If, back in 2001, anyone had told me that four years after bin Laden's attack our president would admit that he broke U.S. law against domestic spying and ignored the Constitution -- and then expect the American people to congratulate him for it -- I would have presumed the girders of our very Republic had crumbled.
Had anyone said our president would invade a country and kill 30,000 of its people claiming a threat that never, in fact, existed, then admit he would have invaded even if he had known there was no threat -- and expect America to be pleased by this -- I would have thought our nation's sensibilities and honor had been eviscerated.

...The U.S. has invested hundreds of billions of dollars in a totally criminal enterprise - one of the greatest cons in history. ...

For the Bush White House, the good news from Iraq just never stops. But the joy that President Bush has expressed over the country's latest election, though more restrained than his infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech, will similarly come back to haunt him.
Soon after Bush spoke of the Iraqi election as "a landmark day in the history of liberty," early returns representing 90 percent of the ballots cast in the Iraq election established that the clear winners were Shiite and Sunni religious parties not the least bit interested in Western-style democracy or individual freedom -- including such extremists as Muqtada al-Sadr, whose fanatical followers have fought pitched battles with U.S. troops.

The great increase in U.S. bombing in Iraq does not help the U.S. win their illegal war.
It does make many more Iraqi casualties and many more opponents of the U.S. occupation and war making. The U.S. then calls them "terrorists", thereby attempting to justify even more bombing.
......It is not a war on terrorism in Iraq. The U.S. makes terrorists where there were none before. It is a war on civilians.

The American media continues to ignore the increasingly devastating air war being waged in Iraq against an ever more belligerent Iraqi resistance -- and, as usual, Iraqi civilians continue to bear the largely unreported brunt of the bombing.
When the air war shows up at all in our press, it is never as a campaign, but as scattered bare-bones reports of individual attacks on specific targets, almost invariably based on military announcements.

Ernest Partridge's article shows how thoroughly U.S. Democracy has been hi-jacked by the Bush Administration and Republican Party. It implies that the Democratic Party has become a corrupt adjunct of Bush Republicans. Elected representatives of both Parties are joining in history's greatest conspiracy to defraud the American people of their Democracy, rob them and send them to die and be wounded in endless wars based on lies.

Every week I get dozens of solicitations from the Democratic National Committee, from the Democratic Senate and Congressional Campaign Committees, or from various Democratic candidates and office-holders, each of them asking for contributions. “You can help us achieve victory next November,” I am told.
If by “victory” is meant a majority vote cast at the polls, then the Democrats achieved “victory” in 2000, 2002 and 2004. And yet, the Republicans remain in control of the Congress and the White House.

El Baradei was praised by the Nobel chairman for resisting U.S. pressures to find the hard nuclear evidence against Iran
they could use in their plans to justify attack.
That may not be enough to stop the U.S. and Israel from attacking Iran.

The director-general, Mohamed ElBaradei, said a "good start" would be for the United States and other nuclear powers to cut nuclear weapons stockpiles sharply and redirect spending toward international development.

One of the strongest influences in the Bush Administration are the Neo-Conservatives. They fill many of the top positions in the Bush Administration. Their war plans for the U.S. in the Middle East have so far been implemented, such as their phoney war with Iraq. It was promoted before the 9/11 attack- the "Pearl Harbour" the Neocons claimed they needed to justify the war to the American people. Although the war was based on a number of lies - now well-known and publicised, both the Republicans and Democrats want victory over Iraq - nothing less. This and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton's silence about the war lie's is one of many indications that the Democrats have sold out to the Republicans and that the American system of Democracy has been corrupted by the military/industrial complex, other corporates, the oil interests and other special interests.

Steven P. Weisman wrote in The New York Times of Nov. 19 that the “biggest challenge” in President George W. Bush’s second term is “how to contain” Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, however, Iran constitutes no threat to the United States. Its “threat” is to Israel, according to “some” (read neocons) in the administration who believe that Iran supports violence against Israel and helps the resistance in Iraq.

People may not be aware of how deeply the criminal neocon system of beliefs have permeated the Bush Administration. It is very pervasive, very committed, criminally insane, and convinced they are right. They have also committed themselves to the potential pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear states they decide to claim are 'suspected of having WMD and suspected of plotting to attack the U.S.'

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is mad. No, I mean seriously ill. Mentally ill. Demonstrably so.

