If any one Steal a any document of U.S Super Computer how we can say America Nuclear Plant is save If any one Attack on U.S Computer and steal any Secret information about Atomic plant. If America Nuclear plant is Connected with Super Computer How can be said is Safe..... American Nuclear plant is big threat of the world after the leaks.
Family of television cameraman killed by US troops in Iraq might sue those who worked with US to prevent soldiers' arrest The Hotel Palestine several months after the bomb in which José Couso died. Photograph: Jerome Sessini/ In Visu/Corbis
The family of a television cameraman killed by US troops during the invasion of Iraq said it was considering taking legal action against Spanish ministers and others who worked with US officials to prevent a Madrid court arresting the soldiers involved.
The brother of cameraman José Couso, who died after a tank opened fire on a journalists' hotel in Baghdad, said the family was mulling court action after US embassy cables published by the Guardian and El País revealed how Spanish ministers intervened after a Madrid court issued arrest warrants for three soldiers.
"We have always known that the Spanish government connived [with the US]," Couso's brother Javier said. "What I ask myself now is whatever happened to our national sovereignty?"
Couso, who worked for Spain's Tele 5, and Reuters cameraman Taras Protsyuk were killed when a US tank opened fire on the Hotel Palestine on 8 April 2003.
In October 2005 a Madrid court ordered the arrest for questioning of three US soldiers and issued an international warrant for them.
Spain's attorney general's office appealed against the measures and the case has since been shelved.
Couso's family is fighting for the case to be reopened. "We believe the behaviour of the attorney general's office and of prosecutors office at the national court has perverted the true nature of these institutions," Javier Couso said.
Spain's governing socialist party and the opposition People's Party, both of which have been embarrassed by the cables, have remained tight-lipped. Socialist ministers have called the Madrid cables – which deal with US attempts to stop court investigations into torture at Guantánamo Bay, CIA rendition flights and the Couso case – as "decontextualised" and "partial".
Ministers have also denied that Spain was offered $85,000m (£54,000) to cover the costs of each former Guantánamo prisoner it accepted.
Javier Zaragoza, the chief prosecutor at the national court, who comes across in the cables as a close ally of the US as it tried to stop investigating magistrates using universal jurisdiction rules to investigate torture at Guantánamo Bay, said the reports of conversations contained in the cables were "biased" and "malicious".
"They come to ask you for information, not to tell you what you should do," he said in an interview with La Voz newspaper. "The thing is that they always try to make themselves look valuable to their government, but they never set the course of action followed by prosecutors or the justice system in Spain."
In an editorial, El País asked for a "clear explanation" of the contacts between prosecutors, ministers and the US embassy in Madrid.
What do the cables released by WikiLeaks tell us about the French president and his relationship with the United States? WikiLeaks has released a US embassy cable that says Nicolas Sarkozy can be 'brilliant, impatient, undiplomatic and hard to predict'. Photograph: Aude Guerruci/EPA
US strategy of keeping quiet over fears about Pakistan's nuclear security is not working according to experts Satellite image showing the Khushab plutonium reactor in Pakistan. Photograph: HO/AFP/Getty Images
The leaked US cables on the Pakistani nuclear arsenal reveal a serious and growing threat of nuclear terrorism that has been deliberately played down by western governments, counter-proliferation experts said yesterday.
They argued there were political and legal constraints on the assistance the US and others could offer Pakistan to help improve security, and that home-grown safety measures had not kept pace with the rapid growth of the country's nuclear complex and the spread of extremism.
"The intersection of terror and proliferation is nowhere more evident than in Pakistan," said Mark Fitzpatrick, a former US state department non-proliferation official now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
"Officials have been talking about this for years," Fitzpatrick said. He argued there were good reasons for the gap between Washington and London's public assurances that the Pakistani arsenal was secure, and the private concerns about the terrorist threat revealed in the WikiLeaks cables.
"The United States has been helping Pakistan make the material more secure, but talking about it doesn't help. It just makes the Pakistanis resist further assistance."
The 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty also places legal limits on the help one country can give another on its nuclear weapons establishment.
Meanwhile, however, there are clear signs that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its estimated stockpile of 90 warheads.
The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), an independent thinktank in Washington, published satellite pictures last month which showed construction work on a third heavy water reactor at the Khushab nuclear complex, where plutonium for nuclear warheads is made.
Shaun Gregory, a Bradford University professor who has extensively studied Pakistani nuclear security, said that there were multiple chinks in its armour.
"The military elements of this are fairly robust, but not invulnerable. But on the civilian side, where the fissile material is processed and the weapons produced, levels of safety and security are much lower," he said.
In an assessment of Pakistani nuclear security published last year, Gregory noted terrorist groups had mounted a string of attacks on nuclear weapons facilities, including a nuclear missile storage facility at Sargodha and a nuclear air base at Kamra, both in 2007. In August 2008 Pakistan Taliban suicide bombers blew up several entry points to a nuclear weapons assembly site at Wah.
