Thursday, February 16, 2006

[september_eleven_vreeland] Digest Number 1292

There are 8 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Halliburton News: Immigrant Concentration Camp Contract Awarded
From: "smacko" <>
2. Congresswoman Says America Run By Criminal Syndicate + Cheney + 9/11
3. Congress's Secret Saddam Tapes
From: "smacko" <>
4. Outing Cardinal Egan
From: Tim White <>
5. Agent From Asia - Bavarian Illuminati
From: "norgesen" <>
6. Energy Dissent and the 2006 G8 Summit in Russia
From: "norgesen" <>
7. G8 Summit 2007: Already there is a broad resistance
From: "norgesen" <>
8. Aubonne Bridge
From: "norgesen" <>


Message: 1
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:11:01 -0800
From: "smacko" <>
Subject: Halliburton News: Immigrant Concentration Camp Contract Awarded

From: Eric Otto

Halliburton News



ARLINGTON, Virginia - KBR announced today that its Government and
Infrastructure division has been awarded an Indefinite
Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to support the Department
of Homeland Security's (DHS) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency. KBR is the engineering
and construction subsidiary of Halliburton (NYSE:HAL).

With a maximum total value of $385 million over a five-year term,
consisting of a one-year based period and four one-year options, the
competitively awarded contract will be executed by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Fort Worth District. KBR held the previous ICE contract
from 2000 through 2005.

"We are especially gratified to be awarded this contract because it
builds on our extremely strong track record in the arena of emergency
operations support," said Bruce Stanski, executive vice president, KBR
Government and Infrastructure. "We look forward to continuing the good
work we have been doing to support our customer whenever and wherever
we are needed."

The contract, which is effective immediately, provides for
establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to
augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program
facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the
U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs. The
contingency support contract provides for planning and, if required,
initiation of specific engineering, construction and logistics support
tasks to establish, operate and maintain one or more expansion facilities.

The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other U.S.
Government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as
well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency,
such as a natural disaster. In the event of a natural disaster, the
contractor could be tasked with providing housing for ICE personnel
performing law enforcement functions in support of relief efforts.

ICE was established in March 2003 as the largest investigative arm of
the Department of Homeland Security. ICE is comprised of four
integrated divisions that form a 21st century law enforcement agency
with broad responsibilities for a number of key homeland security

KBR is a global engineering, construction, technology and services
company. Whether designing an LNG facility, serving as a defense
industry contractor, or providing small capital construction, KBR
delivers world-class service and performance. KBR employs more than
60,000 people in 43 countries around the world.

Halliburton, founded in 1919, is one of the world's largest providers
of products and services to the petroleum and energy industries. The
company serves its customers with a broad range of products and
services through its Energy Services Group and KBR.

Visit the company's World Wide Web site at

[This message contained attachments]


Message: 2
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 20:31:48 -0500
Subject: Congresswoman Says America Run By Criminal Syndicate + Cheney + 9/11

Congresswoman Says America Run By Criminal Syndicate + Cheney + 9/11

Congresswoman Says America Run By Criminal Syndicate

9/11 Rescuer saw explosions inside WTC Lobby

Deadeye Dick (Soused?) Blasts Hunting Host

White House didn't reveal Cheney shooting - Politics -

More Questions Raised About Delay in Reporting Cheney Misfire

Bush Sells 'Major Control Of 6 US Ports To Arab Firm

(Turns out to be a HOAX)
Photos Of Bush And Abramoff


! Oh No !
Tom C. & Katie May Split !
(Scientology it is a Cult that will steal your life (but first your
money and House) if you let them brain wash you )



Message: 3
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 23:51:21 -0800
From: "smacko" <>
Subject: Congress's Secret Saddam Tapes

Congress's Secret Saddam Tapes

By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
February 7, 2006

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is studying 12 hours of audio recordings between Saddam Hussein and his top advisers that may provide clues to the whereabouts of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

The committee has already confirmed through the intelligence community that the recordings of Saddam's voice are authentic, according to its chairman, Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, who would not go into detail about the nature of the conversations or their context. They were provided to his committee by a former federal prosecutor, John Loftus, who says he received them from a former American military intelligence analyst.


[This message contained attachments]


Message: 4
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:33:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Tim White <>
Subject: Outing Cardinal Egan

Outing Cardinal Egan

A priest's lawsuit alleges the Catholic Church is hiding pedophile clergy—and offers a stunning reason why

by Kristen Lombardi
February 7th, 2006 11:40 AM

Who knows whether Cardinal Edward Egan is sleeping soundly these days. But as head of the New York archdiocese—as the top Roman Catholic prelate in the state—he'd have every reason to be restless after the recent advent of a little-noticed lawsuit.
The suit, now pending in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, was filed on December 13 by Bob Hoatson—a 53-year-old New Jersey priest considered a stalwart ally among survivors of sexual abuse by clergy. Hoatson, the now-suspended chaplain for Catholic Charities in Newark, is suing Egan and nine other Catholic officials and institutions, claiming a pattern of "retaliation and harassment" that began after Hoatson alleged a cover-up of clergy abuse in New York and started helping victims.

