EXCLUSIVE: Greece, Cyprus,Thorium, Israel, Syria….and a final US reckoning with Iran.

New evidence suggests that the US is seeking a set-up showdown with Iran

I posted recently about how much safer, cheaper to run, and readily available Thorium as a reactor fuel is in the generation of nuclear power. I also noted that uranium is largely preferred because the Americans insist on it – it’s difficult and expensive to make weapons from Thorium. QED.

This set a few hares running among those knowledgeable in the field. Three separate readers of the piece emailed to ask had I noticed that Iran is using Uranium, when – if they were refining nuclear material for peaceful purposes – Thorium would be a far better bet. In turn, I have put this to two US sources…while a third contact admits to having wondered why the US Government has never put Iran on the spot by offering its leaders all the Thorium their hearts could desire.

In fact, even rabidly anti-US Iran-supporting sites admit that Thorium is the obvious way to defuse the growing Iran/US tension. RT.com, for example, wrote recently that, ‘If Iran is sincere that it seeks only peaceful uses for its nuclear energy, the crisis can easily be defused. The problem isn’t that Iran seeks nuclear power. The problem is that, like the rest of the world, Iran has made a poor choice of nuclear fuel. Uranium is lethal even when it’s not packed in a bomb. It’s absurdly complicated to handle, its behavior is touchy and unpredictable, and its waste is fatal to humans for millions of years. Instead, Iran can follow the lead of China, India, Brazil, and other nations and turn to thorium.’

Similarly, virulently anti-US online writer Nile Bowie observes at GlobalResearch that ‘Iran can truly make an example of itself by phasing out uranium-based nuclear technology and shifting to a liquid fuel based on molten-fluoride salts used in Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR) nuclear technology powered by thorium, an obscure, mildly radioactive metal produced as a waste product from the mining of rare earth minerals. Thorium is plentiful, easily accessible and energy dense, a metric ton produces as much energy as 200 tons of uranium, or 3,500,000 ton of coal. Thorium-based reactors consume their own hazardous waste and would serve Iran’s internal needs far more effectively than its current technology. As a nuclear fuel, thorium is both cleaner and safer than uranium and produces benign alpha radiation, unable to even penetrate skin.’

I am told that the US and China have been exploring the advantages of Thorium together, which is kind of bad news for the Ahmadinnejhad Iranian regime, because the Chinese are thrilled to bits with the results….and have politely asked the rogue State why it doesn’t just stop using uranium, and thus remove the tension.

“You never know for sure what Beijing thinks,” says a Washington insider, “but the word is that we know the content of the Iranian response to them, and it was bullsh*t.”

In recent weeks, I have in turn been trying to hammer home the strategic as well as energy ramifications of increased US influence in the Aegean generally, and Greece/Cyprus specifically. Yesterday, The Slog posted about the arrival of Shimon Peres in Greece. Recently I wrote about Putin’s desire to flex his influence on the island of Cyprus.

The powerful US Jewish lobby is redoubling its pressure on the Obama White House regarding what Mossad sees as Iran’s blatant weapons aspirations for its nuclear programme. In turn, the US fears the instability that would be caused by an Israeli attack to neutralise Iran’s nuclear installations. It would also cause difficulties regarding Turkey’s status as a long-term NATO ally.

Based on feedback over the last month, I am now firmly convinced that the Americans want a ‘set-up’ to justify their own attack on Iran. And in being evasive on the thorium issue, Ahmadinnejhad is playing right into Washington’s hands.

“There’s a sense in the military that we can put the Iranians right on the spot here,” says my Washington source, “that we can produce a kind of Cuban missiles thing at very short notice. Maybe give them 48 hours to sign something unless they agree to use only thorium. We can’t lose, but I feel the mood is to attack, and take the Ayatollahs out like a cancer.”

There is, I should add, clearly another element to the set-up beyond thorium. But nobody is talking about that. And no, I have nothing solid at all as to what that might be. (If you do, the address remains the same: jawslog@gmail.com )

This is strong stuff. This is also a source who has misread one or two things in the past – but not many. Nevertheless, I spent some intensive time yesterday talking to two other people – one a diplomat and one an Arabist, both of whom I respect immensely. First, the Arab expert.

