The good news about nuclear destruction ~ By Shane Connor

This article by Shane Conner, CEO of www.ki4u.com - consultants and developers of Civil Defense solutions to government, NPOs and individual families - is extremely important for you to read. In fact, you should make sure that you also share it with others, as Shane suggests. As you will learn in this column, a "defeatist attitude was born as the disarmament movement ridiculed any competing alternatives to their ban-the-bomb agenda, like Civil Defense." The good news is that many more people would be able to survive a nuclear detonation if they are prepared and know the right and wrong things to do.

RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL READING
"What To Do If A Nuclear Disaster Is Imminent!"
The Golden Horde ~ By Patrice Lewis


The good news about nuclear destruction

By Shane Connor

December 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

What possible "good news" could there ever be about nuclear destruction coming to America, whether it is dirty bombs, terrorist nukes, or ICBMs from afar?

In a word, they are all survivable for the vast majority of American families, If they know what to do beforehand and have made even the most modest of preparations.

Tragically, though, most Americans today won't give much credence to this good news, much less seek out such vital lifesaving instruction, as they have been jaded by our culture's pervasive myths of nuclear un-survivability.

Most people think that if nukes go off then everybody is going to die, or it'll be so bad they'll wish they had. That's why you hear such absurd comments as: "If it happens, I hope I'm at ground zero and go quickly."

This defeatist attitude was born as the disarmament movement ridiculed any competing alternatives to their ban-the-bomb agenda, like Civil Defense. The activists wanted all to think there was no surviving a nuke; banning them all was your only hope. The sound Civil Defense strategies of the '50s and '60s have been derided as being largely ineffective, or at worst a cruel joke. With the supposed end of the Cold War in the '80s, most Americans saw neither a need to prepare, nor believed that preparation would do any good. Today, with growing prospects of nuclear terrorism and nuclear saber-rattling from rogue nations, we see emerging among the public either paralyzing fear or irrational denial. People can't even begin to envision effective preparations for ever surviving a nuclear attack. They think it totally futile, bordering on lunacy, to even try.

Ironically, these disarmament activists, regardless their noble intent, have rendered millions of Americans even more vulnerable to perishing from nukes in the future.

The biggest surprise for most Americans, from the first flash of a nuke being unleashed, is that they will still be here, though ill-equipped to survive for long, if they don't know what to do beforehand from that first second of the flash onward.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Senate Republicans: Vote No on New START ~ By Sarah Palin

In a tweet from David Limbaugh, I found out about Sarah Palin's column on NRO where she weighs in on the Senate ratification of the New START Treaty. Sarah makes the correct statement by saying that we "cannot and must not give up the right to missile defense to protect our population – whether the missiles that threaten us come from Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, or anywhere else." And, that is exactly what I call common sense when it comes to defending and protecting the security of the United States!

Senate Republicans: Vote No on New START

SARAH PALIN

By Sarah Palin

December 17, 2010 ~ 12:13 P.M.

The proposed New START agreement should be evaluated by the only criteria that matters for a treaty: Is it in America’s interest? I am convinced this treaty is not. It should not be rammed through in the lame duck session using behind the scenes deal-making reminiscent of the tactics used in the health care debate.

New START actually requires the U.S. to reduce our nuclear weapons and allows the Russians to increase theirs. This is one-sided and makes no strategic sense. New START’s verification regime is weaker than the treaty it replaces, making it harder for us to detect Russian cheating. Since we now know Russia has not complied with many arms control agreements currently in force, this is a serious matter.

New START recognizes a link between offensive and defensive weapons – a position the Russians have sought for years. Russia claims the treaty constrains U.S. missile defenses and that they will withdraw from the treaty if we pursue missile defenses. This linkage virtually guarantees that either we limit our missile defenses or the Russians will withdraw from the treaty. The Obama administration claims that this is not the case; but if that is true, why agree to linking offensive and defensive weapons in the treaty?

READ MORE at National Review Online - The Corner

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Dire warning: Israel must strike Iran now

There are a few questions to ask yourself regarding this story. If Iran is attempting to build nuclear weapons, why hasn't Obama or the U.N. Security Council done anything? (And they won't: They can't even agree on sanctions! Could this just be hysteria, such as what we experienced before going to war against Iraq because of the WMD (which was probably moved to Syria before we attacked)? Or, does Israel have no choice but but to attack Iran, and do it soon? 