But that's not all his lawsuit claims. Halfway through the 44-page complaint, the priest-turned-advocate drops a bomb on the cardinal: He alleges that Egan is "actively homosexual," and that he has "personal knowledge of this." His suit names two other top Catholic clerics in the region as actively gay—Albany bishop Howard Hubbard and Newark archbishop John Myers.

It's not that Hoatson has a problem with, as the suit puts it, "consensual, adult private sexual behavior by these defendants."

No, what Hoatson claims is that, as leaders of a church requiring celibacy and condemning homosexuality, actively gay bishops are too afraid of being exposed themselves to turn in pedophile priests. The bishops' closeted homosexuality, as the lawsuit states, "has compromised defendants' ability to supervise and control predators, and has served as a reason for the retaliation."

Hoatson realizes what he's up against. "I stopped and I thought long and hard about these allegations," he says. "It's time the church confronts this dysfunction. I couldn't do this outside of filing a lawsuit. The only thing the church responds to is negative publicity or a lawsuit. If I kept trying to do this within the system, I would be gone."

The case hinges on several statutory and legal claims. It argues that Egan and the other bishops retaliated against Hoatson for being a whistle-blower, that they intended to harm him and his career, and that they engaged in a conspiracy to do so.

Joseph Zwilling, Egan's spokesperson, denies the allegations, saying, "There is no truth to any of the statements he has made concerning Cardinal Egan." His counterpart in the Newark archdiocese, James Goodness, calls the charges "patently untrue." Goodness has released a four-page statement painting Hoatson, an archdiocesan priest in good standing until he was placed on administrative leave, as "a troubled individual" who bagged his parish duties to minister to victims.

"If anyone should have been pitied during Fr. Hoatson's parish assignments," Goodness writes in the December 14 statement, "it probably would have to be the pastors who had to put up with . . . Fr. Hoatson's 'malingering'—shirking one's duty."

Hubbard spokesperson Kenneth Goldfarb has lashed out at the priest's Manhattan lawyer, John Aretakis, a leading foe of the bishop who has represented 100 or so people claiming they were molested by Albany clergymen (see "Who Would Take a Case Like This?"). "This is not the first time Mr. Aretakis has made those allegations," Goldfarb says, pinning the charge about Hubbard's alleged homosexuality on the lawyer, not his client. "This is all orchestrated by Mr. Aretakis. He has a long history of coming up with claims that have no basis in fact."

Two years ago, a flurry of allegations that Hubbard had sexual relationships with several men, including a teenage street hustler and three diocesan priests, rocked local churches. Hubbard, who denied the charges, called for an investigation, and his handpicked lay review board hired Mary Jo White, a respected former federal prosecutor in Manhattan. White was paid $2.2 million for a four-month inquiry that ended up clearing Hubbard of all accusations (see "About That White Report"). Aretakis represented the two main accusers.

Aretakis puts little credence in the investigation, calling it "the most expensive piece of fiction ever produced." He denounced White for essentially investigating her own client, and he and his clients refused to cooperate.

Now that similar allegations are written in a lawsuit, the landscape has changed. Now, Aretakis has the platform to try to prove them—and he says he's prepared to do it. He says he's accumulated a list of priests and witnesses who have agreed to provide "firsthand evidence of the sexual proclivities" of Egan, Hubbard, and Myers, if subpoenaed. Some have written statements relaying "homosexual relationships with these bishops," he maintains; others know people who have had the affairs.

Aretakis declined to show the Voice any written documentation on the three bishops, saying, "I don't want to reveal my hand at a time when I don't need to." He describes the evidence against Egan and Myers as involving consensual contact with adult men. Egan has a sporadic history of gay affairs, Aretakis claims, most of them dating back to his time as a seminarian. The lawyer alleges Myers has had gay affairs more recently, some within the past five years.

For Hubbard, it's a different story. On the condition that his clients' identities be shielded, Aretakis allowed the Voice to view videotaped interviews with two men who allege they had sex with Hubbard for money as troubled teens, one in the 1970s, one in the early 1980s. Neither was included in the White investigation, though their allegations do resemble ones it ruled unfounded.

One of the men is now in prison and couldn't be reached before press time. The other, reached through Aretakis, told the Voice independently that the details on the tape are true and that he gave the testimony of his own free will. Now married and living upstate, he has sought help from Aretakis for a potential abuse case against an Albany priest who he says also paid him for sex and introduced him to Hubbard. He says he may sue Hubbard as well.

Goldfarb, Hubbard's spokeperson, refused to let the Voice speak to the bishop about the tapes. "He's been through the mill with this and there's no reason to go through any of this again," he said. Goldfarb again cited the White report, which he said fully cleared Bishop Hubbard. Allegations like these aren't unexpected, he said—indeed, the report predicted there would be more and advised viewing them with considerable skepticism. Read the report, he said, over and over, adding, "It's as if all this preponderance of evidence is being weighed against two people who haven't filed a lawsuit and who won't identify themselves at this time."


It's people like these two men, victims who are struggling to seek justice from the Catholic Church, whom Hoatson says he's aiming to help with his lawsuit. He's asking the courts for $5 million in damages, which he says he'd use for a 24-hour victims' ministry. The suit hinges on alleged harm done to him as a whistle-blower, but he says the real issue is that the bishops' sexual activities have compromised their ability to police predators.

"I have to tell the truth," he says. "I've gotten enough information to indicate that promiscuity on the part of these bishops is the reason they're covering up clergy abuse."

