TOTAL FAILURE OF ANTI NUKE PARADIGM.

TOTAL FAILURE OF ANTI NUKE PARADIGM.

By Gerald, Internet Anthropologist Think Tank

09.05.09

SANCTIONS, BRIBES. MEETINGS, AGREEMENTS

ALL FAILURES.

SEE UPDATE AT THE END,

GEEZE WHAT HASN'T THE WORLD TRIED YET.

PARADIGM INTEL FORCAST:

REPLACE THE COUNTRY N KOREA BELOW

WITH THE COUNTRY OF IRAN when you read the article,

thats our paradigm intel forcast.

THE WORLD IS USING THE SAME TACTICS

ON IRAN IT USED AND FAILED WITH ON

N KOREA.

HIT THEM....

PUT A STOP TO THIS.

g

— 1994: Under agreement with U.S.,North Korea pledges to freeze and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons program in exchange for help building two safer power-producing nuclear reactors.

— Aug. 31, 1998: North Korea fires suspected missile over Japan and into the Pacific Ocean, calling it a satellite.

— Sept. 13, 1999: North pledges to freeze long-range missile tests.

— Sept. 17, 1999: President Bill Clinton agrees to first major easing of economic sanctions against North Korea since Korean War's end in 1953.

— June 2001: North Korea warns it will reconsider missile test moratorium if Washington doesn't resume contacts aimed at normalizing relations.

— July 2001: U.S. State Department reports North Korea is developing long-range missile.

— December 2001: President George W. Bush warns Iraq and North Korea will be "held accountable" if they develop weapons of mass destruction.

— Jan. 29, 2002: Bush labels North Korea, Iran and Iraq an "axis of evil."

— September 2002: North Korea pledges in summit talks with Japan to extend its moratorium on missile tests beyond 2003.

— Jan. 10, 2003: North Korea announces withdrawal from Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

— March 10, 2003: North Korea fires a land-to-ship missile off east coast into waters between the Korean peninsula and Japan.

— August 2003: North Korea joins first round of six-nation nuclear talks in Beijing with China, U.S. Japan, Russia and South Korea.

— July 5, 2006: North Korea launches seven missiles into waters between the Korean peninsula and Japan, including a long-range Taepodong-2.

— July 15, 2006: U.N. Security Council adopts Resolution 1695 demanding North Korea halt missile program.

— Oct. 9, 2006: North Korea conducts underground nuclear test blast after citing "extreme threat of a nuclear war" from U.S.

— Oct. 15, 2006: U.N. Security Council adopts Resolution 1718 condemning test, imposing sanctions and banning North Korea from all activities related to its nuclear weapons program.

— Feb. 13, 2007: North Korea agrees to disable its main nuclear facilities in return for energy aid and other benefits.

— July 14, 2007: North Korea shuts down main Yongbyon reactor, later starts disabling it.

— June 27, 2008: North Korea destroys cooling tower at Yongbyon.

— Sept. 19, 2008: North Korea says it is restoring a key atomic reactor.

— Oct. 11, 2008: U.S. removes North Korea from a list of states that sponsor terrorism.

— Feb. 15, 2009: North Korea claims it has the right to "space development."

— Feb. 23: South Korea says North Korea has a new type of medium-range ballistic missile capable of reaching northern Australia and Guam.

— April 5: North Korea launches long-range rocket from its base at Musundan-ri on the country's northeast coast. U.N. Security Council holds emergency meeting.

— April 13: U.N. Security Council condemns launch and says it will tighten sanctions against North Korea.

— April 14: North Korea announces withdrawal from disarmament talks and says it will restore partly disabled nuclear facilities.

SOURCE:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Sunday, September 06, 2009

ANALYSIS

N. Korea nuke weapon admission puts US on notice

By Shaun Tandon, Agence France-Presse WASHINGTON, D.C.: In admitting to uranium enrichment after years of denial, North Korea is putting the United States on notice that it will do whatever it takes to keep its nuclear program, analysts say. Pyongyang said Friday it was in the final stage of enriching uranium—a second way to make nuclear bombs besides its known plutonium program. It marked a sharp change of tone after a month of easing tensions. SOURCE: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX THEY HAVE NO FEAR. Current paradigm is a total failure. Risk vs reward ratios are in 'their' favor. The paradigm needs to be rebalanced. G .