....For the first time in history criminal leaders have nuclear arsenals to impose their will and have said they are prepared to use them. The US, UK, Israel and other 'Coalition of the Willing' nations are waging illegal, unjustified wars and have threatened opponents with nuclear weapons to achieve their objectives. It is a giant conspiracy that threatens to destroy all humanity.

Five days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Vice President Dick Cheney instructed the nation that the U.S. government would begin working "the dark side" to defeat its enemies in a new global war. "A lot of what needs to be done here will have to be done quietly, without any discussion," Cheney declared on NBC's "Meet the Press." He added, "It's going to be vital for us to use any means at our disposal."

...an ideal short piece to use to help convince people that they should care about the crimes committed in the name of Democracy and Western Civilisation. More and bigger crimes are being committed every day and far greater crimes may be planned - so long as enough people don't care enough to do anything about it. Darkness, dictatorship and the destruction of endless illegal and unjustified wars loom ahead with the Bush Regime.

"Was 9/11 more than just an attack? Could the Bush administration have had anything to gain from the attack? Two prominent European politicians, Michael Meacher and Andreas von Bülow, express their serious doubts about the official version of the 9/11 story."    Watch it online. Real video   http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11222.htm

This article gives an excellent case for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons and for other states to acquire them who might become potential US targets.
However in the case of Iran, according to Scott Ritter and other experts, the US is almost ready to strike and as the following article illustrates, US media is daily conditioning the US public that Iran is an enemy that should be attacked before it gets nuclear weapons and attacks the US.

Is there a case to be made for allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons in the interests of peace? Or has all the air been sucked out of the debate by American and Israeli demagogues who dominate the airwaves?
The case for a nuclear Iran doesn’t emerge from fear-mongering or saber-rattling, like the alternate view, but from reason and respect for widely accepted facts; both of which are sadly missing from the analysis appearing in the western media.

Jorge Hirsch is a Professor of Physics who writes extensively on nuclear issues. His conclusions are similar to mine and to others who study and analyse nuclear policies. Such as Dr Helen Caldicott who has predicted a nuclear war during Bush's second term.
As Dr. Hirsch suggests: the time for discussion and protest about a potential, clandestine, sudden nuclear attack on Iran is now, not after the damage has been done.

Or will the world allow it to happen?
The Bush administration has put together all the elements it needs to justify the impending military action against Iran. Unlike in the case of Iraq, it will happen without warning, and most of the justifications will be issued after the fact. We will wake up one day to learn that facilities in Iran have been bombed in a joint U.S.-Israeli attack. It may even take another couple of days for the revelation that some of the U.S. bombs were nuclear.

Drefuss's article (follows) is the best I have read yet which reveals how the U.S. foments wars and makes enemies under cover of "spreading Democracy In The Middle East".
The U.S. is practising Machiavellian tactics (a hallmark of Bush's neoconservative administration) at home and abroad and using Orwellian techniques to befuddle, terrorise and ultimately sell it to the American public.

During his embattled summer vacation in Crawford, Texas, George Bush managed to launch a new promotional ditty for his war in Iraq: "As Iraqis stand up, we will stand down." Since then there has been much commentary from the administration, from military officials, and from the media on the question of how successfully the Iraqi military is actually "standing up."

Professor van Creveld is an Israeli military historian who agrees with most of the right-wing myths of the middle east. So his following judgement on Bush is particularly interesting.
"For misleading the American people, and launching the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 B.C sent his legions into Germany and lost them, Bush deserves to be impeached and, once he has been removed from office, put on trial along with the rest of the president's men. If convicted, they'll have plenty of time to mull over their sins.
Martin van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University, is author of "Transformation of War" (Free Press, 1991). He is the only non-American author on the U.S. Army's required reading list for officers.

Once again we have John Pilger at his best revealing how even the revered BBC is little more than a sophisticated propagandist for the UK State. The BBC endlessly repeats Tony Blair's and George Bush lies over their illegal and totally unjustified war on Iraq. It carefully avoids reporting damming key facts about that war, as Pilger so ably documents.
The mass media in other countries - the U.S., Australia and New Zealand is just as bad and very much the servant of Bush-Blair-Howard pro-war propaganda.