The army has several concentric layers of security at these sites but Gregory points to other attacks like the assault on the army headquarters itself in Rawalpindi last October – in which the attackers wore army uniforms, drove military vehicles and had detailed maps of the site – as signs of growing sophistication.
"Should terrorists decide to take control of a nuclear weapons site, they are developing the means of doing it. The only thing lacking is a detailed knowledge of where the nuclear weapons are stored."
The gap could be filled by collusion with some of the 130,000 people involved in the Pakistani nuclear arms complex.
"I don't think that in the context of a Pakistani army where there are people disgruntled with what the United States is doing in the region, you can say that collusion can be permanently discounted," Gregory said.
In that context David Albright, the head of ISIS, believes Washington's strategy of keeping quiet about its fears of Pakistan's nuclear security, in the hope of greater co-operation, is not working.
"I've been told for years that the problem was worse than what has been told publicly," Albright said. "But what is surprising is that the United States doesn't have more leverage. We're not getting enough for our money."
He pointed to the failure of repeated efforts of US officials to retrieve US-supplied high-enriched uranium (HEU) in storage at a Pakistani civilian research reactor. Washington has also been unsuccessful in persuading Islamabad to lift its opposition to a global treaty to stop the production of fissile material.
Pakistan is currently blocking talks on the treaty in Geneva. Albright said: "Hiding the truth can't be the basis for a long-term policy."
Serious Organised Crime Agency flags up Interpol 'red notice' over WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's whereabouts
Julian Assange is being sought by police over rape allegations. Photograph: Leon Neal/AFP/Getty Images
British police are continuing to look for the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, over rape allegations made against him in Sweden.
The Serious Organised Crime Agency, which is handling the case, confirmed yesterday it had flagged up an Interpol "red notice" to all UK police forces that the whereabouts of Assange were being sought.
Police sources said Assange would be arrested if they discovered his precise location. The 39-year-old is believed to be in the UK.
A Soca source said: "If there is intelligence or information to say he is in a said location, then that will be acted upon. With a red notice issue it means he's on the radar, on police force systems. Law enforcement Plc is looking for him."
A source close to Assange told the Guardian that his lawyer had been assured by police that he would be approached first if there was any attempt to detain the WikiLeaks founder.
Although the red notice does not amount to an arrest warrant, an Interpol spokesman said that often they were interpreted as a "valid request for provisional arrest" especially if the two countries, such as Sweden and the UK, have extradition treaties.
A Soca source described it as an "initial locate and trace" request by Interpol for Assange, with the red notice asking people to contact police if they have any information about his whereabouts.
Assange, who is from Australia and is thought to have been in London recently, moves regularly from country to country and is known to have spent periods in Britain and Sweden. The source added that police had not received any information relating to the whereabouts of Assange or any indication that he might currently be in the UK.
The red notice concerning Assange was sent from Interpol on 20 November to all its 188 member countries after being contacted by the Swedish authorities who want to interview him over sex offence allegations.
Assange is wanted by Swedish prosecutors on suspicion of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. He denies the allegations.
Initially details of the notice were marked "restricted" and only came to light yesterday after Sweden said its request could be publicised.
Today, Assange's lawyer issued a vigorous condemnation of the Interpol move. Comparing the Swedish prosecutor to Lavrentiy Pavlovich Beria, Stalin's notorious security chief, Mark Stephens said "neither Mr Assange nor his lawyers have been provided any further information beyond that reported in the press."
He continued: "This appears to be a persecution and a prosecution. It is highly irregular and unusual for the Swedish authorities to issue a red notice in the teeth of the undisputed fact that Mr Assange has agreed to meet voluntarily to answer the prosecutor's questions. Mr Assange has repeatedly sought meetings with the prosecutrix – both in Sweden and subsequently – in order to answer her questions and clear his name. It is relevant that Mr Assange sought permission from the prosecutrix to leave Sweden and she gave him her permission. Since leaving Sweden Mr Assange has continued to seek meetings with the prosecutrix, but his requests have either been ignored or met with a refusal."
He added: "At this point in time, we have no evidence pointing to a link between these allegations from August and the issue of the Interpol alert just two days after the WikiLeaks first release of US diplomatic cables. However, it is highly unusual for a red notice warrant to be issued in relation to the allegations reported as having been made, since Swedish law does not require custodial orders in relation to the allegation – indeed to our knowledge this is a unique action by the Swedish prosecuting authorities in applying for a red notice on the basis of these allegations.
"We are also investigating whether the prosecutor's application to have Mr Assange held incommunicado without access to lawyers, visitors or other prisoners – again a unique request – is in any way linked to this matter and the recent, rather bellicose US statements of an intention to prosecute Mr Assange."
If Assange is arrested in the UK, police will notify Swedish authorities immediately before he faces proceedings to extradite him to Sweden at City of Westminster magistrates' court in central London.
"Once he has been located, the Swedish authorities would be contacted and then they would send an arrest warrant and that gets processed by us, to make sure it ticks all the boxes within the legislation, and then it gets actioned," said the Soca source.
He said the process could be delayed if Assange chose to appeal against attempts to extradite him.
