, 23:37 / Israel News

Share on TwitterShare on Facebook
share

The head of the UN atomic watchdog is asking for international input on how to persuade Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, in a move that is sure to add pressure on the Jewish state to disclose its unacknowledged nuclear arsenal.



In a letter made available Wednesday, Yukiya Amano asked foreign ministers of the International Atomic Energy Agency's 151 member states to share views on how to implement a resolution demanding that Israel "accede to the" Non-Proliferation Treaty and throw its nuclear facilities open to IAEA oversight.
United Front
US, other big powers back Mideast nuclear arms ban / Reuters
Five permanent UN Security Council members issue unanimous statement saying, 'We are committed to full implementation of 1995 Non-Proliferation Treaty resolution on Mideast' which calls for making region zone free of nuclear arms
Full Story



The letter was shared with The Associated Press amid renewed Arab criticism of Israel during an international conference at UN headquarters in New York. Islamic nations used the second day of the non-Proliferation meeting Tuesday to call for a nuclear-free Middle East, while criticizing Israel for not divulging its nuclear capabilities and refusing to sign the nonproliferation treaty.



Amano's April 7 letter comes seven months after IAEA member states at their annual conference narrowly passed a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program, with 49 of the 110 nations present backing the document, 45 against and 16 abstaining.



The result was a setback not only for Israel but also for Washington and other backers of the Jewish state, which had lobbied for 18 years of past practice - debate on the issue without a vote. It also reflected building tensions between Israel and its backers and Islamic nations, supported by developing countries.



The resolution "expresses concern about the Israeli nuclear capabilities," and links it to "concern about the threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons for the security and stability of the Middle East."



The US and its allies consider Iran the region's greatest proliferation threat, fearing that Tehran is trying to achieve the capacity to make nuclear weapons despite its assertion that it is only building a civilian program to generate power.



But Islamic nations insist that Israel is the true danger in the Middle East, saying they fear its nuclear weapons capacity. Israel has never said it has such arms, but is universally believed to possess them.



The Muslim countries enjoy support from developing nations. These are critical of the US and other nuclear weapons nations for refusing to disarm, and suspects that developed nations are trying to corner the market on peaceful nuclear technology to their disadvantage - themes likely to surface not only at the now ongoing Non-Proliferation Treaty conference, but at the next IAEA general conference in September.



With divisions deep on Israel, Amano's letter asking IAEA member states for input on the issue foreshadowed intense feuding at that September conference.



"It would be helpful to me if Your Excellency could inform me of any views that your government might have with respect to meeting the objectives of the resolution," according to his half-page letter.



A senior diplomat from one of the IAEA member countries confirmed that his government had received the letter. He and an official from another IAEA delegation said that to their knowledge the agency was still awaiting responses. Both asked for anonymity because their information was confidential.

---------- Post added at 11:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 AM ----------

If Israel can ignore the IAEA, why should anyone else listen?


If Israel can ignore the IAEA, why should anyone else listen?

Media reports on Monday suggested that this week’s annual conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will include a serious discussion of Israel’s presumed nuclear capabilities. One can only hope that this takes place, that the long-running grievances of Arab and other countries are finally given their just due. With accusations relating to weapons of mass destruction having been a large part of the US pretext for invading Iraq and Iran now facing heavy pressure over similar claims, the double standard involving the Jewish state ­ which has steadfastly refused to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ­ has become too obvious to ignore any longer.

None of this has deterred the Israelis, though, from speaking out against the alleged ambitions of others. In fact, Israel has been at the forefront of countries demanding that the IAEA get tough with Iran. The Israelis are not at all embarrassed that Tehran is a signatory to the NPT and they are not; nor does it bother them that no one thinks the Islamic Republic has nuclear weapons, while the Jewish state is estimated by experts to possess something in the order of 200-300 warheads, not to mention a variety of air-, land- and sea-based delivery systems.

The unbridled hypocrisy of Israeli policy and rhetoric on this issue constitutes a major test for the IAEA, and indeed for two cornerstones of modern diplomacy: arms control and collective security. If the presumed violations of some countries are to be “punished” pre-emptively while those of others go unchecked, there is little point in cooperating with the co-opted organization that enforces its own regulations according to Washington’s whim. Israeli impunity relies on America for its sustenance, and the nuclear question is a case in point: US law is very clear in banning foreign aid to countries that either do not sign or fail to obey the NPT, but somehow more than $3 billion in illegal funds gets from Washington to Israel every year with nary a word of protest on Capitol Hill.

If America is unwilling to comply with its own laws when these do not suit Israel’s purposes, why should anyone trust it to undertake an accurate accounting of international security arrangements? And if the IAEA is unwilling to assert its independence in the face of pressure from Washington, why should any of its members bother to help maintain the pretense that signed agreements mean anything at all?

 

[Nahraf]

If Israel can ignore the IAEA, why should anyone else listen?


If Israel can ignore the IAEA, why should anyone else listen?

Media reports on Monday suggested that this week’s annual conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will include a serious discussion of Israel’s presumed nuclear capabilities. One can only hope that this takes place, that the long-running grievances of Arab and other countries are finally given their just due. With accusations relating to weapons of mass destruction having been a large part of the US pretext for invading Iraq and Iran now facing heavy pressure over similar claims, the double standard involving the Jewish state * which has steadfastly refused to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) * has become too obvious to ignore any longer.

None of this has deterred the Israelis, though, from speaking out against the alleged ambitions of others. In fact, Israel has been at the forefront of countries demanding that the IAEA get tough with Iran. The Israelis are not at all embarrassed that Tehran is a signatory to the NPT and they are not; nor does it bother them that no one thinks the Islamic Republic has nuclear weapons, while the Jewish state is estimated by experts to possess something in the order of 200-300 warheads, not to mention a variety of air-, land- and sea-based delivery systems.

The unbridled hypocrisy of Israeli policy and rhetoric on this issue constitutes a major test for the IAEA, and indeed for two cornerstones of modern diplomacy: arms control and collective security. If the presumed violations of some countries are to be “punished” pre-emptively while those of others go unchecked, there is little point in cooperating with the co-opted organization that enforces its own regulations according to Washington’s whim. Israeli impunity relies on America for its sustenance, and the nuclear question is a case in point: US law is very clear in banning foreign aid to countries that either do not sign or fail to obey the NPT, but somehow more than $3 billion in illegal funds gets from Washington to Israel every year with nary a word of protest on Capitol Hill.

If America is unwilling to comply with its own laws when these do not suit Israel’s purposes, why should anyone trust it to undertake an accurate accounting of international security arrangements? And if the IAEA is unwilling to assert its independence in the face of pressure from Washington, why should any of its members bother to help maintain the pretense that signed agreements mean anything at all?

 

[RobbieS]

Zionist Nazis. Now thats an oxymoron if I ever heard one!

 

[Trac]

First of all from where you put this 500 figure

Second if they really have so its really good news cause their enemy dnt want to mess with them just look at the combe of

ICBM + nuck

I wish India also develop ICBM as soon as possible

 

[karan.1970]

Zionist Nazis.. Thread name change, anyone??

 

[file12345]

Well i wouldn't be surprised if tomorrow someone says that Israel has 10,000 Nukes.

Who knows maybe they have a million nukes.

 

[Archie]

It doesnt mean that they have 500 nukes ready for launch , what it simply means is that they have stocks of fissile materials for 500 nukes
Israel as of today has only 80 assembled nukes , same as india and Pak
No country mentains all its nuclear weapons in ready state , even USA which has fissile material for 9000 nukes , only keeps about 2200 in assembled stage