How many Muslim lives can you get for a "golden nugget"?

Back in 2003, after the start of the Iraq invasion, then chairman of the UK's Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) and current head of British overseas intelligence agency MI6, requested that "ten golden nuggets" be included in the US-backed Iraq Survey Group's report on WMD's in Iraq.

golden nugget

"Golden nuggets", as it turned out, was Mr. Scarlett's euphemistic term for "lies" and included several deliciously bogus claims:

Some of the most entertaining were that Iraq, "had smallpox weapons or was trying to produce them" and that Saddam, "probably possessed mobile biological weapons laboratories", and that he was "developing a rail gun which could propel an object at enormous speed along a track." I think we can safely say that if Saddam had, just prior to March 2003, developed the capacity to propel an object at enormous speed along a track, he would surely have used it to propel himself out of Iraq and away from the approaching American military juggernaut. In fact, maybe that's more or less what he did.

Mr. Scarlett's mendacity was also behind the claim in the 2002 UK government "dossier" on Iraq's WMDs, (later publicly voiced by the obsequious Blair), that Saddam could "attack the UK with WMDs within 45 minutes." In May 2003 the "45 minute" claim was dramatically exposed as a lie by the BBCs Andrew Gilligan in a BBC Radio 4 report where he stated that a senior British official had told him that the September Dossier had been "sexed up", and that the intelligence agencies were concerned about some "dubious" information contained within it, specifically the "45 minute" claim. The ensuing debacle ended with the scape-goat "suiciding" of Dr. David Kelly.

Not content with fooling only the Western public, the spin-doctors in Whitehall also produced an Arabic version of the 2002 dossier, and what a 'version' it was. For the Arab peoples of the world "biological weapons" were deemed much too tame; after all, Churchill tried gassing them into submission in the early 20's to little effect. So, as Robert Fisk of the UK Independent reported in 2004:
When Tony Blair published his notorious 2002 "dossier" which falsely claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, Downing Street also produced an Arabic version - which contained significant deletions and changes in text that substantially altered its meaning.

A translation carried out for The Independent on Sunday reveals for the first time that several references to UN sanctions were cut from the Arabic text. On one page, the words "biological agents" were changed to read "nuclear agents". Arab journalists who reported on the dossier culled their information from the Arabic version - unaware that it was not the same as the English one.

While there is evidence of sloppiness in the translation - a 2001 Joint Intelligence Committee assessment of Iraqi nuclear ambitions is rendered as 2002 - many of the changes were clearly deliberate, apparently in an attempt to make the dossier more acceptable as well as more convincing to an Arab audience. At the time, the US and Britain were trying to convince Arab Gulf states that Saddam Hussein still represented a major threat to them - in the hope of seeking their support for the 2003 invasion - while the Arab world was enraged at the disastrous effects UN sanctions had on child mortality in Iraq.
In the end however, through a combination of government and media coverups, Mr. Scarlett's "golden nuggets" were accepted as legal tender by the British and world public in exchange for one illegal invasion of Iraq, which to date has led to the deaths of over 1 million Iraqis. By my count then, one of Mr. Scarlett's "golden nuggets" bought him about 100,000 Iraqi lives. That's a pretty good deal by anyone's standards, and Mr. Scarlett knows it. So like any savvy salesman, he is planning another bargain-hunting trip to the Middle East, specifically to Israel, where he will meet with the freakish Mossad chief Meir Dagan, this time to establish the going rate for an unspecified (yet undoubtedly large) number of innocent Iranian lives:
MI6 chief visits Mossad for talks on Iran's nuclear threat

Times Online
May 4 2008

The head of MI6, Sir John Scarlett, is to visit Israel later this month as Britain forges closer links with Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service.

Iran's nuclear program is expected to be high on the agenda in an intelligence-sharing process described by Israeli officials as a "strategic dialogue". It is building on long-standing cooperation between MI6 and Mossad, both of which have extensive spy networks in the Middle East.

Scarlett, 59, is likely to be briefed by Meir Dagan, 63, the head of Mossad, on Israel's latest information about the Iranian nuclear program. It is understood that Israel has made a breakthrough in intelligence-gathering within Iran.

There is mounting concern in Israel that Iran's nuclear capability may be far more advanced than was recognised in a declassified assessment by the US National Intelligence Estimate last December, which concluded that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons development program in 2003 in response to international pressure.