The Indian writer Vandana Shiva has called for an "insurrection of subjugated knowledge." The insurrection is well under way. In trying to make sense of a dangerous world, millions of people are turning away from the traditional sources of news and information and to the World Wide Web, convinced that mainstream journalism is the voice of rampant power.

Problems Today

America has become involved in many crimes and great hypocrisy, while the President - George Bush - claims Christian virtue and direction from God. It is diabolically evil and rapidly becoming more so as new inferior people of like mind are appointed by Bush to top positions.
American liberties are being willingly overthrown whenever Bush throws up the 'terrorist' enemy, as John Adams foresaw. The Government commits crimes - and is the omniscient teacher - as Justice Brandeis says, as the retribution may be terrible as he predicts.

......a war on Iran could become larger than the one on Iraq, with far more domestic repression in the U.S. and other states in the 'coalition of the willing'. As the US. military is now over extended, a new larger war may mean the Bush Administration will justify the use of nuclear weapons.
As the consequences could be far greater for everyone than those of the Iraq war, preventative actions should be taken by governments now, before the event. Afterward may be too late to be of much use.

The refrain of the Democrats about being misled into supporting the invasion of Iraq has become really tired. And someone other than the White House smearmongers needs to say it: The Democrats cannot be allowed to use faulty intelligence as a crutch to hold up their unforgivable support for the Iraq invasion. What is DNC Chair Howard Dean's excuse? He wasn't in Congress and didn't have any access to Senate intelligence. Still, on March 9, 2003, just days before the invasion began, Dean told Tim Russet, on NBC's Meet The Press, "I don't want Saddam staying in power with control over those weapons of mass destruction. I want him to be disarmed."

Americans have begun to 'smell a rat' - a very huge rat. They have finally begun to connect the dots.
I hope it's not too late and that they can act to stop him in time.

.....To repeat, despite Bush's arguments to the contrary, the "clash of civilizations" would consist of wars started by us. The killing of innocent people in these wars is likely to be massive, and the wars could at any time turn nuclear. If the people and the politicians of America allow these wars to take place, the stain on the morality of Americans will last for generations.

.....The next U.S. pre-emptive war could be against Iran, and/or Syria. Both have been mentioned as potential targets by Bush, as has North Korea if it dares to try and make nuclear weapons.
...... From the following record, and George Bush's actions and statements, we know what to expect.
Hopefully this should encourage people to work to keep New Zealand nuclear-free, and encourage other countries to adopt this step toward a nuclear weapons-free world.

U.S. military spending ($343 billion in the year 2000) is 69 percent greater than that of the next five highest nations combined. Russia, which has the second largest military budget, spends less than one-sixth what the United States does. Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Cuba, Sudan, Iran, and Syria spend $14.4 billion combined; Iran accounts for 52 percent of this total.

Blair's bid to allow police to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge has failed in Parliament.
..... It is very clear, that the public needs a massive educational effort by top experts and speakers using every means of modern communication on the truths of our perilous situation. I think that would motivate enough people to stop Bush, Blair and Howard from committing more and perhaps far worse war crimes. Unless quick action is taken we are unlikely to be able stop the deterioration to more wars and worse disasters.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair was due to risk his first major defeat in parliament overnight (NZT) in a bid to allow police to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge.

His accomplishments and spirit will continue to inspire everyone who knew him to continue their work for a better New Zealand. See also Rod Donald

Fascism Growing In America, Britain and Australia?
It is likely that the US brand of Fascism will become much more overt and repressive, especially if given a boost along that road by new 9/11 incidents. Bush will have to act soon to reverse his declining popularity and muster public support for US attacks on Syria and Iran. A new 9/11 would allow the Bush Administration to implement the next phase of the neo-conservative US global domination plan.

This report of Dr Robert White's paper on some of the historical background to N.Z.'s 1984 nuclear-free legislation contains many useful and valuable facts.
As the originator of the campaign to make New Zealand a nuclear free zone, I will offer some comment and point out a few gaps. These can be examined in greater detail on our website: http://www.nuclearfreenz.org.nz/creationnznf.htm
The article does not mention the importance of the local and national nuclear free zone campaign in causing the Labour Party to make the decision for David Lange to propose in 1984:
" If we are elected government of New Zealand we will make the whole country nuclear free."