NYT reporter abducted, civilians hang w/Taliban

Which is the civilian of the Three above?

You ride with the Taliban,

you die with the Taliban.

STAY AWAY FROM THE TALIBAN.

Kunduz, Afghanistan - A New York Times journalist visiting the site of the deadly NATO airstrike in the northern Afghan province of Kunduz was kidnapped along with his Afghan interpreter on Saturday, the provincial governor said.

The journalist, who went to talk to villagers in Omarkhel village in the Chardarah district was kidnapped by Taliban militants, Mohammad Omar, the provincial governor, told the German Press Agency dpa.

SOURCE:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

A NATO airstrike on Friday exploded two fuel tankers that had been hijacked by the Taliban,

( AND THE DRIVERS BEHEADED G )

In explaining the civilian deaths, military officials speculated that local people were conscripted by the Taliban to unload the fuel from the tankers, which were stuck near a river several miles from the nearest villages.

ecently, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top American and NATO commander here, severely restricted the use of airstrikes, arguing that America risked losing the war if it did not reduce civilian casualties.

Underscoring his concern, on Friday he recorded a video message, translated into Dari and Pashto, to be released to Afghan news organizations.

The general began by greeting “the great people of Afghanistan, salaam aleikum.”

“As commander of the International Security Assistance Force, nothing is more important than the safety and protection of the Afghan people,” General McChrystal said in the brief message. “I take this possible loss of life or injury to innocent Afghans very seriously.”

General McChrystal said he had ordered the investigation “into the reasons and results of this attack, which I will share with the Afghan people.”

SOURCE:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Taliban invite you to come and get FREE FUEL, stolen from the Americans. If you go to get the stolen fuel form the Taliban you assume certain risks.

You know the drones attack the Taliban, just being physically near the Taliban you assume certain risks.

While I grieve the loss of any civilians they assume some of the risks associated with the Taliban, even when collecting stolen fuel from tankers; stolen, guarded and controlled by the Taliban.

Some were even warned by family members not to go. "defied his father’s orders". and went to get the stolen fuel.

They know the risks, then they also have some responsibility for their actions and the consequences for their actions.

STAY AWAY FROM THE TALIBAN,

THEY ARE TARGETS. YOU MAY BE

KILLED.

Gerald .

Published: Saturday, September 5, 2009 at 11:07 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, September 5, 2009 at 11:07 p.m.

The top NATO commander in Afghanistan

has visited the site of an airstrike meant to

take out two tanker trucks hijacked by

Taliban militants, but reportedly also

killed civilians. (Sept. 5))

SOURCE:

.

.

.

Crusin with my top S&D Squad.

Crusin with my top S&D Squad.

Heavy Weapons squad on standby...

"LOVE AND DARKNESS AND MY SIDE ARM"

Out of pocket 4 hrs, ....g

WATCH THE VID

G

.

Bank's gettin theres, HOORA

September 2, 2009 by David Johnson

Shames-Yeakel v. Citizens Financial Bank: Failure to Expeditiously Implement State-of the Art Security Measures Can Create Liability for Negligence in Data Breach Cases

Keeping up with the constant changes in security measures necessary to handle the latest threats to data can make a business feel like it is running out of breath. When a business already has a quality data security system in place, implementing the latest security protocol may feel like a distraction and a waste of money. However, state and federal legislatures and regulators, as well as courts around the country, are increasingly unwilling to let businesses slack off from the cyber-security arms race. As seen in a recent Indiana District Court decision, failure to implement the latest and greatest in data protection measures may be found to be a breach of expected standards of care and expose a business to liability for data breaches.

The plaintiffs complained to the Office of Thrift Supervision ("OTC"). However, the OTC informed them that they had no objection to Citizens holding them liable. In support of its conclusion, the OTC noted that Regulation E, which implements the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, only protects demand deposit and consumer asset accounts, not credit accounts like a home equity line of credit. It also noted that Regulation Z, which implements the Truth in Lending Act, only covers lines of credit when the credit is used for personal purposes. Here, because the plaintiffs had linked the line of credit to a business checking account, the OTC concluded that it was a business line of credit.

