cue the lightning bolts

the only question that matters: is it true?

Iran has signed the NPT. As a signatory to the NPT, Iran may rightfully, legally, use nuclear technology for peaceful energy purposes. Iran has submitted to and passed repeated IAEA inspections. The US intelligence community (NIE) does not consider Iran a nuclear threat. Israel refuses to sign the NPT. Israel has an estimated several hundred undeclared nuclear weapons. Russia and China have warned that an attack on Iran will have global consequences. That's the situation in a nutshell. Where to next, people? Where to?

Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? - Galatians 4:16

10.28.2009

national insecurity news

1. senior Chinese military official meets US officials on bilateral, military ties

WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 (Xinhua) -- Sino-U.S. relations have been maintaining a good momentum of development since U.S. President Barack Obama came to office in January, a senior Chinese military official told U.S. officials on Tuesday.

Visiting Vice Chairman of China's Central Military Commission Xu Caihou held separate meetings with U.S. National Security Advisor James Jones and Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg on Tuesday.

Xu said Chinese President Hu Jintao and his U.S. counterpart Obama reached an important consensus at their meeting in London in April to jointly build a positive, cooperative and comprehensive relationship between the two nations for the 21st century, ushering in a new phase in bilateral ties.

...The general said his U.S. trip is aimed at implementing the consensus reached by Hu and Obama to improve and develop relations between the two countries' armed forces, and promoting military exchanges and cooperation.


read more @ chinaview


2. China hawks target US sign-off shuffle

by Peter J. Brown

The White House in late September released a "presidential determination" that entailed a memorandum to United States Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke. It went virtually undetected. It simply stated:
Subject: Presidential Determination on the Delegation of Certifications Under Section 1512 of Public Law 105-261. By virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of Title 3, United States Code, I hereby delegate to you the functions of the President under section 1512 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999.
Under Section 1512, President Barack Obama is required to certify to the US Congress that above all else, US space-launch industry interests are protected and that by exporting the missile hardware or technology in question, China's missile or space launch capabilities will not be somehow improved in the process, nor will China benefit even indirectly by the proposed transaction.

Shortly thereafter, The Washington Times ran a story that said, in effect, that China could now celebrate because by shifting authority to Locke's office Obama had suddenly rewritten the rulebook when it came to exports of missile and space-related technology to China.

...[big snip]

What emerges here is a very dark cloud that now hangs over all the upbeat talk that there are long-awaited signs of progress appearing in Washington, DC.

The notion that Chinese military personnel were provided with a US-based mail order house that shipped items on a weekly basis back to China while operating completely under the radar of the US defense and law enforcement communities for a decade is baffling. Nor does it does bode well especially for those supporters of reform who argue that existing export controls and customs oversight are adequate to meet the additional workload that any meaningful export regulatory reform will certainly trigger.

In a nutshell, customs and law enforcement agents in the US face a significant challenge as they attempt to monitor outbound technology transfers and terminate the actions of those who traffic in illegal exports.

read more @ asia times


3. US expanding military bases on Black Sea coast


US army bases will appear on the Black Sea Coast – in Bulgaria and Romania. About $50 million will be assigned to build the base in Romania, and the Pentagon plans to spend $60 million more for the same purpose in Bulgaria.

The Romanian base is expected to be put in operation in 2010, whereas the second one will most likely be launched in 2011 or 2012. Over 4,000 US military men are expected to serve at the two bases: 1,600 in Romania and 2,500 in Bulgaria. The authorities of the two nations expect that the US military men will settle there for a long time.

...

Alexander Khramchikhin, deputy director of the Institute for Political and Military Analysis, said in an interview with Pravda.Ru that the plans of the United States to build army bases in Romania and Bulgaria were exposed nearly a decade ago.

“Indeed, the Americans need more bases for their actions in the Middle East. They have bases in Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, but they are not enough to satisfy all of Washington’s needs. The Pentagon needs new bases in Eastern Europe to maintain its troops in the Middle East,” the expert said.

Another expert, Konstantin Sivkov, told Pravda.Ru that the appearance of new army bases in Bulgaria and Romania would pose a threat to Russian interests.


read more @ pravda


No comments:

legal mumbo jumbo

Disclaimer: The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.