“For once, [Hillary] Clinton is getting the ducks in a row. Both the Saudis and the Israelis now see Iran isolated after the fall of Assad. Iran is their common enemy – a loose cannon, and for the Saudis, religiously schismatic and anti-Royalist. So yes, if State [the US Foreign Office] has them onside, and if State is supporting the [Muslim] Brotherhood in North Africa, then obviously, there’s a clear intent taking shape. The Arabs will of course be publicly shocked and horrified at this act of gangsterism by the American Satan, but behind many doors, everyone from Benghazi to Tel Aviv will be mightily relieved.”

The diplomat is French, but has spent many years working in both America and North Africa.

“I’d be staggered if Washington were to contemplate complete regime change in Iran,” he began, “although from the Pentagon viewpoint, it solves problems ranging from Iranian-based insurgents in Iraq through to hotheads in Tel Aviv. But I find it hard to see how they could manage the transition post Ayatollahs. In my opinion, a massive patriotic backlash would immediately follow if the Americans invaded. It is in the childish nature of Americans to ‘get even’ as they say, and a great many of them do firmly believe that annihilation of the Ayatollahs is the only solution. Their best approach, I think, would be to encourage dissidents and humiliate the regime without invasion. This may well be what they have in mind.”

Pressed on the subject of US strategy against Iran, however, he added, “Yes, I do think the Americans think anything would be better than an Israeli strike against Iran. And I don’t agree that Greece would be irrelevant to that….I think it would be central to the element of surprise and speed. Of course the Americans are encouraging a Greek – Cypriot – Israeli affiliation. That is a major problem for Brussels and, by the way, a serious issue for Putin. But how far they would go, well…that’s another issue.”

Regime change in Iran would be a major setback for Vladimir Putin after Libya and Syria – and a massive blow to his prestige and popularity at home. But on the other hand, mayhem at best (or stalemate at worst) in Syria and Iran would serve the long-term Russian policy of interrupting, sealing off and generally raising the price of oil to Western Europe. For that would mean an economic blockbuster for Russian energy, and a diplomatic screw the Kremlin can continue to turn.

Personally, I think they’re all mad. But I’ve seen the US do this so many times now: blunder in and think later about how to get out. On the other hand, I can’t see a man as diffident as Obama pulling a stunt like this before the Election. As for Putin, I don’t think there’s much he could do other than sabre-rattle. But if he thinks that anything now can stop an oil-glut in 2013, then he’s not as smart as I think he is. Global depression is now a cast-iron certainty.

As for Greece, I have no longer a scintilla of doubt that they are being courted by the Americans, but there are definitely doubts within the Athens elite about getting too obviously into bed with Washington – in terms of how that might play electorally. Were Turkey-bashing to be part of the mix, then naturally it would play extremely well. But it would take a lot to make the US take on Turkey as well – at any level.

As always, stay tuned. This is a continuing saga, and there’s a long way to go yet.

And brand new at The Slog: ‘You Are Here’: my unique guide to rifts, bridges and mechanisms in the Euroblown theatre.

85 thoughts on “EXCLUSIVE: Greece, Cyprus,Thorium, Israel, Syria….and a final US reckoning with Iran.

    • I take on board some of your remarks on thorium as a reactor fuel, but no commercially viable reactors have ever generated electricity. USA, Russia, France & Uk have more than enough plutonium (derived from uranium reactors of various sorts) to last them forever and a day. Couldn’t care a monkey’s about the rest of the world.

  1. Pingback: John Ward – Exclusive: Greece, Cyprus, Thorium, Israel,Syria… And A Final US Reckoning With Iran – 6 August 2012 | Lucas 2012 Infos

  2. Great piece. Maybe we should ask David Cameron what he thinks….oh, sorry I forgot, he doesnt do much of that.

    Not to worry the MSM will keep us all posted…….

    Thank goodness we have you John.

    • BillK
      I don’t want to tell Iran anything beyond stop being such anti-semitic religious maniacs. However, I do make it clear in the piece that the US is LOOKING for an issue here…not a real reason.
      Praps you know more than I about Thorium, but the South American countries have all had very positive results. I think you’re mistaken when you say it has NEVER produced electricity: every single test shows that its release of convertible energy is far higher than uranium’s.
      Again, as I say in this post, uranium is popular because the US uses it to make bombs.

