Archive for the ‘Iran’ Category


Iran’s Bushehr reactor is connected to the power grid: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14779227

Israel und US plan attack: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15595657

On June 23rd President Obama declared his plan for withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan. And later, also from Iraq.


Because a US led atomic attack against Iran will cause fallout, which will also affect Afghanistan and Iraq.

Projected Casualties Among U.S. Military Personnel and Civilian Populations from the Use of Nuclear Weapons Against Hard and Deeply Buried Targets:


The IPPNW (peace nobel prize 1985) says, that

  • six B61-11 earth-penetrating atomic weapons with a yield of 340 kt each will be dropped according to HPAC / Pentagon scenario
  • dropped on: Isfahan and Natnaz (Iran)
  • Result: In 48 hours -> 2,6 million deaths, fallout on India, Pakistan, Afghanistan (evacuation of the troops?), 10,5 million people injured.

At the same time Iran is trying to run it’s atomic reactors (build by russian company ROSATOM – builds now in Belarus, most Chernobyl affected country) – which are offline since the outbreak of the computervirus Stuxnet:


If the atomic reactors are running and producing Plutonium, Iran fulfills these conditions:

  • 1st, the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review
  • 2nd, the National Security Strategies of 2002
  • 3rd, the 2006 National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction

These 3 papers will be used as a reason to start a war.

Plus: The atomic facilities of Iran are underground. Which makes them invulnerable against conventional attacks.

1981 – Israelian conventional airstrike against ABOVEGROUND Iraq atomic reactor Osirak: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/7/newsid_3014000/3014623.stm

2007 – Israelian conventional airstrike against ABOVEGROUND Syrian atomic reactor: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/washington/14weapons.html

So, the HPAC program used by the US Pentagon recommends the use of six B-61 atomic weapons agains Iran – each digging 7 meters deep and then explode.

B 61 atomic bomb: http://books.google.de/books?id=YgAAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA78&lpg=PA78&dq=pentagon+less+fallout+b-61&source=bl&ots=kYo5w2KxVZ&sig=M2UcN_1fIzSsdPkB-y2Nx8wEIGQ&hl=de&ei=csAxTr2XMYbesgaamYjpBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

A civil atomic program – supported by the IAEA – is the base for a military atomic program. If this military atomic program violates the proliferation: A war is inevitable. So, the IAEA plays a key role in Preparing Wars.


US forces pull back is an evacuation:


Medical consequences of a nuclear attack against Iran:


How Nuclear Energy takes YOU as HOSTAGE:





Read Full Post »

From German issue of Le Monde diplomatique from April 2010 (web)

In this issue of Le Monde, Obama’s strategy is described as not to make the planet atomic weapons free, but the strategy of his B-61’s is mentioned (web). The US military wants to abandon it’s longe range bombers such as the B-52 and B-2 and the atomic Tomahawk missles. At the same time the military sympathizes with the use of the B-61 earth penetrating weapons. The US military claims due to the earth penetrating nature of these bombs, there would be less fallout and less collataral damage (paper from Brookings think thank here). The IPPNW (web) says, the B-61’s only digs 7 metres into the ground, then it detonates and causes more fallout than a surface explosion. The ideology seems to be clear: Creating a clean image of the atomic version of the B-61 is a goal of the hardliners in the Pentagon. Obama has failed to replace them with people who support other strategies.

Even Obama’s Stratcom-commander General Chilton said on Dec. 15th 2009, that “We will need atomic weapons as long as the United States exist”.

More: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/resources/books/BAC/chapter1.pdf

The atomic B-61 is needed for destroying / damaging Iran’s underground atomic facilities. You cannot compare them with the atomic reactor in Iraq – destroyed by conventional weapons of Israel in 1981, or the Syrian reactor – also destroyed the conventional way in 2007. They were all build on the surface. Obama doesn’t risk another ground invason.

Efficiency is one thing, the other one is Dollars. From 2007 till 2008 the U.S. spent more than 140 million Dollars daily for it’s atomic arsenal.

But we must resist against the downplaying of even an “limited” atomic war. The results would be: In 48 hours -> 2,6 million deaths, fallout on India, Pakistan, Afghanistan,  10,5 million people injured – according ot the IPPNW. This is the worst case scenario. This must never happen.

More about the medical consequences: http://www.ippnw-students.org/iran/iran_attack.pdf

Here is the Non-Governmental Organizations’ Statements to the States Party to the Seventh Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, May 11th, 2005

And here is my older blog entry about the possible scenarion of an evacutation of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan

Here is the NPT Treaty of the U.N.



Read Full Post »

When US or coalition forces pull back from Afghanistan or Iraq – it’s not a pull back.

It’s an evacuation.

An evacuation due to the fallout – created by six U.S. B61-11 earth-penetrating atomic weapons with a yield of 340 kt each.

Fallout will be going down on Afghanistan, perhaps Iraq, Pakistan and / or India.