One source claimed the new information was on a par with intelligence that led Israel to discover and then destroy a partly constructed nuclear reactor in Syria last September.

Israeli officials believe the US will revise its analysis of Iran's programme. "We expect the Americans to amend their report soon," a high-ranking military officer said last week.

It is thought that if Israel were considering military action against Iran over its nuclear programme, it would want to ensure it had diplomatic support in London and Washington because of the danger of triggering a wider Middle East conflict.

"We're doing a lot of things about Iran," Ehud Barak, Israel's defence minister, said last week. "We say we shouldn't rule out any option.

Not ruling out options means action, but the worst thing to do at the moment is to talk [about it]."

Now, this should give us cause for serious concern. After all, we got royally screwed on the Iraq deal. How much are we going to have to pay for Iran?

While we can't yet know precisely what kind of "sexed up" nuggets will be on offer, the above report gives us a good idea. For example, we are told that "new information" will be "on a par with intelligence that led Israel to discover and then destroy a partly constructed nuclear reactor in Syria last September". Well, that is definitely not exactly encouraging. The "Syrian reactor" claim has already fallen flat on its face with only CIA chief Michael Hayden's word (forgive me if I don't trust it) and a grainy image of what the CIA claims is the inside of the reactor core as evidence! Check it out:

©CIA - Office of Michael Hayden

Pretty impressive huh? I'm not joking here. The above image is, along with Hayden's word, the totality of the "Syria reactor" claim! What I see here is an image of the top of a nuclear reactor (of which there are many in the world) over which someone has 'photoshopped' some text! Is this what the CIA spends billions of dollars every year on?? If so, I can save them some money. Below I present evidence that I have collected, all by myself, of the dire threat posed to the world by Iranian nukes:


Any spooks reading this, please contact me for pricing.

Actually, last I heard the CIA was recruiting for just this type of job.

It's not surprising then that the Syrian Ambassador said that the CIA's "Syrian reactor" claims were "manufactured to create further crisis in the Middle East", part of a US/Israeli "policy of madness", part of a "disinformation campaign" and added:

"We call upon member states to exercise caution and not to follow as other people have followed the vein of an administration which can only be described as madness."

He also correctly stated that Australia and France lacked credibility for referring to the US allegations and for failing to mention Israel's own nuclear arsenal. "France played a major and pivotal role in building the Israeli nuclear program and continues to supply Israel with nuclear technology, which is a clear infringement of the NPT", he said.

And who can argue with him? Israel sits atop the Middle East's ONLY Nuclear arsenal (at least 300 weapons), yet has the gall to threaten other Middle Eastern states if they so much as think about developing their own!

Frankly, all of it gives me deja-vu. Remember Colin Powell in front of the UN back in March 2003? Yeah, I know all Americans would prefer to forget that little embarrassment in front of the entire planet, but that Syrian reactor "corroborating evidence" above is just too similar to another little pic that Powell produced to back-up his Iraq WMD claims. Remember this one:


That, my friends, was a major part of the evidence that the US government submitted to the world in an attempt to justify its invasion of Iraq. And many people bought it!

However, it is not primarily Syria that is on Scarlett and Dagan's collective mind, but Iran (although they undoubtedly hope to deal with Syria, and the 'Palestine question' in a 'buy one get two free' deal on Iran). So what is the evidence against Iran? The above article tells us that:
"There is mounting concern in Israel that Iran's nuclear capability may be far more advanced than was recognised in a declassified assessment by the US National Intelligence Estimate last December, which concluded that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons development programme in 2003 in response to international pressure."
"Mounting concern"? Among whom may we ask? The same individuals who have long harbored the desire to 'remake' the Middle East, with Israel at its center? And what evidence might we expect for the Israeli claim that, despite its $40 billion annual budget, the US intelligence estimate on Iran's nuclear program is somehow completely wrong? Do not, even for a second, expect that any real evidence for a functioning Iranian WMD program will ever be produced, unless you are willing to content yourself with more badly drawn pictures and crudely 'photoshopped' images. What you can expect is more hyperbole and rhetoric as US, British and Israeli military intelligence services do what they do best - manufacture terrorism. A recent article in the World Tribune made this clear:
Diplomatic Sources: Plans for Air and Naval Strikes on Iran Submitted

World Tribune
May 01 2008

The U.S. military has drafted and won approval for attack plans in response to an Iran attack.