      • Sorry, but I couldn’t find any South American thorium news.
        I’ll stick with saying there are no experimental LFTRs running at present and production systems are decades away (if they work out and are economic).
        There is certainly a lot of thorium hype around from many people looking to be given government money for projects.
        When the energy crisis hits governments will be throwing money at everything.

      • But so far no one has made a viable electricity producing reactor. It is probably possible, but it is not trivial.

  3. JW
    Nice as it is to try and pierce the ‘smoke and mirrors’ of the
    Great Game,do not lose sight of the core issue.
    This is about the Petrodollar.
    If Pax America cannot enforce its hegemony through the
    forced use of the Petrodollar,then it must be by military action.
    Any solution to the Iran situation,must solve this true issue.
    The die is cast.Either war before the elections if Obummer’s
    internal polling looks bad,or war after.
    The Iranians will refuse to be subjugated by the US or its proxiy.
    War.

    • Sorry WS
      I think the days when the US can enforce its hegemony are numbered. After Crash II, they will disappear forever.

      • Agreed.
        But they are in a delusional state.
        Living here and interacting on a daily basis,I hear and see it.
        Exactly as it must have been in Edwardian England.
        Excepting this time.God is American(from the South), and
        plays baseball etc. this time around.
        The hubris of empire ,and the pride before its fall.

    • @Winston
      Correct as evidenced by the fact that there is no law against Iran developing nukes apart from the ones USA makes up……. this always gets forgotten…….of course no one wants any more proliferation but USA logic of trying to exclude Iran of course is intrinsically faulty….

  4. There is little evidence that the Iranians are actively seeking to produce nuclear weapons, and even less that they have the slightest intention of attacking Israel or anybody else. However, they are quite deliberately developing a dual-use technology which will give them the option of building nuclear weapons in the future of they feel the need. Why? Because this would grant them immunity from attack. The Americans regard the prospect of Iranian defiance with impunity as intolerable, so they must be taken out, and the consequences will be what they will be.

      • Sorry, you can’t prove a negative.
        There is no evidence that Iran is seeking to build nuclear weapons-this has been stated by some US intelligence sources, and, I think, some Israeli sources. Can’t remember the actual article these came from.
        Your piece certainly hangs together and makes eminent sense-the US and some Israelis want to whack Iran, and it would make sense for the Saudis (but only short term).
        My fear is that Dave and Little Willy will go along with it and get us involved-to our great disbenefit.
        BTW, bet Germany stays well clear-but sells industrial goods and cars to the ones left standing.

    • @RA
      I agree….US has not even started to justify a case against against Iran…..its much less than the groundless rhetoric that existed before Iraq……nothing seems to change….

  5. One wonders why thorium – as an extremely good alternative to uranium – has only become big news in recent times if it’s so darned good.

    But assuming it is, it can only mean Iran wants to develop nuke weapons which is exactly what many of us have believed for a very long time, despite Ahmadinnerjacket’s softy softy Western interviews and words of great calmness. That fits neatly into Iran’s long-term strategy of becoming the regional king and exporting its hatred across the M/E. Apart from Saudi, it has poor relations with the UAE and Oman.

    On the US and Iran…I’d be very surprised if the US invades Iran with boots on the ground in a serious way…maybe just a few special forces etc. Since US now has three carrier groups in the area and who knows how many support ships, bombs & missiles, the most likely event is a bombing run to wreck Iranian nuke sites to put them out of business and perhaps the Ayatollahs too.

    • “One wonders why thorium – as an extremely good alternative to uranium – has only become big news in recent times if it’s so darned good”

      I thought the Slog answered that – because it’s no good for producing atom bombs.

      • @me: No, the slog did not answer in that way. THAT thorium is no good for producing atom bombs does not automatically mean that it *is* good for nuke power generation. Please try again :-)

      • And who else but the military/government has deep enough pockets that they can use to burn through millions/billions with a great possibility that the research and development will produce absolutely little to nothing of value. For a corporation they expect to make a profit while the government/military does not need to generate a profit to stay alive.