Whether his claims are true or not, Hoatson is making history. Richard Sipe, a former priest and scholar who has written about clergy sexual abuse and homosexuality in the Catholic Church, explains that it's rare for a priest to sue a bishop in court for retaliation—he has heard of only one case before this. It's almost unthinkable for a priest to say in court records that three of his area's top bishops are actively gay.

"That's a very significant move," Sipe says. Such he-said, he-said allegations can be near impossible to prove in any case, let alone when the subjects are powerful and respected church leaders. But, he adds, "even saying it in a lawsuit will force the subject of the bishops' sexuality out in the open."

And that could spark something of a revolution. Says Sipe, "This lawsuit could be the beginning of a movement."

Hoatson comes across as an unlikely revolutionary. He looks nothing like a Catholic priest, dressed on a recent Tuesday in jeans and a sweater. The wardrobe isn't by choice. Four days after he filed the suit, Newark archdiocesan officials put him on leave. Though he still gets his $1,700 monthly stipend, he's prohibited from presenting "himself publicly as a priest," as the December 20 decree states. He can no longer wear his collar or say Mass at the two parishes where he works.

Sitting in a coffee shop on Astor Place, he talks for hours about the way religion has colored his life—the way he'd had a "mystical experience" at 13 in which he saw himself as a priest, for instance. By 18, he'd entered the Christian Brothers order of monks, where he would teach in parochial schools for two decades. He felt so drawn to the priesthood that he enrolled in the seminary in 1994, at 42.

"I was called to the priesthood by God," he explains. "I never really understood why."

Hoatson believes he got that reason in the winter of 2002, when the clergy-abuse scandal exploded in Boston and across the country, in dioceses from California to Kentucky to New Hampshire and Iowa. Back then, Hoatson was serving as school director at Our Lady of Good Counsel Parish, in Newark, watching the crisis unfold on TV. He got word of a victim going public with charges that a Boston monsignor had molested him in the 1980s. The victim turned out to be Hoatson's former student; the official, a former school chaplain.

Hoatson called his onetime student, and soon was making regular trips from Newark to Boston, helping the man come to grips with the trauma of abuse. When other victims came forward, he hooked them up with lawyers or escorted them to confront dioceses. Word spread among survivors in New York and New Jersey about the generous priest. Hoatson has rescued victims from heroin dens; visited them in prison; collected them from shelters; paid their rent. Last year, he set up a ministry known as Rescue and Recovery International out of his Rockaway Park, Queens, apartment.

"He's like a guiding light," says Richard Regan, of Rochester, New York, who says a now-deceased Queens priest molested him and his five siblings in the '50s. Ken Lasch, a retired priest in the Patterson, New Jersey, diocese, calls Hoatson "a locomotive—in the lead and full speed ahead." Hoatson would think nothing of letting predatory priests know he's watching, Lasch says. "Bob is that type of person. Once he sees corruption, he goes after it."

Hoatson puts it another way: "This has become a mission for me."

His work has made him wrestle with his own experiences of sexual abuse. As a 22-year-old seminarian in the Christian Brothers, he says, another brother repeatedly molested him over a four-year period. Several years later, he confided in his superior, who Hoatson says assaulted him as well. "I knew it was abuse," he says, but he never identified it as such until years later. Now, he counts himself among a handful of priests who've named their alleged abusers; his lawsuit recounts what he says is molestation he suffered at hands of the two brothers in the '70s and '80s.

What finally triggered his suit was Hoatson's fear that he'd be stopped from working with victims. On May 20, 2003, according to the lawsuit, he testified at an Albany hearing sponsored by the New York State Senate. There, he criticized Catholic bishops for shielding predatory priests. That's exactly what happened in Boston, where the release of internal church documents revealed how Cardinal Bernard Law and his underlings had shuffled pedophiles from parish to parish for decades, covering up abuse while putting children at risk. Bishops who engaged in this practice, Hoatson testified that day, had "selected evil over good, denial over admission, lying over truth-telling."

Three days later, he was relieved of his duties as Good Counsel Parish school director. Hoatson contends that Newark officials told him, as he recalls, "The archbishop [Myers] has asked that you tone down your language." They handed him a termination letter.

His suit claims that Hubbard dialed up Hoatson's boss to complain and, as it states, "had the plaintiff fired from his position." It charges that Egan and his representatives "contributed and became involved in retaliation" as well.

Church officials deny these allegations. "Cardinal Egan did not nor did anyone representing the New York archdiocese ever contact the Newark archdiocese about Father Hoatson," Zwilling says. Goldfarb says that "nothing of consequence" connects Hubbard and the Albany diocese to Hoatson's firing. "There is nothing to this," he adds.

Goodness, Myers's spokesperson, maintains that Hoatson was removed from his school post solely because he'd asked to be transferred seven months earlier. By February, the archdiocese had accepted his request. "This preceded by months any comments he would make to the New York legislature," Goodness argues.

Yet only after the Albany testimony did Hoatson receive a formal letter letting him go, "effective immediately." It would take another eight months before Myers reassigned the priest to the Catholic Charities chaplaincy, in early 2004.