Western diplomatic sources said the U.S. military's Central Command has submitted plans for an air and naval strike on Iran, Middle East Newsline reported. The sources said the plan envisioned escalating tensions that would peak with an Iranian-inspired insurgency strike against U.S. military assets in the Gulf.

Officials said the Defense Department has sought an update for plans to attack Iran amid what they term its "increasingly hostile role" against the United States. The officials cited the weapons flow to insurgency groups in Iraq as well as confrontations with U.S. ships in the Gulf. [...]

Under the plan approved by the Defense Department, Central Command would be allowed to retaliate for an Iranian attack with U.S. air strikes. The sources said the plan contained a series of options that range from a limited to full-scale attack.
Note the conviction with which the US military command states that the Iranians are going to carry out a strike against US military assets in the Gulf. It brings to mind the drills and reports given to the US state Dept. prior to 9/11 that envisioned a "terrorist attack" on New York buildings using planes as bombs.

As for the US government's recent claims that the Iranians are the new enemy-du-jour in Iraq for their sponsorship of "Special Groups", this is simply more of the same lies and disinformation. Consider the words of Gen. David Petraeus to the Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing last month on the fighting in Basra:
"The recent flare-up in Basra, southern Iraq, and Baghdad underscored the importance of the ceasefire declared by Moqtada al-Sadr last fall as another factor in the overall reduction in violence. Recently, of course, some militia elements became active again. Though a Sadr stand-down order resolved the situation to a degree, the flare-up also highlighted the destructive role Iran has played in funding, training, arming, and directing the so-called Special Groups and generated renewed concern about Iran in the minds of many Iraqi leaders. Unchecked, the Special Groups pose the greatest long-term threat to the viability of a democratic Iraq."
What Petraeus does not mention however is that it was the Iranians that brokered the cease-fire that quelled the violence! Iran has consistently denied allegations that it is fomenting violence in Iraq and providing the Iraqi resistance with weapons. Apart from the fact that Iran would be fully entitled to do so if it chose, there is no evidence that this is the case. If Iran were to supply weapons to the Iraqi resistance, the tide of this very one-sided 'war' would turn in short order. Equipped with Iranian armor-piercing RPGs, (like those used to great effect by Hizb'allah against the IDF in the summer of 2006) US defence contractors like Boeing, Lockheed-Martin and Raytheon (and many others) would see their orders for replacement military machinery skyrocket, and the Iraqi resistance would not have to rely on burying IEDs by the road-side. But like all psychopaths, the cabal directing the 'remaking of the Middle East' would never agree to a fair fight and much prefer their victims to be more or less helpless.

If US government's claims that Iran is supporting the insurgency in Iraq are true, and that these "Iranian backed groups" are attacking Iraqi forces, why then was the Iranian president welcomed by his Iraqi counterpart with open arms in March of this year? If the US government is such a close ally of the Iraqi government, why do Bush and other US officials have to secret themselves into Iraq under cover of darkness?

The entire official history of the war on terror and the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions are pure fabrication. When a defining period in world history begins with the bludgeoning of a nation into submission, and requires further similar acts to cement the reality of its narrative and to coerce the people to accept it as such, there is no need for the truth. Indeed, in such cases, the truth becomes the enemy of the narrative, and must be denied at all costs. The true history of the war on terror provides us with an insight into the 'creativity' of the psychopathic mind, their 'creative' potential being limited to destruction. The idea of "creative destruction" is an oxymoron that can only make sense to the extreme psychological myopia of the psychopath. It is a nihilistic ethos that "Neocons" like Michael Ledeen openly embrace. It is all they know and the extent of their perverted 'humanity'. The idea of the 'other', or the suffering or needs of others, is completely alien to them. And yet, when they consider the masses of ordinary people, they understand that they are not quite conspecific and that if they are to have their predatorial needs met, they must manipulate, lie, deceive. If that is not effective enough, then the next psychopathically 'logical' step is murder, on as large a scale as necessary, or as large a scale as they can get away with.

And so here we are, on the brink of what is sure to be yet another blatantly manufactured terror attack and war on the ordinary people of the world; another blunt force trauma to the body public on a massive scale, and I ask you the question again: what price will you accept this time? How many "golden nuggets"? How many innocent lives will you allow to be extinguished in the name of a utterly preposterous "war on terror" before you accept the truth - that the inmates are running the asylum - and resolve, if only in your own mind, that enough is enough...