      • To BT above and below
        For f**k’s sake BT, do read the article in full. I can’t be arsed if you wont, chum.

      • @JW: I did read your article in full, thanks. So I don’t know why you’re getting wound up and abusive. Nothing I wrote disagrees with your 2nd hand comments from ‘sources’, perhaps simply clarifying your interpretation of things. My own opinion is that the US will not put boots on the ground in Iran. I know you didn’t say they would, but nor did you exclude it and it is an important matter to clear up, because IF the US attacks Iran, it will not become another Iraq.

        On thorium…my comment about it was precisely because I have some doubts about its use in the immediate future for a number of valid reasons which have already been stated by about three other sloggers, so I won’t repeat them. You may (or may not) be getting carried away with all the hype about thorium.

      • @BT
        THe USA was in the 50′s researching both Thorium and Uranium. A thorium reactor was built and ran successfully for several years. The US wanted (at the time) to be able to produce Nuclear bombs which was not possible from Thorium (prohibitively expensive) so they plumped for Uranium because of the Civilian/Military balance of requirements – which at the time is/was fairly understandable.
        I have posted links on this on other threads – but in depth YouTube lectures and discussions on this are numerous. Thorium in todays world is the answer to our needs. Further research is always required when dealing with nuclear – but the working prototype has been run for several years in the 60′s. Thorium is good to go – and the East is taking it forward whilst the west is looking for investment.

  6. Whilst at university at Dublin in the late 1970s,I know an age ago,a lady professor lectured us on Thorium and its uses,particularly energy production and the use of the reactor in producing oil/gasoline from coal-I know an old process.She was Iranian -funny she was able to lecture on Thorium and the plant that the USA had trialed between 1960 and 1972-just athought.

  7. The problem with Thorium, though a very promising and saner way to generate nuclear power, is that there are no off-the-shelf reacor designs available.
    Only one experimental reactor was ever made and that was shut down in the seventies. Some say at the bidding of Westinghouse and GE who were doing very nicely thank you with their existing uranium based designed and its attendant and lucrative fuel rod contract business.
    India too looked into thoruim and the idea was dropped after some machinations in favour of, guess what, GE and Westinghouse technology.

    The Iran nukes issue is a canard. Panetta says they are not making a bomb as do the IAEA. Their enrichment program is only to 20% and a long way from the 98% needed for a bomb.
    The fact is that it is a convenient casus belli for the Isrealis and US to kick off some sort of war. If it were not nukes, they would find something else.

    • DE
      To kick off a war to what purpose?
      I think the IAEA assertion is way, way over the top from what they said last time.
      And 20% traces were all they found. It means nothing.

      • They want regime change – Iran was ‘lost’ with the fall of the Shah and they want it back under US influence and control.
        BTW the Iranians aren’t anti-semitic. There is a significant Jewish population in Iran, they even reserve seats in Parliament for them.
        They are anit-Zionist, which is altogether different.

    • Seem to rememeber that sometime last year that the Iranians announced they were moving towards 80% enrichment.
      Maybe they were bluffing ? :)

  8. Following on, therefore, there is no way the ‘Offer Iran thoruim’ solution will be tendered. There are giant multinationals that want to make sure the technology stays in the lab and it would take away the main reason for beating up on the Iranians.
    The US would be forced to find some other casus belli such as being beastly to the Kurds in the NorthWest, the ethinc Arab peoples in the SouthWest or the Baluchis in the SouthEast.
    None of which is particularly true, but hey, who cares about the truth when you’ve got an empire to build?

  9. “It would also cause difficulties regarding Turkey’s status as a long-term NATO ally.
    ……………..
    But it would take a lot to make the US take on Turkey as well – at any level.”

    It would take a big event, rather than a great deal of time.
    Realistically, Turkey has already been thrown out of NATO.
    It has the second largest army in NATO, yet sends fewer of them to Afghanistan than Romania or Poland.

    The EU would be forced to come to Greeces aid in a war with Turkey, regardless of who fired the first shot. If you look at who is in NATO, but not the EU, you get a very short list, and Suez War interference wouldnt cut it this time.

    Thats not to say the US is looking to pick a fight with Turkey, but, well, in 1936, the UK sided with Germany against France over the rhineland, and well into the thirties, was using Japan as a dagger held firmly in Americas back.