The hiatus allowed Hoatson to pursue his work with victims full-time, and he championed their cause at demonstrations, in letters to the editor, before area bishops. At Catholic Charities, he said Mass for employees and did routine parish work, all while keeping up his crusade. He says he'd managed to fulfill his ministry without much interference from the archdiocese until November 2005, when Myers issued a "precept" binding Hoatson to certain conditions. The document orders him "to cease activity in his own business"—his victims' ministry—and "to show proper reverence and obedience to his ordinary."

Goodness says the archbishop handed down the precept because "Father Hoatson had not been adhering to conditions of priesthood." The priest, he notes, resides in Queens even though he's required to live within the archdiocesan district. Hoatson says he doesn't feel safe in his assigned residence because of the alleged harassment.

He isn't the only one who believes he's being treated differently. Lasch, a lawyer trained in church canon law who has advised his fellow priest, says, "The diocese has exhibited a pattern of prejudicial treatment against Bob." He adds, "I see it as making it difficult for him to do his work."

Either way, Hoatson thinks he knows what's up. "I have to be gotten rid of because I'm trying to break the cycle of sexual disorder in the church," he explains. The disorder includes what he describes as "a promiscuous homosexual culture" perpetuating the cover-up of clergy sexual abuse. Egan, Hubbard, and Myers have hidden predatory priests because they're hiding their own gay activities, he charges.

To stop the abuse, he says, "you have to admit what is going on in the church with its homosexual culture."


What Hoatson is saying is, in many ways, nothing new. Speculation over homosexual bishops has circulated among the Catholic faithful for decades.

The topic remained largely off-limits—until the clergy-abuse crisis. That's when a loose network of victims' advocacy and church-reform groups sprang up, demanding accountability and pressing for change. Not only has this survivors' movement encouraged people to come forward and tell their stories, but it has also pushed the church to acknowledge the scale of clergy sexual abuse. To date, according to the Catholic bishops' own figures, 9,660 people nationwide since 1950 have accused 4,089 priests of molesting them. In New York City, 140 victims have named 49 abusive priests; in Albany, it's 141 and 69 respectively.

Among those who've tracked the crisis, it's not hard to find people who believe that the reason some bishops have shielded predatory priests is that they fear exposure of their own sexual activities. Anne Barrett Doyle, of, a nonprofit archive documenting the clergy-abuse crisis, explains that this belief "is widely accepted by activists and scholars and for good reason." Recent cases have shed light on abusive bishops who, in turn, had covered up for others, she points out.

Consider, for example, the case of Bishop Thomas Dupre, of Springfield, Massachusetts. In March 2004, he abruptly retired and fled his diocese when confronted with allegations that he'd molested two men decades earlier. Until then, Dupre had been the target of fierce criticism for his handling of some 14 accused priests, many of whom held powerful positions as his underlings.

Hoatson supporters consider his lawsuit—and his outing of purportedly gay bishops—a logical step in the fight for accountability. For Catholic leaders may have acknowledged that abusive priests preyed upon children for decades, but they haven't owned up to their complicity. "Personally," says Maria Cleary, of New Jersey Voice of the Faithful, a church-reform group that has worked with Hoatson, "I feel some things just need to be said at this point. There comes a point in any change process when you have to start pushing the envelope."

Pat Serrano, of Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, seconds that: "You need to express yourself loudly to get the church's attention."

If victims and their allies feel more emboldened to question bishops' sexuality, it may be because the church has raised the issue all on its own. Last November, the Vatican handed down a document known as the "Congregation for Catholic Education," in which it denounced homosexuality as "intrinsically immoral" and "disordered." It suggested that homosexual men cannot be celibate, and banned formerly active gay seminarians from ordination.

Sipe, the author and scholar, says the Vatican document "has opened up the question of sexual orientation among the priesthood," including the hierarchy. And it's set the stage for a potential backlash, incensing gay priests and causing Catholic faithful to think twice about the church's hypocrisy. For years, gay Catholic groups like Dignity USA have refused to call gay bishops on it, keeping an anti-outing policy.

"There's conflict in the gay community with the idea of outing a bishop," he says. Indeed, he says one Dignity leader showed him a private list of 142 bishops who are purportedly homosexual. Some are celibate, others not. But nothing has ever come of it.

The Vatican's antics on homosexuality could change all that. Michael Mendola, of Dignity New York, the local chapter, says gay priests have kept their mouths shut about bishops' sex lives because they "don't want to jeopardize their relationships with the dioceses." But he knows plenty of good, caring gay priests who, in his words, "are tired of all the nonsense going on in the church with homosexuality these days." They're tired of the way the Vatican has pinned blame for the clergy-abuse crisis on homosexuals. And the way far-right Catholic groups have tried to purge the church of gays.

Some may grow so tired of being persecuted that they could break the veil of silence. Once news of Hoatson's lawsuit gets out, Sipe predicts, "I think others may follow."

Whether that happens remains to be seen, of course. In the meantime, Hoatson's suit must make its way through the courts. Attorneys for Egan, Hubbard, and Myers did not return a phone call from the Voice seeking comment for this article. But letters they sent to U.S. District Court judge Paul Crotty, who is presiding over the case, suggest that they intend to try to dismiss it on legal grounds. As Daniel Alonso, the Manhattan attorney who represents Egan and the New York archdiocese, writes in his January 19 letter, "We propose to move to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted."