An Interpol spokesman said: "In cases where arrests are made based on a red notice, these are made by national police officials in Interpol member countries."
The WikiLeaks founder is facing growing legal problems around the world after US Republicans revealed yesterday they were pushing for his criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act.
Scotland Yard refused to divulge any discussions that may have taken place concerning Assange.
A Metropolitan police spokesman said: "We don't discuss purported communications regarding extradition cases unless someone is being called before the City of Westminster magistrates court, where we deal with our cases."
Meanwhile, Assange's mother, Christine, who runs a puppet theatre in Queensland, Australia, said she was worried about her son's wellbeing.
"He is my son and I love him, and obviously I don't want him hunted down and jailed. I'm reacting as any mother would. I'm distressed," she told Australian radio. "
One message, often buried, comes out loud and clear from the embassy cables: the US should choose its allies more carefully President Obama with King Abdullah in Riyadh, during an official visit in 2009. The Obama administration has since concluded a $60bn arms deal with Saudi Arabia. The WikiLeaks US embassy cables have revealed that the king has urged the US to attack Iran. Photograph: AFP/Mido Ahmed
Among the most arresting lines in the trove of diplomatic cables made public this week was one from King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. "Cut off the head of the snake," he advised his American friends. Any herpetologist would agree that this is good advice in dealing with a threatening viper. But who is this snake? King Abdullah was referring to Iran, obliquely arguing for a military attack.
Yet, there was another tantalising detail in the trove of cables that suggests the larger threat comes from inside King Abdullah's own country. "Saudi donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like al-Qaida," the New York Times reported in its first article on the leaked documents.
That is a huge, though not unsurprising, revelation. It reflects how complex and sometimes self-defeating America's foreign alliances have become. Saudi Arabia is an intimate ally of the United States, yet Saudi money supports the world's most violently anti-American terror network.
This deeply troubling contradiction has its roots in Saudi history and tradition. The regime's survival is based on a deal with the Wahhabi clerics who dominate religious practice in Saudi Arabia – and whose austere brand of Islam is among the world's most reactionary. Clerics agree to support the regime, ignoring both its alliance with infidel America and the notoriously unIslamic lifestyles of its thousands of princes. In exchange, the regime gives these clerics billions of dollars, much of which they use to run mosques and religious schools across the Islamic world. More than a few of these mosques and schools, often run by Saudi clerics or others they have trained, are incubators of terror, where generations of lost boys learn to chant the Qur'an and hate America.
The deal is, as former CIA director James Woolsey once described it, "for the Wahhabis to be given all of the money in the world they could ever remotely dream of needing or wanting to spread their sect's beliefs, and for them to leave the House of Saud alone."
Successive American presidents have turned a blind eye to piles of evidence that Saudi money is being used to foment holy war against America. They have reason to do so. The absolute monarchy that rules Saudi Arabia generously cooperates with American global policies – even agreeing, according to one leaked cable, to supply China with oil in the hope of wooing it away from reliance on Iran. Saudi Arabia supplies much oil to the US. And it is the world's largest consumer of American weaponry.
The Obama administration recently announced a deal to sell Saudi Arabia a staggering $60bn worth of weapons. This is new only in scope. In 1990, the New York Times ran a story headlined "US to Sell Saudis $20bn in Arms; Weapons Deal is Largest in History." Seventeen years later, the same newspaper ran an almost identical headline: "US Set to Offer $20bn Arms Deal to Saudi Arabia and Other Gulf States."
How could President Obama, in the midst of a recession, refuse to sell the Saudis another $60bn worth, given the number of jobs this sale will create? He might argue that it is unwise to send so much highly sophisticated weaponry to a kingdom with an uncertain future. King Abdullah is 86 or 87, and is currently hospitalised in New York. He has no designated successor in the country where Osama bin Laden was born and remains highly popular. Weapons systems the US sold to the Shah of Iran wound up in the hands of Islamic militants who seized power there in 1979; a comparable scenario in Saudi Arabia is hardly impossible.
Obama might also argue that arming a country that arms our enemies endangers American lives. That, of course, would provoke questions about Pakistan, America's other two-faced ally. It is no secret that while Pakistan takes billions of dollars in American aid, most of it military, it arms and supports the Taliban and other violently anti-American groups.
Raising questions about these relationships is difficult. Revising them would require sacrificing short-term convenience for long-term benefits, and the US government is not good at long-term thinking. Yet, as King Hamad of Bahrain told American diplomats in one newly-leaked cable: "The danger of letting it go on is greater than the danger of stopping it." He was talking about Iran, but his wisdom applies at least as well to America's perverted relationships with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
King Abdullah, according to another leaked document, was also talking about Iran when he told American diplomats, "The bottom line is that they cannot be trusted." This week's leaks suggest that this truism applies at least as much to his own government, and that of Pakistan, as it does to Iran.
From deep in the vast archive of these leaked documents, a voice cries out to America: look more closely at your allies. Those who served your purpose at one time may now be dangerous enemies.
Comments are open.....