Do you agree with John Bolton? Personally, I must say that I do.

Bolton said he believes there is no doubt Israel possesses the military capability to hit Iran's nuclear sites, but he said the Jewish state would need to act soon.


"I think the problem is that the military option is declining day by day," he said. "Every day that goes by is another day where the Iranians can build alternative facilities for uranium conversion, uranium enrichment weaponization, that are in unknown locations that are deeply buried or hardened and that Israel's capabilities just can't reach."

Tehran will have nukes before U.N., Obama do anything, says diplomat

Posted: March 07, 2010 ~ 9:47 pm Eastern

© 2010 WorldNetDaily

John BoltonThe only action that can stop Iran from building nuclear weapons is an Israeli strike on Tehran's nuclear facilities, argued John Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under the Bush administration.

Speaking in a radio interview with WND senior reporter Aaron Klein, who hosts an investigative program on New York's WABC 770 AM, Bolton warned time is running out for an Israeli attack.

"Right now we know about the facilities. ... We know where they are," he said. "We know exactly what their dimensions are, and I think they are susceptible to an Israeli attack."

Bolton said an Israeli military option "isn't there forever. ... If Israel is going to use military force, it needs to use it sooner rather than later."

Bolton posited, "Right now, basically the only scenario that I see other than Iran getting nuclear weapons is military strikes against their nuclear program that result in breaking Iran's control over the nuclear fuel cycle."

(Klein's interview with Bolton can be heard at the READ FULL STORY link below.)

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

The lion doesn't sleep tonight ~ By Barry Farber

Barry Farber points out that it may not be a good idea for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran to have nuclear weapons. They aren't exactly "France."

Hollywood gave the world a pretty good definition of American morality for a long time through the "Western." Remember? The good guy never shot first. The bad guy always shot first. Then the good guy drew and shot and won.

Sorry, Hollywood. In a nuclear world, the good guy can no longer wait for the "high-ground" luxury of shooting last. An earlier America would have ended this Iran threat with Tehran's first excessive centrifuge. Hundreds of millions of us, disgusted with this American administration, are waiting for Israel to tell Obama, "Yes, we can!"

By Barry Farber

Posted: February 24, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Picture the classic "missionary" scene: in a far corner of the jungle, the Western missionary proudly teaching the basics of civilization to a crowd of smiling, heretofore "un-reached" natives. Add one element: a full-grown lion in the back of the hut on a secure leash.

One day the lion breaks loose. The missionaries hold a quick crisis meeting to decide whether to call an all-out alert – in World War II they called it "condition red" – women and children hustled to safety and all men fully armed, or – and it's a rather interesting "or" – whether they could relax, because the lion had overheard enough lessons in basic civilization to render him docile and not dangerous!

Absurd? Absolutely. And it's precisely where we are today regarding Iran.

Pearl Harbor was abrupt. Sept. 11 was abrupt. This one was so slow-motion it was downright boring. We were assured Iran had abandoned its quest for the nuclear bomb in 2003. Those of us with conservative leanings were cheering Hillary Clinton in 2008 in her argument with Sen. Barack Obama over whether or not America should hold talks with Iran without pre-conditions. Hillary said no. We agreed, not that we would have voted for her anyhow had she become the Democratic candidate. Obama adamantly won the applause of those with empty heads and overflowing hearts by proclaiming his willingness to talk to anybody, anywhere, any time, with no pre-conditions. "Unclench your fist," Obama railed out to the dictators of the world, "and we will shake your hand!" If naiveté were a disease, Obama could be diagnosed as terminal without removing his shirt.

And now the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency tells us, "Oops! Iran is, indeed, at work on nuclear warheads and, in fact, never stopped." It's enjoyable to be in position to say, "I told you so!" But how much time do we have to enjoy saying it between the U.N.'s ugly "surprise" and the mushroom cloud?

