Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Israeli in secret cable: Turks aid Iran nukes
My access to Wikileaks has been restored as of this afternoon.
Israelis accuse Turks of aiding Iran's nuclear program. Israel accused its sometime ally Turkey of permitting nuclear materials headed for Iran's weapons program to be shipped via Turkey with the "full knowledge" of the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, according to a secret State Department cable copied from the Wikileaks web site.
Urged by French Premier Nicolas Sarkozy to launch an independent invesitgation of reported Israeli military abuses in Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu bluntly refused, the document says.
Here is a copy:
S E C R E T PARIS 001461
SIPDIS NOFORN
E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/29/2019 TAGS: PGOV PREL IS TU SY FR
SUBJECT: FRANCE-ISRAEL STRATEGIC DIALOGUE COVERS TURKEY, PEACE PROCESS, SYRIA
REF: PARIS 1418 Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Kathy Allegrone, Reasons 1.4(b),(d).
¶1. (S/NF) SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: French participants in the second annual Franco-Israeli Strategic Dialogue on October 28 noted profound disquiet among the Israelis about Turkey, according to Frederic Bereyziat, Senior MFA Desk Officer for Israel and the Peace Process. Bereyziat told poloff October 29 that the Israelis claimed the Turks have allowed weapons-related material for Iran's nuclear program to transit Turkey, with Prime Minister Erdogan's full knowledge.
In the lead up to this Strategic Dialogue, Bereyziat reported, President Sarkozy called Prime Minister Netanyahu directly on October 26, to urge him to establish an independent investigation into the actions of the Israeli Defense Forces in the Gaza conflict. Sarkozy told Netanyahu that such a step would decrease pressure on Israel and its allies stemming from the Goldstone Report, but Netanyahu responded briskly: "No way."
Franco-Israeli discussions on the status of the peace process stumbled over a "profound difference on tactics," according to Bereyziat, who also reported the French intention to introduce a Resolution in the U.N. General Assembly designed to prevent the Goldstone Report from returning to the Security Council.
Finally, Bereyziat described a division within the Israeli delegation about Syria's openness to the west, with some on the delegation discounting benefits that might accrue to Israel through the re-launching of negotiations, and others supporting the French claim that Israel would put Syria in a bind by suddenly expressing openness to negotiations over the Golan.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Mounting hysteria over Wikileaks
A probable indicator of hysteria over what Wikileaks wreaks is the fact that Wikilikeaks.org's site appears to be down again, even though it had been transferred to Amazon's server in an attempt to prevent denial of service attacks.
At any rate I couldn't get through this morning. But I strongly suspect that the reason isn't deliberate denial of service but worldwide worries over reports that Wikileaks would soon expose documents from a big U.S. bank that would prove highly embarrassing, even devastating. Bank of America issued a denial of sorts that means little but appears intended to halt the slide in its share price.
Considering the case of acute indigestion being suffered by the European Union and International Monetary Fund credit sectors, it is little wonder that interest in Wikileaks has gone througth the roof. Especially when it is apparent that the "system" can't even protect diplomatic and so-called national security secrets.
And the howls by the penny dreadful press, the campaign to have Julian Assange arrested for "espionage," and the Swedish prosecutor's drive to get Assange on very dubious sex charges go to show that "just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
'I think that the docs probably mainly reflect that US diplomats believe in the crap that comes out Washington," writes a friend in response to a recent post.
"Given that Der Spiegel and the New York Times are involved I imagine they did the screening to make sure of no embarrassment to Israel. Rusbridger at the Guardian is a closet neocon IMO too.
"It's no surprise that there is nothing on 9/11 - that is because 9/11 was a much tighter ultra top secret operation, not the sort of thing that gets discussed on diplomatic wires.
"The worry is that someone who does get a real leak goes to wikileaks with it and gets betrayed.
"For me the big surprise is that the Saudi king was indeed advocating an attack on Iran (if that is true). The only genuine motive I can see for that is the effect it would have on the oil price which would make him one of the all time top scumbags. Let's hope his people think that too.
"Lets hope people will find the time to go through the originals for themselves, there will certainly be a lot more than the MSM gatekeepers are telling us about."
At any rate I couldn't get through this morning. But I strongly suspect that the reason isn't deliberate denial of service but worldwide worries over reports that Wikileaks would soon expose documents from a big U.S. bank that would prove highly embarrassing, even devastating. Bank of America issued a denial of sorts that means little but appears intended to halt the slide in its share price.
Considering the case of acute indigestion being suffered by the European Union and International Monetary Fund credit sectors, it is little wonder that interest in Wikileaks has gone througth the roof. Especially when it is apparent that the "system" can't even protect diplomatic and so-called national security secrets.
And the howls by the penny dreadful press, the campaign to have Julian Assange arrested for "espionage," and the Swedish prosecutor's drive to get Assange on very dubious sex charges go to show that "just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
'I think that the docs probably mainly reflect that US diplomats believe in the crap that comes out Washington," writes a friend in response to a recent post.
"Given that Der Spiegel and the New York Times are involved I imagine they did the screening to make sure of no embarrassment to Israel. Rusbridger at the Guardian is a closet neocon IMO too.
"It's no surprise that there is nothing on 9/11 - that is because 9/11 was a much tighter ultra top secret operation, not the sort of thing that gets discussed on diplomatic wires.
"The worry is that someone who does get a real leak goes to wikileaks with it and gets betrayed.
"For me the big surprise is that the Saudi king was indeed advocating an attack on Iran (if that is true). The only genuine motive I can see for that is the effect it would have on the oil price which would make him one of the all time top scumbags. Let's hope his people think that too.
"Lets hope people will find the time to go through the originals for themselves, there will certainly be a lot more than the MSM gatekeepers are telling us about."
No comments:
Post a Comment