    If it came down to it, how much aid would Greece and Bulgaria need to throw turkey out of Continental Europe, and Cyprus?

    • JW is way off track about Turkey.
      Turkey has claims on areas now in Iran and Syria.
      They will use the coming war to annexe them back.
      Smoke and mirrors again.
      We are about to find out just how firm the Sino
      Russian line in the sand is.
      A thermo nuclear global WW3 is a very real possibility.

    • No.1- Washington has a big beef with Turkey, Turkey told Geithner to shove it when he tried to bully them off banking business with their nearest neighbours in Tehran and scaled up the sanctions; when they signed the joint deal on the railway links around Lake Van; and when they insisted they would not be an American puppet in the region.
      No.2- There are elections coming up in Iran; the people had a go last time when the Dinnahjacket results were fabricated, and learned a lot about how to play it next time. If Barry wants to continue to claim he is a democrat, he should wait til the people have had their say (and maybe brought about regime-change themselves).
      No.3- Why on earth would Tehran believe what anyone tries to sell them on Thorium. No politician’s word is worth a sticky lollipop. No imagination in either Tel Aviv or Langley 20 years ago, when it was obvious Iran would try and match Israel’s nuclear arsenal.
      No.4- if Iran needs the bomb, Pakistan will mislay some. They don’t need to wait til they have enriched the uranium. This is Israeli mischief-making.
      No.5- As time passes, it becomes more and more clear that America is not competent to maturely control a nuclear arsenal, same as Pakistan, Russia, China and Israel.
      (that leaves us, France, and a few soviet republics …….. ha ha ha)

  10. It’s never going to be just one or two things with the US regarding Iran, when they invaded Iraq they had a list of five things that were most likely to happen, one of which was Gaddafi giving up his weapons program, this is going to go much wider than just Iran or even Syria. I read a lot about the eventual targets being Russia and China but it doesn’t take much of an imagination to see how that would end up does it?

  11. Alpha radiation is not benign. If a material that emits it is ingested it is actually the most harmful, because it comprises a helium nucleus; it is therefore massive enough to do great damage to cells at close range.

  12. Nice one John!

    On Thorium: Iran is playing a strategy of nuclear ambiguity (like that other place). If they use thorium they’re sissy’s. If they use uranium there’s a chance they might go for the bomb, and then you get Mutual Assured Distruction, thereby blocking Israhell and the Merkins.

    As for Iran, hell, they invented chess! My advice to Hillary is don’t come to Brzezinski’s Great Chessborad with rubber duckies.

  13. “……….serve the long-term Russian policy of interrupting, sealing off and generally raising the price of oil to Western Europe. For that would mean an economic blockbuster for Russian energy, and a diplomatic screw the Kremlin can continue to turn”…….

    It is not just the oil, but also Russian Gas….which most of Europe relies on not only for industry but in domestic heating in winter (in one form or another). Whether through a US or Israili strike, or the Euro plummitting 20-30% by Xmas for reasons of its own making……Putin has Europe totally by the ‘short and curlies’ if he wants to reduce gas flow or raise prices.

    And we are not immune in the UK, just because Russian Gas does not make it this far…(yet)….if gas prices go up here in the UK (just the way that oil and petrol does in troubled times) then since almost 50% of UK electricity comes from Gas burning Power Stations, we could all be facing a very chilly dark winter.

      • Thank you me:
        I’m reassured to know that we have thousands of wind turbines to supply my gas central heating this winter.

    • Not too worried about Putin raising prices – we have our own domestic energy cartel which does it all the time anyway…….. :)
      Also with the ‘green’ get rich quick scheme – our Government colludes to produce expensive energy to the masses.

  14. A little thought,it requires Uranium 233,nasty and very poisonous and needs massive shielding but decays rapidly,to kick off the Thorium reactor.Sorry,forgot to throw that in.

    • A very small amount though MdS ! And once running the stockpile can be destroyed – thus doing away with the ‘long term storage’ costs and nimby storage location problems. It could be that a single Uranium plant may be needed to be maintained globally to fire up the Thorium plants but an international ‘agreement’ on supply and maintenance would deal with the issue.
      Aside – the fire up ‘issue’ would become a research project (globally) to allow the demise of the Uranium requirement. Besides there will always be a few U based plants while all Nuclear armed/prepared countries require the build potential for weapons.