Source for attack scenario: HPAC – Hazard Prediction and Assessment Capability / PENTAGON

Although President Obama doesn’t want to nuke Iran HERE

it is a possible scenario. More HERE and in this IPPNW fact sheet

So, be alerted, when applauding to pull back of forces, when at the same Iran’s atomic power plants are running.

If the Iran is building an atomic bomb this is a case for:

  • 1st, the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review
  • 2nd, the National Security Strategies of 2002
  • 3rd, the 2006 National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • NPT / Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty more HERE

The IAEA sells the ideology of peaceful atomic power, which, plus the know how, enables countries to build atomic reactors and atomic bombs – both siamese twins. Which means, every atomic reactor automatically contravenes the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Which opens automatically the HPAC scenario and the attack with atomic bombs.

The IAEA is subject to the five permanent U.N. members: China, USA, France, England, Russia. All atomic powers.

pure coincidence.


Read Full Post »


Pro-atomic-power and it’s propaganda: “atomic transmutation”

Two things:

1.) Transmutation is a bad excuse for NOT finding an atomic waste disposal.

2.) Transmutation may transform some material into short-living emitters.

But some into long living emitters.

And don’t forget what atomic reprocessing facilities cause:

Here is

The Real Costs of Cleaning Up Nuclear Waste: A Full Cost Accounting of Cleanup Options for the West Valley Nuclear Waste Site

on the webiste of http://www.synapse-energy.com/

Transmutation is dirty, expensive and dangerous. And, of course, a bad excuse.


Read Full Post »

Since the U.S. and Poland signed the contract to install an Amercian build missle defense system in Poland, Russia reacts: Russia wants to build an own air defense system in cooperation with Belarus. This was confirmed during talks between Belarussian dictator Lukashenko and Russia’s President Medwedjew in the southrussian City Sotschi. The whole thing is going to be signed in autumn 2008, along with the transfer of Russian bombers to Cuba. History repeats itself.  Source


Read Full Post »

German Government plans total pull-out from atomic power.

Remember: Total pull-out from atomic power is in the making by the following countries: Austria, Sweden, Italy, Belgium and Germany (2000). Poland stopped it’s construction of an atomic reactor (although they plan a new one in 2020), Ireland stopped the atomic program in their country.

17 of the E.U. countries do have plans for total pull-out.

Uranium is needed for atomic power plants. Uranium has a range of 60 years. If you renew Uranium for re-use in atomic power plants you get radioactive waste materials. The quarrying of 1 ton of Uranium causes 2000 tons of radiative material.

Atomic power is not environmental friendly and it cannot stop climate change.

It’s just another money printer for the industry.

Prepare yourself with easy-reads and contra-atomic information (Made in Germany):

German Federal Construction Minister wants 30 new Wind Energy Parks of 25,000 Megawatt

German politician: Atomic energy is NOT green

German KiKK study proves higher risc of children cancer near atomic power plants

German chronological plan for setting atomic power plants offline

German radioactive waste disposal to be closed till 2014

German atomic power plants operated by Vattenfall – the 2007 accidents

More scientific information:

Into the Future without Atomic energy. Pullout in 10 years – Win for Environment and Working places. CAN (Anti-Atomic coalition, Sihlquai 67, 8005 – Zurich), December 1995.

Burlakova E.B.: Low intensity radiation: radiological aspects. Radiation Protection Dosimetry Vol. 62, No 1/2 pp. 13 – 18 1995, Nuclear Technology Publishing.

Gadekar S.: Conclusion of the health survey of villages near Rawatbhata. CANE 767, 36 Cross, 4th Block Jayanager Bangalore 560 041. April / May 1993 Anumkti Vol. 6 No 5, pp. 1 – 32.

Muller, H.J.: Genetics, Medicine and Man (1947). (Memo wordpress.tekknorg: HERE)

Nussbaum R.H. & Köhnlein W.: Health consequences of exposures to ionizing from external and internal sources: Challenges to radiation protection standards and biomedical research. Medicine and Global Survive De. 1995 Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 198 – 213.

Viel J.-F.: Consequences des essais nucléaires sur la santé: quelles enquêtes épidémiologiques? Médicine et Guerre Nucléaire, janv. – mars 1996 Vol. 11, p 41 – 44. British Medical Journal, January 1997, vol. 314, pp. 101 – 106.

Wolff Et.: Thesis on Teratology and X Rays, Arch. Anat. Hist. Embr. 1936, Vol. 22, pp. 1 – 382

More HERE [1] and HERE [2]


Read Full Post »

Contingent on the Heat which occures during Summer, atomic power plants worldwide will have problems. The temperature in rivers is going to rise. So, less cooling water can be used from these rivers. And the other way: To avoid breaking the limit for minimum quantitiy, less warm water from the atomic power plants can be preluded into the rivers, because this would harm fish and the ecosystem.

Several atomic power plants will have their performance lowered. Take an example from 2006 / Germany: Operator and concern E.ON Energie web reduced the output from their atomic power plants by 50 % (!). The cause was the high temperature of the river “Weser”, whose water is directly used for cooling.

Atomic power plants do not guarantee security of supply.

The electricity price will rise.

More solar power is needed.



Read Full Post »

Older Posts »