Hoatson's suit could well get quashed before it ever reaches an open courtroom. Yet in the court of public opinion, he may already be winning. Survivors, at least, are rallying around the priest, cheering him on in listservs and Internet discussion boards, lauding him as courageous beyond belief. "Father Bob is no dummy," says Regan. "He's a priest who has a lot to lose by coming forward with this suit."

And that's just what worries some of his allies who think he's crossed a line. They fear his allegations against the bishops may backfire, undermining his credibility and, worse, his victims' ministry. One fellow clergyman doesn't doubt that the bishops have targeted Hoatson for whistle-blowing. But he can't quite wrap his mind around why the priest decided to bring the bishops' sexuality into the mix. "Once you make those claims, there is no turning back," the cleric says.

To Hoatson, though, it comes down to the truth. All he wants is to save his church, he says, and sometimes, you have to destroy something in order to rebuild it.

"I answer to a higher authority, and this is what God has asked me to do," he says. "God is calling on me to dismantle the insanity and corruption."

About That White Report

In February 2004, Andrew Zalay came forward with the first of what would become a flurry of allegations that Bishop Howard Hubbard, head of the Albany diocese, had had homosexual encounters. Flanked by his Manhattan attorney, John Aretakis, Zalay told reporters at a press event that he'd discovered the 1978 suicide note of his brother, Tom, who had written about a sexual relationship with the bishop in the '70s.

That announcement set off a chain of events ending with the so-called White Report, the findings of a private investigation requested by Hubbard and commissioned by diocese's lay review board. Former U.S. prosecutor Mary Jo White, whose name carries great credibility, was paid $770 an hour by the diocese for her four-month inquiry, consisting of 300 interviews, 20,000 records, and exonerating lie-detector tests on Hubbard and eight other priests and former priests. The following is a road map of the 525-page report's contents:


• Hubbard had a sexual affair with Tom Zalay in the late '70s.

• Hubbard paid a teenage street hustler for sex in the late '70s.

• Hubbard had homosexual affairs with three Albany priests.

• Hubbard had patronized gay bars.

• Hubbard had engaged in gay sexual activity in Albany's Washington Park.


• White found "no credible evidence" to substantiate the charges that Hubbard had homosexual relations with Zalay, the street hustler, or the three priests.

• She found "no credible evidence" that Hubbard "ever led a homosexual lifestyle or engaged in homosexual relations at any time."

• She determined similar charges "could be expected to emerge" again, and warned they "should be met with considerable skepticism."

• White said Aretakis had a habit of forcing his clients to sign false statements.

Aretakis says he's "never told a client to lie or offer up a false statement, nor would I ever do that." He has denounced the report as not being neutral because White was hired by the lay board to investigate its boss—Hubbard. He and his clients refused to cooperate with her because, he argues, "She had a classic and a substantial conflict of interest."

White, for her part, did not return the Voice's phone call. In February 2004, when she announced the start of the investigation, she laid out the reasons she could remain independent—for instance, she is not Catholic, had never met Hubbard, and had never represented him or the Albany diocese before. Asked about the appearance of a conflict, she said, "There is not a chance at all that I would undertake this [in] other than a totally independent way, and the money is totally irrelevant to that independence."

Four months later, she received $2.2 million for the project. Hubbard got his name cleared.,lombardi,72095,6.html


Message: 5
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 08:11:25 -0500
From: "norgesen" <>
Subject: Agent From Asia - Bavarian Illuminati

Agent From Asia

Bavarian Illuminati

Of Nazis and Royal Houses and Diversion-Sinister








All five books zipped -



Occult Wars

[This message contained attachments]


Message: 6
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:47:15 -0500
From: "norgesen" <>
Subject: Energy Dissent and the 2006 G8 Summit in Russia

Reclaim the Debate! Resist the G8!

In July 2006, the G8 will hold its annual Summit in St.Petersburg, Russia.

Vladimir Putin says he's placing "energy security" at the top of the G8 agenda during Russia's presidency of the Gang of 8. As the G8's only net oil exporter and the major exporter of natural gas to Europe, fossil fuels give Russia its trans-national clout. Now Moscow claims it wants to help put the Kyoto Protocol into effect, making this G8 Summit another critical moment for climate justice action. But dissenters will demonstrate that there can be no "energy security" while climate crisis & ecosystem destruction gain speed, and civilization drives suicidally down a road paved by dependence on non-renewable, fast-depleting fossil fuels. The G8 countries consume 45% of world oil and produce 47% of global CO2 emissions. Their "energy security" is our energy grave! Stay tuned to for details...