Dr Robert White spoke to the July meeting of the Auckland Branch of ESR to comment on the historical background to New Zealand's anti-nuclear legislation in 1984, and comment on the present situation.
On 14 July 1984 the Labour Government came to power and introduced the first nuclear-free policy for weapons and reactors on ships that New Zealand had ever had. It also established NZ as the first ever, single-nation, nuclear weapons-free zone. NZ is the only country that has put its nuclear-free policy into law which is comprehensive and expresses our complete rejection of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, or having anything to do with them. For many New Zealanders it is very symbolic and has won our country international recognition as an advocate of a nuclear-free world.

to Continuing US-UK War Crimes in Iraq Now Tony Blair's military are putting Kendall-Smith on trial for refusing to serve again in Iraq because he believes the war is illegal. The evidence keeps piling up, far more than we had in 2003 and 2004 that the war is illegal and violates every law, every convention, every treaty on every aspect of waging war, that humanity has ever created. Really it is so absolutely stupefying, and I am amazed that there is so little opposition to Blair's colossal deceit. The British people seem to be as much a pushover for war propaganda and lies as the Germans were under Hitler. But it's worse, far worse.......

The question of legality deeply concerns the British military brass, who sought Tony Blair's assurance on the eve of the invasion, got it and, as they now know, were lied to. They are right to worry; Britain is a signatory to the treaty that set up the International Criminal Court, which draws its codes from the Geneva Conventions and the 1945 Nuremberg Charter. The latter is clear: "To initiate a war of aggression... is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

It's the best news for a long time that an NZ doctor, with a postgraduate qualification in philosophy, has refused further service with the UK airforce in Iraq because he thinks it is illegal. He is a credit to his parents.
New Zealand should be proud that a New Zealander is bringing the first court case in Britain to question the constitutional legality of the Iraq invasion.

Two New Zealanders will effectively put Britain's involvement in the United States-led "coalition of the willing" in Iraq on trial later this week.
A British court martial of New Zealander Flight Lieutenant Malcolm Kendall-Smith will begin on Thursday (local time), when he will become the first British officer to face criminal charges for challenging the legality of the Iraq war.

The following short, humorous piece raises some very profound and disturbing questions about the London bombings. Using the alleged terrorist action as justification, Tony Blair is trying to push draconian anti-terrorist laws through the UK Parliament. These proposed laws seem to have little real purpose in opposing and detecting terrorists. But they would be very effective in intimidating the public, silencing dissent, curtailing civil liberties, and generally increasing control of the general public. Tony Blair is deeply enmeshed in a web of deceit, using a tissue of lies to deceive the UK public and Parliament into supporting the illegal invasion, occupation and continued war on the Iraqi people.

Some Questions They Will Not Be Asking - And Certainly Not Answering:

The US army and marines are heavily committed in Iraq, but soldiers could be found if the Bush administration were intent on invasion. Donald Rumsfeld has been reorganising the army to increase front-line forces by a third. More importantly, naval and air force firepower has barely been used in Iraq. Just 120 B52 and stealth bombers could target 5,000 points in Iran with satellite-guided bombs in just one mission. It is for this reason that John Pike of globalsecurity.org thinks that a US attack could come with no warning at all.

Dan Plesch evaluates the evidence pointing towards a new conflict in the Middle East
The Sunday Telegraph warned last weekend that the UN had a last chance to avert war with Iran and, at a meeting in London last week, the US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, expressed his regret that any failure by the UN security council to deal with Iran would damage the security council's relevance, implying that the US would solve the problem on its own.

Excellent Source Of Independent Journalists and News

A political and media onslaught is about to be unleashed with the indictments of a whole host of key White House officials (including you-know-who) caught up in the Plamegate coverup. The unraveling of this potentially treasonous scandal -- which began with the outing, for political reasons, of a covert CIA officer -- could well provide the tipping point that will allow the Democrats to retake the House in the next election, initiate Congressional investigations of Bush Administration crimes, and possibly even pass an impeachment resolution.

Over 350(US) billion dollars yearly finances the US Global War On Terror (GWOT).
As the following report by the Center For Defense Information shows, much of it is wasted. Some 12 billion cannot be accounted for. As pointed out in other papers on this site, the U.S. continues to create enemies in order to justify ever increasing defence budgets. These in turn help make arms corporations very, very wealthy. Naturally that assures continuing large campaign donations from the mainly republican arms trade corporations to ensure Bush and other Republican candidates and chosen Democrats get re-elected.

