Honest times

Uproar in countries over Wikileaks

Sun, 28 Nov 2010 20:27:17 -0500

Following the start of the release of secret US Embassy cables through the wikileaks site it has been reported that many countries have expressed further concern over what the documents hold. One country in particular Saudi Arabia is said to be extremely worried about the surface of information that the Saudi King suggested that they attack Iran due to their nuclear operations. Surely this is not that much of a revelation as the US already has issues with Iran and Saudi Arabia are technically on the US’S side of the war. The information released in document form just makes this common knowledge fact.

A selection of the Secret US embassy cables have also been...

Sun, 28 Nov 2010 19:47:12 -0500

A selection of the Secret US embassy cables have also been released through the nytimes this is an extract from one of the cables released.

Wikileaks - Saudi king urged attack on Iran

Sun, 28 Nov 2010 19:38:05 -0500

Saudi Arabia urges US attack on Iran to stop nuclear programme

• Embassy cables show Arab allies want strike against Tehran
• Israel prepared to attack alone to avoid its own 9/11
• Iranian bomb risks ‘Middle East proliferation, war or both’

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has repeatedly urged the United States to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear programme, according to leaked US diplomatic cables that describe how other Arab allies have secretly agitated for military action against Tehran.

The revelations, in secret memos from US embassies across the Middle East, expose behind-the-scenes pressures in the scramble to contain the Islamic Republic, which the US, Arab states and Israel suspect is close to acquiring nuclear weapons. Bombing Iranian nuclear facilities has hitherto been viewed as a desperate last resort that could ignite a far wider war.

The Saudi king was recorded as having “frequently exhorted the US to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons programme”, one cable stated. “He told you [Americans] to cut off the head of the snake,” the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir said, according to a report on Abdullah’s meeting with the US general David Petraeus in April 2008.

The cables also highlight Israel’s anxiety to preserve its regional nuclear monopoly, its readiness to go it alone against Iran – and its unstinting attempts to influence American policy. The defence minister, Ehud Barak, estimated in June 2009 that there was a window of “between six and 18 months from now in which stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons might still be viable”. After that, Barak said, “any military solution would result in unacceptable collateral damage.”

The leaked US cables also reveal that:

• Officials in Jordan and Bahrain have openly called for Iran’s nuclear programme to be stopped by any means, including military.

• Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt referred to Iran as “evil”, an “existential threat” and a power that “is going to take us to war”.

• Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, warned in February that if diplomatic efforts failed, “we risk nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, war prompted by an Israeli strike, or both”.

• Major General Amos Yadlin, Israeli’s military intelligence chief, warned last year: “Israel is not in a position to underestimate Iran and be surprised like the US was on 11 September 2001.”

Asked for a response to the statements, state department spokesman PJ Crowley said today it was US policy not to comment on materials, including classified documents, which may have been leaked.

Iran maintains that its atomic programme is designed to supply power stations, not nuclear warheads. After more than a year of deadlock and stalling, a fresh round of talks with the five permanent members of the UN security council plus Germany is due to begin on 5 December.

But in a meeting with Italy’s foreign minister earlier this year, Gates said time was running out. If Iran were allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, the US and its allies would face a different world in four to five years, with a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. King Abdullah had warned the Americans that if Iran developed nuclear weapons “everyone in the region would do the same, including Saudi Arabia”.

America is not short of allies in its quest to thwart Iran, though some are clearly more enthusiastic than the Obama administration for a definitive solution to Iran’s nuclear designs. In one cable, a US diplomat noted how Saudi foreign affairs bureaucrats were moderate in their views on Iran, “but diverge significantly from the more bellicose advice we have gotten from senior Saudi royals”.

In a conversation with a US diplomat, King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa of Bahrain “argued forcefully for taking action to terminate their [Iran’s] nuclear programme, by whatever means necessary. That programme must be stopped. The danger of letting it go on is greater than the danger of stopping it.” Zeid Rifai, then president of the Jordanian senate, told a senior US official: “Bomb Iran, or live with an Iranian bomb. Sanctions, carrots, incentives won’t matter.”

In talks with US officials, Abu Dhabi crown prince Sheikh Mohammad bin Zayed favoured action against Iran, sooner rather than later. “I believe this guy is going to take us to war … It’s a matter of time. Personally, I cannot risk it with a guy like [President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad. He is young and aggressive.”

In another exchange , a senior Saudi official warned that Gulf states may develop nuclear weapons of their own, or permit them to be based in their countries to deter the perceived Iranian threat.

No US ally is keener on military action than Israel, and officials there have repeatedly warned that time is running out. “If the Iranians continue to protect and harden their nuclear sites, it will be more difficult to target and damage them,” the US embassy reported Israeli defence officials as saying in November 2009.

There are differing views within Israel. But the US embassy reported: “The IDF [Israeli Defence Force], however, strikes us as more inclined than ever to look toward a military strike, whether launched by Israel or by us, as the only way to destroy or even delay Iran’s plans.” Preparations for a strike would likely go undetected by Israel’s allies or its enemies.

The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, told US officials in May last yearthat he and the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, agreed that a nuclear Iran would lead others in the region to develop nuclear weapons, resulting in “the biggest threat to non-proliferation efforts since the Cuban missile crisis”.

The cables also expose frank, even rude, remarks about Iranian leaders, their trustworthiness and tactics at international meetings. Abdullah told another US diplomat: “The bottom line is that they cannot be trusted.” Mubarak told a US congressman: “Iran is always stirring trouble.” Others are learning from what they describe as Iranian deception. “They lie to us, and we lie to them,” said Qatar’s prime minister, Hamad bin Jassim Jaber al-Thani.