For more information, read:
a.. January 2006: A New Cold War | Europe Shudders as Russia Turns Off the Natural Gas | Russia Steps to Head of G8 as 'Energy Savior' | Peak Oil Looms Large In USA
b.. December 2005: G8 And Nuclear Power | Travel to Russia Info | Russia Seeks to Wield Petro-Power as Political Tool | Energy question may spell end of the good life for the West | The Fusion of Peak Oil and Climate Change | Oilwatch International Call to Action | Explosion at Russian Nuclear Plant Near St. Petersburg Kills One Worker
c.. November 2005: Global Movement Against Climate Crisis Heats Up | Montreal Climate Summit | Climate Indymedia | Climate News
d.. October 2005 : A call out to protest against G8 summit of 2006 (Translations into many languages can be found here)

e.. September 2005 : Black Alliance against G8 formed | Reinventing Dissent: The Unabridged Story of Resistance against the G8 Summit in Scotland, 2005

f.. Some information about a possible Cycle Caravan to Russia.

g.. Hallmarks of People's Global Action | Global Resistance 2005 Call to Action (pdf) | Dissent: a network of resistance - Against the G8
h.. Wikipedia: G8 | Reclaim the Commons & G8 | Official Website of Russian G8 Presidency
G7 was created in 1975, for informal discussions on economic and political questions between heads of most powerful capitalist states. Russia joined in 1998 - it was accepted thanks to its nuclear arsenal and vast natural and energy resources (in 2004, Russia was only 16th largest economy of the world, but was the 2nd largest oil producer; e.g. China, the 2nd largest economy and oil consumer, was not invited to the club). G8 has no juridical status whatsoever, so it exists outside any democratic framework. But it still has become an important spectacle and platform, where top leaders of the world may look for consensus among each other, before imposing their policies on their populations.

| The G8 and the Nuclear Industry
G8 countries dominate the world's nuclear economy. The nuclear weapons and energy programmes of G8 countries make up the majority of the world's nuclear technology. The influence of the nuclear industry and the military implications of nuclear technology have made nuclear issues a part of the agenda at recent G8 summits.

Nuclear power has its origins in the development of nuclear weapons. The race to develop the nuclear bomb during World War II left the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada with a nuclear capacity. After the war, Russia and France developed their own nuclear weapons programs. Development of nuclear power programs in Germany, Italy and Japan shortly followed. Today, G8 countries are the most industrialized and "nuclearized" countries in the world.

The influence of the nuclear industry on G8 states is indisputable. Despite the fact that nuclear power has been excluded from the Kyoto protocol as a clean energy source, the nuclear industry and some G8 governments continue to extol the virtues of nuclear energy as a "solution" to climate change. Continued G8 support for nuclear energy syphons billions of dollars away from the development of cheaper, cleaner and more sustainable energy sources.

| The Fusion of Peak Oil & Climate Change
Peak Oil and Climate Change are two historic events for humans and life on earth. The first threatens modern industrial ways of living and the latter threatens the climatic systems that are an integral part of our world and the way we live and survive. A quick recap on both. Peak Oil is the point of historic maximum global oil flow, Climate Change is the alteration of established climate systems due to (in this case, anthropogenic) global warming. The onset of both will affect food & water supplies, mortality rates, conflict, migration and much more. The evidence that climate change is underway and almost past the point of no return is very strong and Peak Oil day by day gathers more credence as many studies point to an imminent peak.

| Russia Seeks to Wield Petro-Power as Political Tool


for further official dates look here:

[This message contained attachments]


Message: 7
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:31:48 -0500
From: "norgesen" <>
Subject: G8 Summit 2007: Already there is a broad resistance

G8 Summit 2007: Already there is a broad resistance

Heiligendamm has 270 inhabitants, lies on the coast of the Baltic Sea
and is part of the district of the small town of Bad Doberan. The G8
summit will happen in May or June 2007, not in July like other summits,
in order to avoid any revenue loss for the tourism industry in this
region. The event is expected to take place at the Kempinski hotel in
Heiligendamm; this is a luxury hotel which belongs to the Fundus-Group.
Fundus is currently buying up more and more of (and hence privatising)
the land around the hotel, thus becoming the subject of much talk,
because hitherto public thorough-fares are being closed off. The space
requirements of the summit delegations are expected to exceed those
available at the hotel, which means the actual summit itself may be
scheduled for Rostock (20 kilometres away with 200 000 inhabitants)

Already now, the mobilisation on the Left is impressive. Many already
began to prepare and network in 2005.

Anarchists and Left Radicals

The organisation in Germany already began in April 2005 at the
conference of the “Bundeskoordination Internationalismus“ (BUKO – the
federal coordination for internationalism). Since then, there have been
two Germany-wide meetings, each with over 200 participants (and numerous
e-lists). Some activists from Eastern European countries, France,
Switzerland and the UK also attended. The discussions at the meetings
revolved around organisational issues: Should the PGA Hallmarks provide
an organisational basis? How would decisions be made? What kind of
organisation would this be: will this be a network for the particular
elements of the radical left or will it be a platform for everyone? To
date, the radical left groups have worked within a notion of “Dissent!“
The content discussions focussed on terms such as “internationalism“ and
“globalisation“: Does globalistion offer any positive connotations (e.g.
“globalisation from below“), or should there be a continuation of the
term internationalism, including further development of its meaning?
What is the relationship of this mobilisation to liberation movements?
How can contemporary social organisations find a space for themselves
within the moblisation (for example in the area of migration)? Can we
articulate overarching concerns?
In multiple working groups these different points were explored:
political content, Infotour, external and internal communication,
action, strategy, St Petersbrug 2006, praxis, camp 2006, trauma,
anti-repression etc. One decision that was made is that there will be an
international mobilising camp this summer and a number of groups are
working on the idea of making migration the main theme of this gathering.
The next meeting will take place from 31st March to 2nd April 2006.
Contact:; further info: and