Ultimately, the plaintiffs sued Citizens, claiming that the bank's actions violated the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. § 1601, et seq.), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq.), the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (15 U.S.C. § 1693 et seq.) and constituted common law negligence. The evidence regarding these claims was considered by the Court in its August 21, 2009 ruling on Citizen's motion for summary judgment.

The aspect of the case that may have the largest precedential impact was its decision on the plaintiffs' negligence cause of action. (Fn1) A major basis for their negligence claim was the theory that financial institutions have a common law duty to protect their members' or customers' confidential information against identity theft. While the Court could not find controlling State precedent on point (Indiana law applied), it noted that Indiana courts have held that a bank has a duty not to disclose information concerning one of its customers unless it is to someone who has a legitimate public interest. The Court then stated, "If this duty not to disclose customer information is to have any weight in the age of online banking, then banks must certainly employ sufficient security measures to protect their customers' online accounts."

SOURCE:

Banks gettin it,

THEIR TURN IN THE BARREL.

doin my happy dance...G

g

If you had Id theft show

this to your attorney, sue

the bank.

.

Pirate spys jack Russian ship, Russia ok with it.

EU official: Israel hijacked Russian ship

Jewish Telegraphic Agency - ‎Sep 2, 2009‎

Russia denied the ship was running weapons to the Middle East. According to Time, Israeli President Shimon Peres met with his Russian counterpart, ...

no doubt about Israels BALLS. G

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

CHATTER AND NOISE:

ISRAELS SECURITY CABINET MEETS TO

DISCUSS READYNESS FOR MISSILE

ATTACKS..

g

Ops and Intel up date, 09.04.09

Ops and Intel up date, 09.04.09

Pakistan concerned over reports of India's new nuclear test: FO

Well gee, India pissing on USA's prade again.

Why would India test a nuke now?

Its just going to stir up problems in Paki.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Binny gets off death bed.

DUBAI (Reuters) - A website often used by al Qaeda supporters said on Thursday it would soon carry a "present" to Muslims from Osama bin Laden on the occasion of the holy month of Ramadan.

The Islamist website gave no further details, but messages by the al Qaeda leader have usually appeared within about 48 hours of being announced on the Internet.

SOURCE:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Hizbollah CAUGHT IN PONZI SCAM $100,000,000's

Hizbollah's opponents seize on claims of Lebanese fraud scheme

By Ferry Biedermann in Beirut

Published: September 3 2009 03:00 | Last updated: September 3 2009 03:00

A prominent Lebanese businessman seen as close to Hizbollah, the Shia militant movement, has been taken into custody for allegedly losing hundreds of millions of dollars of investors' money.

SOURCE:

NOW THATS BALLS. G

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

In Afghan:

DEA intelligence experts and a growing network of informants -- something other U.S. agencies have been unable to duplicate -- are providing detailed "actionable" information -- "target sets" -- that can be exploited rapidly in "capture-kill" missions.

SOURCE:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Paki's Nuke expert still a risk.

AQ Khan should beware of Taliban!

A two-member panel of the Lahore High Court has issued an interim ruling following an appeal from the Pakistan government in favour of retaining the security protocol of Pakistan’s nuclear scientist, Dr AQ Khan. The court will now hear the government petition in detail on the 15th of September. Another Lahore High Court judge had issued another interim order lifting all restrictions on Khan’s movement.

Clearly, the government is bothered about Dr Khan’s security and wants to be heard on the point. The case still had to be argued but it was the “interim” restoration of freedom of movement that could prove dangerous, given Pakistan’s general level of security. Thousands of road-barriers in the country clearly indicate that freedom of movement of the entire nation is somehow curtailed.

The “security protocol” came with an Islamabad High Court decision in February declaring Dr Khan a “free citizen”. Dr Khan could not stand the restrictions contained in the “protocol” and now wants to be free of it. There was public sympathy with his petition because it implied defiance of the United States that wants to interrogate him and doesn’t want him in circulation. But Dr Khan’s security problems are in fact more complex.