Those dwindling few who still say Obama's diplomacy might work and the world can live with a nuclear Iran have never even used their best argument. In 1960 another country was about to get the nuclear bomb. It worried us terribly. The country was France! France was considered too "irresponsible" to have the bomb. The "France" reminder might have given the candle of Obama's clique another 15 seconds of flame. No more. We were wrong about France. We're right about Iran. Anybody who's not scared silly is ignorant or on drugs. Or maybe they just don't know about the "Twelfth Imam"!

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Sanctions, Nobels and mushroom clouds ~ By Gabriel Erem

My comment for this column is that I can't believe anyone ever thought that Iran wasn't in the process of developing nuclear weapons. Who were they kidding? Anyway, let me conclude with this thought-provoking graphic:

"Altogether, this raises concerns about the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile," said the report.


In plain English: The nuclear clock is ticking very, very fast.

By Gabriel Erem

Posted: February 24, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

I am happy to announce that I have won the 2011 New York City Marathon.

Truthfully, I don't deserve the coveted trophy, as I don't even go jogging, never mind running.

But, using the same logic the self-righteous International Nobel Committee of misguided European liberals used to award Barack Hussein Obama and Mohamed Mostafa ElBaradei the once-meaningful Nobel Peace Prize for doing absolutely nothing that would make our world safer, it appears that I also deserve the recognition.

The IAEA – the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog – last Thursday finally expressed "concern" for the first time that Iran may currently be working on ways to turn enriched uranium into a nuclear warhead, instead of having stopped several years ago.

Do we need to see a mushroom cloud before the Impotent Assembly of Eminent Incompetents (IAEA) sees the light after the often-repeated threats of Iranian madman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who has publicly advocated wiping off the map another member of the United Nations?

Such well-established "free democracies," like Iran, Cuba, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Egypt, China, the Vatican, Venezuela, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and Syria are prominent among IAEA's member states, and until recently it was headed by a colorless Egyptian puppet, ElBaradei, who upon his triumphant retirement was last week welcomed back to Cairo and hailed as a national hero.

The IAEA's report appears to contradict the appallingly naive assessment by Washington that Tehran suspended such activities in 2003. It appears to coincide with the concerns of several U.S. allies that Iran may never have suspended enrichment.

The U.S. assessment itself may be revised and is currently being looked at again by American intelligence agencies.

In a report prepared for its 35 board nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency also said that Iran managed to make a batch of near 20-percent enriched uranium within days of starting production from lower-enriched material.

Higher enrichment brings Iran nearer to the capability of making fissile warhead material, should the Islamic republic opt to do so.

Iran, of course, with a straight face continues to deny any interest in developing nuclear arms. But the confidential IAEA report, made available to the Associated Press, said Iran's resistance to agency attempts to probe for signs of a nuclear cover-up "give rise to concerns about possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program."

The language of the report – the first written by Yukiya Amano, who became IAEA head in December – appeared to be more directly critical of Iran's refusal to cooperate with the IAEA than most previous ones under his predecessor, Mohamed ElBaradei.

For the first time ever, the IAEA report strongly suggested that intelligence supplied by the U.S., Israel and other IAEA member regarding Iran's attempts to use the cover of a civilian nuclear program to move toward a weapons program was more than compelling.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Ahmadinejad: 'Yep, I'm nuclear!' ~ By Ann Coulter

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

Even if you weren't aware that the U.S. has the worst intelligence in the world, and even if you didn't notice that the leak was timed perfectly to embarrass Bush, wouldn't any normal person be suspicious of a report concluding Ahmadinejad was behaving like a prince?


Not liberals. Our intelligence agencies concluded Iran had suspended its nuclear program in 2003, so Bush owed Ahmadinejad an apology.


Feb. 11, 2010: Ahmadinejad announces that Iran is now a nuclear power.

By Ann Coulter

Posted: February 17, 2010 ~ 6:02 pm Eastern

© 2010

The only man causing President Obama more headaches than Joe Biden these days is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (who, coincidentally, was right after Biden on Obama's short-list for VP).

Despite Obama's personal magnetism, the Iranian president persists in moving like gangbusters to build nuclear weapons, leading to Ahmadinejad's announcement last week that Iran is now a "nuclear state."