From Sept. 11, 2001, to last week, the federal government has spent $357 billion on the “Global War on Terror.” These expenses include military operations, reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan and security at U.S. bases and embassies overseas.

... U.S. strategy is to create the 'so-called ' terrorist threat' which can then be used to justify targeting any nation the U.S. selects in its endless war on terror (GWOT). By attacking various countries, which they justify by lies, as in Iraq, the Bush Administration makes an endless supply of enemies. Bush and his neocons then label them as 'terrorists'. They blame neighbouring nations for helping these 'terrorists' and proceed with the next phase in the U.S. PNAC expansionist plan.

Dick Cheney's "Global War on Terrorism" (GWOT)
Vice President Cheney in a recent speech to US military personnel has acknowledged that the war could go on for several decades. This statement, which reveals the Bush Administration's commitment to global warfare, was barely mentioned by the mainstream media.
We are dealing with a "military roadmap". Iraq and Afghanistan are at the outset of the Bush administration's military adventure.

Sir,
I have been researching nuclear war issues since 1945, when some 200,000 people were killed by nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Since then you have adjusted the hands of your Doomsday Clock 18 times - closer or further from midnight and nuclear war. This depended on developments in nuclear weapon technology, national policies and international threats and crisis. The last time was in 2002 when you moved it from 9 to 7 minutes to midnight. This was because the U.S. rejected a series of arms control treaties and announced its withdrawal from the ABM treaty; nuclear weapons proliferation to India and Pakistan and the so-called ' terrorist threat'. It is now 3 years later and I suggest the threat of a nuclear war has increased to the highest level yet for the following 10 reasons:

It's the 60th anniversary of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which premiered in December, 1945, just a few months after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The goal of the magazine has always been simple, if somewhat ambitious: to save the world by working to minimize the threat of nuclear war. It came out of a time when physicists were central players in questions of international security. It came out of a time when physicists were central players in questions of international security.

Bill Gallagher is one of the very few journalists, who write about the amazing and real situation in the US today.
If more journalists, newspapers, TV and radio told the truth, the Bush Administration would probably soon lose power and influence. Bush would be impeached and many in the Bush Administration would be prosecuted for war crimes.

DETROIT -- With George W. Bush, a certifiable madman, in power, it shouldn't be surprising that the rest of our republic is going bonkers. Bush, our commander in sleep, has spread the virus of neo-fascist fever and the bug is gripping our nation like the flu in February. The evidence is compelling.
The national commander of the American Legion demands an end to all "public protests" and "media events" against the war. Commander Thomas Cadmus declared, at the legion's convention in Honolulu, that "it would be tragic if the freedoms our veterans fought so valiantly to protect would be used against their successors today."
I get it. Here's what's wrong with America these days: freedom of speech, the freedom to peaceably assemble, and the right of people to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Those items found in the Bill of Rights are the scourges of our nation. Get rid of those damn freedoms at home and the Iraqis will start tossing rose petals at our troops.

General Smedley Butler's 1933 speech is a classic that applies to Bush and his wars today. General Butler's worst fears have come true - this time with much larger annihilation devices at the command of Bush and his neocons. He gives many examples of the greatly inflated profits enjoyed by the wide range of manufacturers who make materials used in war - from munitions to warships to uniforms. Bush promised an endless "war on terror" to defend Democracy". He is delivering on this promise while creating a record-breaking national debt and enormous profits for the myriad of people and company's engaged in the runaway US war machine.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.
A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

A number of papers on this site indicate that the Bush administration commits terrorist acts, with the objectives of bringing about, a civil war in Iraq that will justify their continuing occupation and plundering of Iraq's ressources. This article is the first one I have seen that also claim UK forces are also engaging in this deadly and evil game.

Basra; another milestone in war on terror
"What our police found in their car was very disturbing - weapons, explosives, and a remote control detonator. These are the weapons of terrorists. We believe these soldiers were planning an attack on a market or other civilian targets." Sheik Hassan al-Zarqani, spokesman for the Mehdi Army

Mankind has created a number of ways which could be used to trigger an extinction process, as assessed by this article by editors of the Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists in Dec 2004. Some factors not assessed, even more relevant today are: 1. The possibility of an unbalanced, rogue and/or ideologically-driven government gaining power and deliberately implementing a strategy of war and terror attacks which then escalate into a self-extinction process. Some suspect this may already be happening....