  15. Why does nobody think that Israel won’t use the bomb to destroy Iran’s nuclear programme? At the moment, who is going to retaliate? So they get slagged in world opinion. But the downside risk of no action is immense. They’ve experienced anti-semetic genocide once before and I doubt Israel will risk it a second time…

    This is not about energy – it is about survival as a nation and a people.

    And no – I’m not Jewish – just a realist. We have a crippled US administration, some bad guys and a motive…

    • @marcjuf
      I’ll give you the same advice I gave to JW.
      In fact I’ll go one better.I bet you $ 100 that you cannot find a
      statement to back that claim.If you bother to do your own research,
      not take the MSM claims,you will find the attributed quote translated
      from Farsi says:”The REGIME in Jerusalem will fade from the pages of
      history’.
      I fail to see a threat to anyone’s existence in the correct translation.
      The reported version is great propaganda ,now try and find the
      truth.
      Sheep.

    • @marcjf: IMHO the most likely reasons that Israel may not bomb the blitzes out of Iran are (a) they may not have access to the right bombs to get through tons of heavy rocks and concrete that the Iranians have supposedly covered their nuke sites with, (b) the US may have told them to hold fire (literally) because *it* wants to do the job properly and (c) Israel going it alone could conflagrate a regional war. JW will have entirely different explanations, I’m sure.

      • BT – technical not moral reasons – which may well be correct. All I’m postulating is that the IDF may have different views than perhaps we do…

      • @marcjf: For sure my explanations are technical but I do believe they will dominate. Not least because of point (b).

        I think Israel has been ratcheting up the war rhetoric against Iran for some time precisely to drag the US into sorting it all out. With three US carrier groups now on site it looks like they’ve taken the hint…

      • I always thought that Israel didn’t go after Iran because as long as Iran is around, the Arabs have somebody to beef with other than Israel. Same reason why Iran would have trouble bombing Israel to bits– the Arabs would go after them for killing the Palestinians and poisoning the holy city of Jerusalem, and how many bombs would they have left over to fight back?

        This is probably a bunch of old alliance-of-the-periphery BS but Israel hasn’t held back in the past on blowing various nuclear facilities to smithereens, so why they’ve dithered so long on this one is beyond me.

  16. JW says :
    “I don’t want to tell Iran anything beyond stop being such anti-semitic religious maniacs”
    My understanding is that Jews are very much accepted in Iran. It is Zionists that are detested.
    People need to understand that Jews and Zionists are not the same. Indeed there are many Jews that hate Zionists.
    As ever the truth is more complex than first appears. Then again, how many unauthorized nuclear weapons does Israel have? Hypocrisy by the West intent on war?

  17. JW-’To kick off a war to what purpose?’
    I thought the whole point was to get one over on the Superpower of the 21st Century, XinHua (or ‘China’ as we know it)- bash the Iranians, gain control over 20% of China’s oil supply, slap the Russians in the face so as to desparately hang on to ‘USA is No.1′ status- all the wars we’ve seen are proxy wars with China and their on-off allies Russia. All for energy and mineral rights. Vast copper resources and rare earths in Afghanistan, plus pipeline control. Syria too, though with limited oil reserves, has pipelines direct from Iran and Iraq to the Med…Geo-pol considerations are all economic after all. Turkey still wants to be the regional power it once was, playing devils advocate with Israel and the Syrians…generating arab support with oppostion to the Israeli Occupation, and western support opposing Assad, and pissing off the Russkis…Al Qaida is, and remains, a canard of US/Saudi origins- just as the Yanks once created the ‘Islamic Revolution’ to destroy the large, increasingly pro-soviet, Iranian Communist Party…Machiavelli would be proud.

    • ‘….I thought the whole point was to get one over on the Superpower of the 21st Century, XinHua (or ‘China’ as we know it)- bash the Iranians, gain control over 20% of China’s oil supply, slap the Russians in the face…’
      Goodness me, did you?
      Why?