Out of these initiatives the working group Infotour has formed. The
purpose of this group is to organise publicity about the G8, so as to
involve as many groups and individuals as possible in the preparations
for the mobilisation from an early stage already. The Infogroup takes an
approach whereby it is the explicit aim to provide information about all
mobilising activities, particularly also to counteract any possible
splitting of the broader mobilisation. At present, there are around 30
info-events planned in Germany, Poland and Switzerland. Further working
groups include the cycling caravan working group, actions working group
and the working group for an international mobilisation. Infos on

Left Coalition

For the past six months, organisations and networks such as the
Interventionist Left, SOLID, ATTAC and others have been trying to create
a broad left coalition. It will be officially launched at the end of
March. Here, an excerpt from the call:

„We are thus calling for the creation of an inclusive and broad
coalition that takes on the organisation and coordination of all
collective tasks which cannot be achieved by one group alone. Here,
initiatives from across the Left spectrum should come together: Local
social forums, unemployed and social initiatives, antifascist groups,
refugee initiatives, autonomous groups and other movement-orientated
groups of the radical left, third world and church organisations, ATTAC
and no-global organisations, traditional communist and trotskist
organisations, trade unions and youth groups, The Linkspartei (Left
party)/PDS etc.

In order for all relevant groups to be able to participate in the
preparations in an equal way, we require a basic consensus that enables
us to work together despite our differences and is not articulated
unnecessarily narrowly.

As common basic principles, we propose:

* The explicit and unequivocal delegitimisation of the G8
* The reciprocal recognition of different forms of protest, action and
* A mode of collaboration based on solidarity and reliability which
enables binding decisions
* A clear and pro-active rejection of all right wing populist and
right-wing forces“

Contact for this preparatory group:

Further more...

Since January the NoLager Network (anti-deportation network) is calling
for mobilisations against the G8 2007 (migration will be one of the
cetral themes of the general anti-G8 mobilisation). In this way
refugees will connect their struggles with Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the
federal state where the G8 will be taking place: It is in
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern where the German government began the mass
deportations to Togo. Resistance to this has had initial success and the
deportations have had to be interrupted.
Annually in May, the BUKO conference takes place. This year, there will
be an explicit theme on the G8.
In 2005 there were 2 militant attacks in the context of the G8 2007 in
Heiligendamm. In Hamburg the car of a corporate executive burnt and in
Berlin this happened to a villa belonging to the foreign office.
ATTAC has created a federal working group and publicised the call:
“Global Social Rights“. NGOs are also mobilising. The local section of
the Linkspartei (Left Party) in Rostock where the G8 will predomonantly
take place, rejects the G8.

Many of these groups and organisations will have a presence at the
European Social Forum in Athens because of their ongoing efforts to
organise against the 2007 G8 summit.

Meanwhile in Rostock there are many Left orientated groups preparing for
the summit. There are local networking meetings and public events.
Already anti-G8 groups are calling against the 2006 edition of the
annual May 1st demonstration of the openly fascist NPD (German
nationalist party).



“If you go to a demonstration and then go home, that’s something. But the people in power can live with that. What they can’t live with is sustained pressure that keeps on building, groups that keep on doing things, people that learn from the last time and do it better next time…”

Shut Them Down! is an essential collection of reflections on the movement against the 2005 G8 summit in Gleneagles, Scotland. As well as action stories from the frontlines of resistance to the summit, there are detailed accounts of how various aspects of the mobilisation were organised, and analysis of the lessons to be learned. But Shut Them Down!’s relevance extends far beyond the Gleneagles experience. It addresses fundamental issues such as the nature of openness and ‘horizontality’, and the limitations of the ‘activist’ identity. Most important of all, Shut Them Down! poses the question: how can we take those worlds we glimpse in such moments and generalise them so that they make sense in the rest of our lives?

[This message contained attachments]


Message: 8
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:48:08 -0500
From: "norgesen" <>
Subject: Aubonne Bridge

Highlighting repression and fighting police impunity.
Trial Update: 1st Day

Poget, the Senior Officer, and Diess, the one who cut the rope, testified today. As did roughly half a dozen police men and finally two indymedia activist and one of the activists.

DOWNLOAD: Press Release in English

If you can help we need more donations to continue this campaign

Most of the officers testified that they were not able to hear their radios during the entire time. This was because either the motor of the police car was too loud, or things were too chaotic, and it was clear that there was no functioning method of communcation between the police on the scene prior to and during the cutting of the rope.

Diess stuck to his incredible story, he didn’t know we were hanging and just thought it was “instinctive” to cut the rope in front of him without first asking his senior officer. Neither did he think to ask the officer 1m away who was going to great effort to hold the rope up. He said that he wanted to open the road because the G8 convoy were coming and their order (the ones they bother to obey) were to get the convoy through on the main road.

Poget`s story for creating the situation that lead to the rope being cut was equally straightforward and instintual. He opened the road within 5 seconds of arriving when he broke the first security banner. From then on he attacks a cameraperson, and says several times that he doesn’t care if the activists hurt themselves or if they break their knecks. Poget, just after the rope was cut, went on to say “arrest this mafia shit” refering to people on the bridge – who were all suffering from a very traumatic incident. He was good to his word and did nothing to help the climbers who were either smashed in a river bed or hanging from a cut rope for at least 30 minutes in a traumatising situation.