Gee, that's weird – because I remember being told in December 2007 that all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies had concluded that Iran had ceased nuclear-weapons development as of 2003.

At the time of that leak, many of us recalled that the U.S. has the worst intelligence-gathering operations in the world. The Czechs, the French, the Italians – even the Iraqis (who were trained by the Soviets) – all have better intelligence.

Burkina Faso has better intelligence – and their director of intelligence is a witch doctor. The marketing division of Wal-Mart has more reliable intel than the U.S. government does.

After Watergate, the off-the-charts left-wing Congress gleefully set about dismantling this nation's intelligence operations on the theory that Watergate never would have happened if only there had been no CIA.

Ron Dellums, a typical Democrat of the time, who – amazingly – was a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, famously declared in 1975: "We should totally dismantle every intelligence agency in this country piece by piece, brick by brick, nail by nail."

And so they did.

So now, our "spies" are prohibited from spying. The only job of a CIA officer these days is to read foreign newspapers and leak classified information to the New York Times. It's like a secret society of newspaper readers. The reason no one at the CIA saw 9/11 coming was that there wasn't anything about it in the Islamabad Post.

READ FULL STORY >

Olmert: We can stop Iran without strike

From The Jerusalem Post (JPost.com)

Former PM says his successor is sincere about making peace.

By GIL HOFFMAN

15/02/2010 03:17 (Israel time)

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert, who led Israel’s efforts to prevent a nuclear Iran during his three-year premiership, expressed certainty on Sunday that the Islamic Republic’s nuclearization can be prevented without resorting to a military confrontation.

Speaking to a gathering of the Israel Friends of Tel Aviv University at the campus’s Green Building, Olmert said the Iranian threat should not be underestimated and was a genuine reason for concern, but that Israel should not initiate a military strike on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear sites.

He appeared to confirm Israel’s involvement in alleged covert operations that have reportedly hindered Teheran’s nuclear program.

“There are a huge range of options between a full military attack and accepting a nuclear Iran,” Olmert said. “There are other means that – together with other things happening, and they are happening – can create a result that would not allow the Iranians to reach what they are trying to reach.”

Olmert acknowledged to an Israel audience for the first time that he had been ready to divide Jerusalem and allow its holy basin (the area surrounding the Old City) to come under the stewardship of five countries, and to accept Palestinian refugees into Israel. He said he regretted not saying earlier that Israel had to be divided on the basis of the pre-1967 armistice lines.

Olmert said he did not know why Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas did not accept the deal he negotiated with him. But he said world leaders and Arab leaders did and that he believed most of the people of Israel would have as well. Olmert expressed hope that the Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu would adopt his plan.

READ FULL STORY >

Exposed: Saudi Arabia's secret nuke stash

From WorldNetDaily

Riyadh 'confident' it has an atomic option By Aaron Klein Posted: January 22, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily JERUSALEM – Pakistan's nuclear weapons project was partially financed by Saudi Arabia, with the two countries sharing nuclear technology, a senior Egyptian security official told WND. "The Saudis are confident they have a nuclear option via Pakistan," said the security official. "The Pakistani nukes are also Saudi nukes." The official said an agreement between the two countries was secretly inked seven years ago, although at the time such a pact was strongly denied by both Saudi and Pakistani officials. Pakistan in the late 1990s became the seventh country to successfully develop and test nuclear weapons. The Pakistani arsenal is estimated at between 35 and 95 warheads, according to the U.S. Navy Center for Contemporary Conflict. READ FULL STORY >