Dr Khan is a prime target for the Taliban who kidnap important people for ransom. If he gets “lifted”, his price will be very high, higher than any the Taliban have received for diplomats and film directors so far. And the ransom will be demanded not only from Pakistan but from the US as well! And he will go to the highest bidder. Even in normal circumstances, Dr Khan would be a very attractive victim, but given Islamabad’s security, he is under more threat than any other person living in the country. Both the media and Dr Khan should pause to consider this point dispassionately.

SOURCE:

Gerald

,

Iran's dead line.

Iran's dead line.

By Gerald, Internet Anthropologist Think Tank

09.03.09

Paradigm Intel forecast:

Iran makes some small gestures,

and acknowledges a willingness to talk

as a method to stall for more time .

Expect more desultory responses.

Their goal is to stall for enough time

to test a nuclear devise.

There is a propensity for both sides

to move towards some small accommodation

to avoid a confrontation. And voice some

"progress" towards a non-nuclear armed Iran.

While USA is functioning in earnest, Iran

is not acting in good faith, they are just

stalling for time.

Sanctions had no impact on N Korea's

drive to obtain a nuke weapon.

In fact N Korea even signed an

agreement and then ignored it

and tested two nukes.

N. Korea and Iran view sanctions

as the price to join the nuke club.

Sanctions have had and will have

no impact no impact on Iran's

goal to get a nuke.

Iran views their objective for a nuke

with religious fervor, ( the 13 Imman )

and as an opportunity to take their

place as a world nuclear power.

And use the nuclear weapons as an

umbrella to protect their terrorist activities.

Iran views USA as a paper tiger,

they seized the American Embassy

and took hostages, held them for 444

days and USA did not retaliate or take

actions.

Obama's overtures towards dialog

have been viewed as weakness by the

Iranian Regime.

And view Obama's actions as a desire

to be viewed as a good guy, and the regime

doesn't believe Obma will give that up for

an attack on Iran's nuke stockpile.

Iran views Israel as a real threat.

They have acted and took out Iraq's

reactor and Syria's reactor.

Iran has been installing chemical

weapons along Israel's borders.

The world is fast approaching

a time to decide if Iran will be allowed

to get Nuclear weapons.

There are many questions to be answered

in order to resolve the paradigm.

Does Obama have the BALLS to take

Military action against Iran?

Can USA hold Israel in check?

Will Israel defend its self with a

preemptive strike?

Can Iran stall long enough to test

a Nuke?

Iran will not voluntary give up its

pursuit of a Nuke weapon.

The decision will be Obama's.

To allow Iran to get a nuke

or take action to stop them.

Will his legacy be a nuclear

armed Iran?

If Iran gets a nuke they

will use it.

Internet Anthropologist Think Tank: Iran will push the button

Can this problem be managed? YES G

Internet Anthropologist Think Tank: Ahmadinejadization of Iran.

What will Iran do with a Nuke?

http://warintel.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-will-iran-do-if-they-get-nuke.html

Does Obama have the courage to stop Iran?

Gerald

Anthropologist

Iran's new defence minister, Ahmad Vahidi, is wanted by

Argentina for his alleged role in a bomb attack in 1994.

Does that sound like they are looking for peace? G

Update: Great piece by Annie Hamilton

Strange as it may sound, President Ahmadinejad swears that a halo of light appeared around him while he addressed the UN in '05, confirming his "divine purpose on Earth " Ahmadinejad’s is also obsessed with the return of Shiite Muslims’ messiah and as a stringent follower of Islam, has expressed his ultimate goal of the destruction of America and Israel on more than one occasion. Iran’s “Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khameini declared that Iran refuses to “beg world powers for its right to develop nuclear technology” and has demonstrated that it will not retreat from the "field of danger" and will protect those rights, even should it mean death for them. Ahmadinejad reportedly spoke with Syrian president Bashar Assad recently, where (if sources are citing truthful statements) Assad is reportedly hoping for a united war as it will only strengthen their 'position.'

Deadline or not, this hardly portrays a positive outlook for our safety in America, our Administration or for hope for peace in the middle east. The $800 million dollar question remains: How will our Administration react to this deadly threat against Israel and America?

SOURCE:

.