Source http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-saudis-iran

Wikileaks - Epic whistle blowing

Sun, 28 Nov 2010 19:33:00 -0500

The most famous whistleblowing site in the world wikileaks has begun releasing a large amount of secret and unclassified documents held by the U.S government. Governments in many countries has expressed concern and anger over the release of these documents for fear that it could harm relationships between U.N leaders and could pose a potential threat to the safety of government officials.

The documents began being released today and are known on the web as secret US embassy cables. These cables date back as far as 1966 and from what has been reported so far not many countries are spared from information revealed.

The documents are proposed to release information that exposes the extent of the US spying on its allies and the UN, they also show to true severity of the corruption and complete disregard for human rights in the US government.

The release of these documents one could argue is the promotion of terrorism and many government officials and people in high places have called for the wikileaks site to be closed down others have expressed their opinions that how could this information have been allowed to enter untrustworthy hands in the first place if the potential information released could be so damaging.

Draconian Anti-piracy laws

Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:12:40 -0500

Most people who can navigate their way around the internet have downloaded illegally in some way be it music, software or movies. But is this really killing the music industry? The fact that Miley Cyrus earns around $25million a year says not.

Still recording companies and music companies want to enforce new laws that restrict our downloads and monitor what we access on the internet. They plan to do this by wanting all internet users to have software similar to virus protection that allows organisations to access information that lets them know what we have accessed on the internet and even go so far as to delete illegally downloaded materials. Obviously if your an internet pirate that downloads excessive movies and sells copies for profit then this is a good idea, but what about your average joe who downloads the odd album or movie? should you be treated a criminal purely for downloading for your own personal use?

This topic raises many issues in regards to human rights and invasion of privacy. Free downloads are available from a variety of sources which would mean that this new software that they wish to impose would allow the gatherer of the information access to everything that you have viewed on the internet. If they can access you downloaded files to delete them then what is stopping them viewing other personal documents and information that has not been retrieved illegally. The software they have proposed has extremely similar qualities to a trojan virus which of course if you get one on your computer the person who has infected your pc pretty much can see everything that you type on your keyboard including passwords and banking details.

It has even been quoted by top IT professionals that even the most hi-tech copyright monitoring systems are unworkable and at risk of exploitation by people who do not want to use the system purely to protect the rights of artists.

In an age where excessive surveillance of our everyday lives is of constant scrutiny this is absolutely ridiculous it is a total invasion of privacy. Who is going to want to use the internet if it feels like someone is reading over your shoulder every time you visit a site. If people cannot download for free for their own personal use this is only going to promote further use of copying to dvd and selling pirate copies for profit. Another crazy and outrageous suggestion by the government when clearly there are bigger issues that need to be tackled.

Britain's ever growing debt

Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:15:24 -0500

According to recent statistics our country is currently £4.8 trillion in debt this figure grows by around 446 million per day and it is estimated that if the government was to sell every house in the UK then we would still be £1 trillion in debt. When politicians were asked on a recent channel four documentary ‘Britains trillion pound horror story’ none of them could give a correct answer to the correct amount of debt that we are in. This brings the question are they hiding it from us? or is the actually figure growing at such a rapid speed that they could not answer the correct amount?

Records of government expenditure from 2009 reveals that the government actually paid out more in welfare payments than it took in income tax revenue. This means that because of the amount of debt that we are in our children and grandchildren will be deprived of necessary services and experience budget cuts to pay for people who do not work today in decades time. The welfare reform act which is said to improve our current benefits system is costly and time consuming to implement and will inevitably not save the government any money as this is not the problem. The issue lies with the current amount of jobs available in our country, people can say that a lot of the people receiving benefits choose not to work or are unable to work, this is true but from personal experience with friends and family the majority are unable to find jobs within their experience and education skills. The proposed increase in university fees is going to clearly make this more difficult for people of low incomes as a lot of people will not be able to attend university and improve them self to get a job.

The government needs to invest more in producing products and manufacturing things that are of interest and value to other countries to improve our economy. Services and state workers are off no use to other countries and therefore don’t bring any money in. The way we are going the situation is just going to get worse the cuts that the government has made to our budget so far will merely touch the surface of Britains debt problem which means that the people who need it most are being denied services for absolutely no valid reason other than to shadow the economic turmoil that we are in and provide an answer to a problem that really cant be solved.

Four million migrants

Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:59:30 -0500

There are currently four millions migrants working in the UK. This statistic considering the amount of unemployed British citizens this figure is ridiculous. Recent figures suggest that if half of these migrants were not here than we would have enough jobs for everybody who is an unemployed Brit. Some say that the reason why we are employing so many is that they work for cheaper and do jobs that the British don’t particularly want to do. A) that is disgusting as everybody should receive an equal wage regardless of where they are from. B) if you are jobless, fully capable of working and receiving hard working peoples money to support you through benefits you should be forced to take any job! This In turn would reduce the amount of migrants that come here.

The government is taking steps to put a cap on the amount of migrants that enter our country this will restrict the amount of migrants entering from outside the EU but will not prevent the heavy flow of eastern Europeans that are migrating to our country at an alarming rate!

Britain should be more strict on the way they let migrants enter our country what is wrong with Australia’s system of only accepting migrants who carry a skill that is of shortage in their population? My opinion is that we are far to politically correct for our own good! Don’t discriminate against people from different races but surely by allowing migrants to steal jobs that are desperately needed by British born citizens you are inevitably destroying our economy even more. Migration caps should be applied to all non UK citizens and should be individually evaluated by skills and contributions that they can provide our country! Why are we allowing this to happen when so many of our equal level countries would not!