Loose nukes, nanobots, smallpox, oh my! In this age of endless imagining, and some very real risks, which terrorist threats should be taken most seriously?

A search on "Pre-emptive Nuclear War" revealed there are 1,750,000 entries on Google.
They illustrate the colossal investment in designing and making various types of nuclear weapons and the strategies to use them.
Think about the hundreds of billions of dollars poured into the nuclear arms race during the last 65 years since 1945. Now think about the paltry fig-leaf sum devoted to peace and disarmament and the suspicion and rejection of those working in this field. These facts and reflections tell you something about humanity and our runaway race toward extinction.

A world nuclear war is one that involves most or all nuclear powers releasing a large proportion of their nuclear weapons at targets in nuclear, and perhaps non-nuclear, states. Such a war could be initiated accidentally, aggressively or pre-emptively and could continue and spread through these means or by retaliation by a party attacked by nuclear weapons. While some speak of "limited nuclear war," it is likely that any nuclear war will quickly escalate and spiral out of control because of the "use them or loose them" strategy. If you don't use all your nuclear weapons you are likely to have them destroyed by the enemy's nuclear weapons.

This 2003 paper gives a historical record of the development of nuclear war as a tool to achieve US military objectives.
No longer were nuclear weapons to be regarded as a deterrent "last resort" type of doomsday device. There was a new doctrine to use nuclear weapons first or "pre-emptively" - supposedly before the claimed enemy had a chance to use what the Pentagon calls "weapons of mass destruction" against the US.
The Pentagon will supply the so-called "intelligence" to justify it. This would likely be a phoney doctored intelligence, similar to what they supplied to justify the war on Iraq with a litany of accusations later found to be false.
Based on what they knew to be lies, Bush for the US and Blair for the UK , nevertheless warned they might use nuclear weapons against Iraq if Iraq resisted the US-UK invasion with WMD.
The alleged WMD could be anything the Bush Administration chose to define as WMD.

It Keeps Getting Scarier and Scarier
...The prospect of the U.S. using nuclear weapons against Iraq adds a new, even more horrifying dimension to the threat of war in the Persian Gulf. LaRouche has already called on President Bush to renounce this madness.
The leak of the Jan. 10, 2003 document did not come in a vacuum. For the past year, the Bush Administration has been moving, step by step, to overturn a fifty year policy of keeping nuclear weapons on the shelf, as part of America's strategic deterrent. Here is a short chronology:
In January 2002, the Bush Administration issued its Nuclear Posture Review, a Congressionally mandated report on the U.S. nuclear weapons program.
For the first time, the 2002 report openly discussed the possible use of nuclear weapons, naming seven countries that could be targets of the American nuclear arsenal: Russia, China, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and Syria.

In discussing the nuclear free issue (which I am in full agreement with) someone replied two days ago "its just a farce because our hospitals are nuclear powered." I have heard this before - is this correct and if so how.

Hospitals do a lot of radiation for medical purposes, with which we have always agreed. The New Zealand Nuclear Free Peacemaking Association has always agreed with the peaceful applications of nuclear technology for medical and industrial uses. However hospitals are not nuclear powered, but powered by electricity. There is no nuclear power in NZ.

David Lange was a great man in many ways. His brilliant wit and his grasp of any topic for debate were the first things one noticed. To my mind his most valuable contribution to mankind was that he chose to make the vitally important stand for world nuclear disarmament by declaring New Zealand nuclear free. This was an idea that I had been promoting since 1981. It developed out of 36 years of peacework since the first nuclear bombs were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945. I am deeply grateful that he recognised the potential good this policy could achieve.
........  "I can smell the uranium on your breadth"

Although written in 2002, the following article gives a blueprint on how the US can create covertly, the very terrorism they condemn and which they use to justify wars - such as the much-predicted war on Iran. It may seem puzzling and counterproductive why the so-called terrorists in Iraq seem to be attacking Sunnis and Shiites in the apparent attempt to foment a civil or religious war between the two factions. Why would they do that if the objective is to get rid of US occupation?
On the other hand if a civil war did develop in Iraq, the US would have a reason to remain rather than withdraw, thus giving them a motive to foment a civil war between the two factions.
The British used similar techniques called "divide and rule" - setting one faction against another - in building their Empire.