Nexus - 1503 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

The real nuclear threat supposedly is coming from bin Laden. The objective is to "to do away with our way of life": "None of this is to underestimate the impact of a nuclear weapon being detonated in an American city. It could be catastrophic, but it is highly unlikely to threaten the very survival of the US. To believe otherwise risks surrendering to the fear and intimidation that is precisely the terrorists’ stock in trade. "General Richard Myers, another former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, has claimed that if [Islamic] terrorists were able to kill 10,000 Americans in a nuclear attack, they would ‘do away with our way of life’. But Hiroshima and Nagasaki incurred well over 100,000 instant deaths and that did not mean the end of the Japanese way of life."' (ibid.; emphasis added) The US media have the distinct ability to turn realities upside down. The lies are upheld as indelible truths. The "Islamic terrorists" have abandoned their AK-47 Kalashnikov rifles and Stinger missiles; they are not only developing deadly chemical and biological weapons, they also have nuclear capabilities. The fact, amply documented, that al-Qaeda is supported by the CIA and Britain's MI6 is beside the point. The nuclear threat is not directed against the Middle East but against the USA; the perpetrators and architects of nuclear war are bin Laden's al- Qaeda (a CIA "intelligence asset"), which is planning to launch a nuclear attack on an American city: "US government officials are contemplating what they consider to be an inevitable and much bigger assault on America, one likely to kill millions, destroy the economy and fundamentally alter the course of history... "According to captured al-Qaeda leaders and documents, the plan is called the 'American Hiroshima’ and involves the multiple detonation of nuclear weapons already smuggled into the US over the Mexican border with the help of the MS- 13 street gang and other organized crime groups." In an utterly | (WorldNetDaily.com, convoluted argui 11 July 2005; emphasis added) Dibb transforms "According to captured al-Qaeda leaders and documents, In an utterly twisted and convoluted argument, Professor Dibb the plan is called the 'American Hiroshima’ and involves the transforms the US-NATO threat to wage a nuclear war on Iran multiple detonation of nuclear weapons already smuggled into an al-Qaeda operation to attack an American city with into the US over the Mexican nuclear weapons. border with the help of the MS- Dibb presents the US-NATO 13 street gang and other menace to trigger what would result in organized crime groups." In an utterly twisted and a Middle East nuclear holocaust as a (WorldNetDaily.com, convoluted argument, Professor humanitarian operation to save 11 July 2005; hasis added . American lives. By implication, th uly 2005; emphasis accec) | Dibb transforms the US-NATO ff A"oscan wvonsosed tacmoriens The New York Times confirms that | threat to wage a nuclear war on Hiroshima" would be supported by an al-Qaeda-sponsored "American Iran's President Mahmoud Hiroshima" "could happen": Iran into an al-Qaeda operation Ahmadinejad, and this in turn would "Experts believe that such an to attack an American city immediately provide a just cause (jus attack, somewhere, is likely." A ad bellum) for retaliation against Iran: (New York Times, 11 August with nuclear weapons. "What a nuclear attack on a 2004) US city would mean, however, is an understandable According to the Aspen Strategy American retaliation in kind. Group, which includes, among others, Madeleine Albright, So, those countries that have slack control over their fissile Richard Armitage, Philip D. Zelikow and Robert B. Zoellick, "the nuclear materials and cosy relations with terrorists need to danger of nuclear terrorism is much greater than the public watch out. A wounded America would be under enormous believes, and our government hasn't done nearly enough to reduce pressure to respond in a wholly disproportionate manner. it": "And then we would be in a completely changed "If a 10-kiloton nuclear weapon, a midget even smaller than strategic situation in which the use of nuclear weapons the one that destroyed Hiroshima, exploded in Times Square, might become commonplace." the fireball would reach tens of millions of degrees (ibid.; emphasis added) Fahrenheit. It would vaporize or destroy the theater district, Madison Square Garden, the Empire State Building, Grand The notion of "pre-emption" applied to the use of nuclear Central Terminal and Carnegie Hall... The blast would partly weapons is predicated on the right to "self defence". "Nuclear destroy a much larger area, including the United Nations. On pre-emption" defines "when it is permissible to wage war" using a weekday some 500,000 people would be killed." nuclear weapons: jus ad bellum. The latter concept serves to (New York Times, 11 August 2004) within the military command structures. It also convoluted argument, Professor Dibb transforms the US-NATO threat to wage a nuclear war on Iran into an al-Qaeda operation to attack an American city The notion of "pre-emption" applied to the use of nuclear weapons is predicated on the right to "self defence". "Nuclear pre-emption" defines "when it is permissible to wage war" using nuclear weapons: jus ad bellum. The latter concept serves to build a consensus within the military command structures. It also serves to convince the military that they are using nukes for a "just cause", to "save the Western way of life". "Threaten them with a devastating [nuclear] attack" According to Professor Dibb, nuclear deterrence should also apply in relation to al-Qaeda, by holding responsible the governments which help the terrorists to develop their nuclear weapons capabilities: "But as Ashton Carter, a former US assistant secretary for defence has recently argued, the realistic response is to hold responsible, as appropriate, the government from which the terrorists obtained the weapon or fissile materials and threaten them with a devastating [nuclear] strike. In other words, deterrence would work again." (Dibb, ibid.; emphasis added) Dick Cheney's Second 9/11 The insinuation that al-Qaeda is preparing an attack on America has been on the lips of Vice President Dick Cheney for several years now. Cheney has stated on several occasions since 2004 that al-Qaeda is preparing a "Second 9/11". For instance, in August 2005, Cheney reportedly instructed USSTRATCOM, based at the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska, to draw up a "contingency plan"—"to be employed in response to another 9/1 1-type terrorist attack on the United States" (Philip Giraldi, APRIL — MAY 2008 NEXUS + 17 The "American Hiroshima" In an utterly twisted and with nuclear weapons. (ibid.; emphasis added) Continued on page 78 www.nexusmagazine.com