Why I don't advocate war between Israel and Iran ~ By Jerome Corsi

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Jerome Corsi Posted: December 16, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 In a reference to my book "Why Israel Cant Wait: The Coming War Between Israel and Iran," Meir Javedanfar wrote on the Huffington Post, "Dr. Corsi, together with former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, belongs to a cadre of American Republicans who have taken it upon themselves to champion an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear installation as the only viable solution to the Iranian nuclear conundrum." "Why Israel Can't Wait" predicts that a war between Iran and Israel is imminent, but it does not recommend a war. Clearly, Javedanfar fails to appreciate the distinction between predicting a war and advocating a war. He suggests that marginalized and frustrated right-wingers "want to desperately see" a failure of President Obama's policies, at home and abroad, "as a vindication for their own policies and worldview." Again, Javedarfur fails to appreciate the difference between predicting President Obama's policies at home and abroad will fail and wanting those policies to fail. In "Why Israel Can't Wait," I predicted President Obama's policy of negotiating directly with the Ahmadinejad regime would fail because Iran would game the negotiations, just as Iran has done for years, if not decades. I further predicted in "Why Israel Can't Wait" that President Obama would not obtain meaningful additional sanctions through the United Nations because of Russia and China's support for Iran. Now that Lebanon has been voted onto the Security Council, the reality is that Hezbollah will block any adverse action that body contemplates in the form of more onerous sanctions applied against Iran. In authoring two books on Iran during the Bush administration and in scores of radio and television interviews, I have argued consistently that peaceful regime change from within is by far the best solution to stopping Iran's nuclear-weapons program. In June, when thousands of protesters poured into the streets of Tehran to protest the fraudulent re-election of President Ahmadinejad, President Obama once again failed to act in a way that produced positive policy results. Never did Obama demand new presidential elections in Iran to be held under meaningful international inspection. READ FULL STORY >

It's a scary scenario: "One Second After" ~ By John Kubicek

Commentary from johnny2k Is Home

Regarding a discussion about EMP and "One Second After," a novel by Professor William R. Forstchen By John Kubicek Saturday, November 28, 2009 I had just finished posting the great column "The Sky is Falling!" by Dave Johannes from Uncommon Sense when Coast to Coast A.M. came on the radio. So happens that the original host of the show, Art Bell, was hosting the show tonight. I've always loved hearing Art on the radio, so I don't mean to marginalize him, but he always did have that propensity to shriek, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" many times over the years when he was the main host before his semi-retirement. One of the best examples of that was with all the guests that he brought on the show back in the late 1990's, such as Gary North, that claimed that the Y2K computer bug was going to destroy our infrastructure. Of course, as we know, it never happened! I have used that example here because it directly correlates with the guest Art has on the show tonight. Only, in this case, Art and his guest, William Forstchen, are talking about a scenario that isn't actually far-fetched. In fact, it is a frightening possibility, especially given that North Korea has nuclear weapons, and Iran is probably very close to having them. The scenario that was being discussed on the show is based on a novel by William R. Forstchen, by the title of "One Second After". This is where a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the United States, and an EMP (electromagnetic pulse) fries everything; virtually all transistors, the entire power grid, and all communications would be gone in a second. There wouldn't be any water, transportation, or even emergency services left to keep us going. READ FULL STORY >

This week on TheREALjohnny2k - 10/11 to 10/17/09

From johnny2k Is Home

By John Kubicek Sunday, October 18, 2009 There may be a couple things that you will notice about This Week on TheREALjohnny2k today. First, the obvious. For the last several weeks, I had been posting this series in my other blog, johnny2k's Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape. I decided to go back to putting it on this blog, as I had originally done, for a couple of reasons. This blog is where I post my own work, and I guess the videos I upload to youtube is part of my work. And secondly, I had not written much lately, and there needed to be some more content to be keeping johnny2k Is Home a bit more active, if you know what I mean. The other thing you may have noticed... or, maybe not, is that none of videos below has to do with the "Falcon, the balloon boy hoax" that dominated the news the latter part of last week. As far as I am concerned, and figuring out what a hoax it seemed to be shortly after the whole scenario began to unfold, dominating all of the cable news channels, it was nothing short of tabloid fodder, or maybe something that Geraldo Rivera or Greta Van Sustrand may be interested in analyzing for the next few weeks. Anyway, nothing about it had youtube video written on it. It just wasn't a story that needed any further moments of attention for the derelict parents of the 6 year old child that played a role in a gigantic media scam. No further elaboration required. What I did get on video this week had a lot to do with Glenn Beck, the White House and Anita Dunn. I think you are going to love this week's videos. Oh, by the way,, there is a very special treat for you at the bottom of this post. Keep a box of tissues close by. Trust me! [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE AND SEE THE VIDEOS]