      • Yes in all this where do the Chinese come in? I have some time in the far east and my opinion is that the western states must have sacked all of their knowledgeable china hands given the cockups over the last decade or so. We repeatedly underate and underestimate them to our short and long term cost.

        So where do they fit into this with a huge stake in Iranian oil? Only if they do some deal with washington could they stand by and watch their oil supplies go ‘poof’ [the original use of the term] but that would need washington to understand and they have repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of understanding where china is concerned. Also china has a long history of NOT deserting its allies no matter how ugly they become. They are implacable enemies but in the chinese tradition, once friendship is given it is a robust thing.

        I do not claim presience but somethiing about all these scenarios doesn’t ring true -not least that thorium is a long way from operational however desirable- but mostly it is the china aspect that seems like the extra piece in this puzzle. I did briefly consider a deal involving china/US debt but could not come up with anything in China’s favour…..

  18. Off-topic perhaps but seems to have some lateral resonance.

    Today is of course the anniversary of the first time in recorded human history that unmoderated nuclear fission was used as a weapon of war.

    “Brighter than a thousand suns”.

  19. Pingback: At the End of the Day | A diary of deception and distortion

  20. Concerning Obama: a lot will depend on his electoral position in october. If it seems probable he’s about to lose, war is highly effective to rally the country behind him against it’s favourite arch-enemy since 1979.

  21. ” Global depression is now a cast-iron certainty”

    wise words that the majority still seem to be in denial of

    • So which pipeline will be linked? The Trans Arabic Pipeline or the TAP Syria Lebanon? Wonder why all these wars are happening? From Lebanon in 2006, the Arab Springs, to Syria today… things that make you go mmmmmm

  22. James E
    It does indeed.
    To all
    I think far too much emphasis here on Thorium – partly my fault, I accept that: but then, for those who read rather than skim, I did write: ‘There is, I should add, clearly another element to the set-up beyond thorium. But nobody is talking about that. And no, I have nothing solid at all as to what that might be. (If you do, the address remains the same: jawslog@gmail.com ).’
    So for those who know something as opposed to those who seem to know everything, the offer is still there.

    • Yep also think about why is nuclear getting such a bad rap these days?

      So why is Greece in play and now Cyprus? oh its those lazy Greeks/Cypriats that are causing the global economy to stall and for Euro to collapse!!! yeah right… I wont swear here out of common courtesy… Why isnt Portugal or Ireland in the news or getting blamed? Iceland is forgotten… The Spainiards well they are abit to be fair, but Italy, France, Germany England and the mother of all mothers the US?

      Another food for thought watch

      The word “conspiracy” without “theory” is something totally different…

  23. The Kirkuk – Banias Pipeline -

    ‘In 2003 the USA carried out airstrikes along the section of the pipeline in Iraqi territory.

    In 2007, Gazprom’s subsidiary Stroytransgaz commenced discussions with the Ministry of Oil of Iraq and Iraq’s North Oil Company concerning its participation in the restoration of the Kirkuk – Banias export oil pipeline. Negotiations continued into 2008 with representatives of the two sides discussing the technical issues of the condition of the pipeline system and the terms for carrying out the restoration work. The parties reached a principal agreement about the participation of Stroytransgaz in rebuilding the Kirkuk – Banias Pipeline and signed a corresponding protocol.

    In December 2009, the Iraqi Government postponed a decision on repairing the pipeline. Stroytransgaz’ CEO Alexander Ryazanov said at the time that his company had submitted a plan to fix the pipeline to the Iraqi cabinet “some time ago”, but that no decision had been made because of the “country’s political situation”.’

    http://pipelinesinternational.com/news/the_kirkuk_banias_pipeline/055366/#

  24. Pingback: SYRIAN CRISIS: American strategy glides forward like a dream machine. | A diary of deception and distortion

  25. Pingback: GREECE EXCLUSIVE: Samaras spearheads new Centre Party as Tsipras courts the Americans | A diary of deception and distortion

  26. Pingback: John Ward – Greece Exclusive: Samaras Spearheads New Centre Party As Tsipras Courts The Americans – Syriza And Golden Dawn Still Growing, PASOK Down To 4% – 1 November 2012 | Lucas 2012 Infos

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s