The questions became far more aggressise and rigerious against the indymedia activist and the police spokes person from the activist side. What was regarded as “normal lawyer behaviour” included non-relevant questions of the activist witnesses clearly intended to intimidate and discredit. Their lawyers did not seem to accept the fact that the activist group had no leader, for example.

The trial today, Monday, continued until nearly 7pm, and will begin again tomorrow, Tuesday morning at 8:30am.

The Aubonne Photostory

Most of these pictures are taken from the video, which shows the atmosphere and the unresponsible behaviour of the present officers much better than this story. Nevertheless here are some shots showing details which are missing in the video.
Which shows again how important it is to have both on such an action: video and photo camera.
Click on the first picture to start the story at the beginning. Then a click on the picture leads to a bigger version of the picture, if available.


In case you did not know, it is not only the Genoa G8 2001 cops who are
on trial, but Swiss cops are in court this coming week too, and we are
looking for help to promote the issue in Russia.

The lawyer for the case of the Aubonne Bridge thinks we have a chance to
win. We think if the cops are found guilty, it can send a big message to
Russia, and to tell the Russian cops that if they beat people up in
2006, they can be found guilty too.

We have issued political statements for the radical left, and we also
have press releases for mainstream press, which are on the web-site. Can
anyone on this list help to bring the Aubonne infos to Russia, by
Indymedia or in any other way?


Statement by the Aubonne Support Group on the court proceedings against
the Police in the case of Aubonne

We don’t believe in your rule of law, and we don’t believe in your
system of justice.
We won’t act out our roles in your play and make repression all too easy
for you.
We won’t make it so easy for you to sweep this under the carpet...

Every court case is a play, in which ‘justice’ is meted out in the name
of a “people” that doesn’t even really exist. What is right, and what is
not, and how this is interpreted from case to case, is entirely up to
the powerful.
The point of the whole show is for them to retain their hegemony and the
status quo of social and ecological injustice.
Jails are the key institution in this system of state repression.
Without jails, that is, without the means to deter, to punish, and to
simply remove people from society, no state (and no capitalism) could
continue to exist.

To initiate a court case against the police contradicts the rejection of
state and its organs of repression. How can we say that justice can
never come from the state, and at the same time demand that the police’s
actions on the bridge have juridical consequences?

We do not expect justice, not from this court, nor any other.
We don’t believe in your laws, your sentences, your jails.

So why claim a right that means nothing to us?
This contradiction bothers us, of course. We are aware of the fact that
to initiate a case against the police is a reformist approach.
Aren’t we rather aiding them, if one out of the hundreds of cases of
state abuse that are ignored every year is brought to court – doesn’t
this merely maintain the appearance of official justice?

Here, we would like to explain in five short points why we nonetheless
have decided to take this approach, and believe it to be meaningful.

Being a spanner in the wheel
We do not expect anything from this case, although we are prepared to
use their own weapons against them. We want to create headaches for the
powerful. We want to make it harder for them, and their repression. The
best way to fight repression would of course be immediate
self-management in all spheres of life, but until that time, we believe
it to be useful to also, amongst others, use tools that have their roots
in their system – publicity, personal prestige, and careers. The
publicity we’re creating here is a problem for them.

Challenge images
The state always needs to maintain its democratic appearance in front of
the middle classes. The Aubonne-case in terms of politics and the public
eye is a ‘scandal’, nothing more and nothing less. It became a scandal
as the result of active publicity- and media-work, without which it
would have been ignored, like so many others. A scandal is always an
‘exception’ – but if the number of scandals increases, then images of
law and order (for example that of the police as ‘serving and
protecting’ the public) can become shaky. It then becomes harder and
harder to maintain belief in the rule of law.

Limiting their “carte blanche”
We also think that it’s a good thing when cops and the police have to
consider the potential consequences of their actions. They don’t like it
when their brutality is made public. However, this is usually only
possible in connection with trying to take them to court (even if it is
actually very unusual that cases are actually taken up by the state
prosecution service, and they normally get away with their lies). When
the ‘forces of order’ realise that activists can sometimes manage to put
them in the dock, when their brutality can become the talk of the town,
then this challenges their feeling of being able to act with total
impunity, and thus limits their “carte blanche” to behave however they want.

Against forgetting
We think that it’s important not to leave the field of media reporting
entirely to the police. We need to make the real course of events known
to people, and make sure they aren’t forgotten. Due to the censorship of
the media, this is usually impossible outside of political movements. In
this case, however, it is possible, and we want to use this opportunity.

Personal stuff…
Finally, there are of course also very personal reasons to do this,
which we think are completely legitimate. Many activists have been
through a lot as a result of the Aubonne-story, and it’s simply a matter
of personal satisfaction to at least see two of the cops sweating under
Also, it’s possible that the Swiss state will have to pay damages –
which is not very likely, since it has never happened so far – but if it
were to happen, it would be great to see a couple of quid in return for
never being able to climb or run again.

So these are our reasons. Of course it feels a bit schizophrenic,
sitting next to the public prosecutor, claiming our ‘rights’. But we
still think it’s important, and right, to at least temporarily use this
avenue in this case, even if we don’t believe in their system.

Whether it makes sense, generally, to report and attempt to prosecute
the police – there may not be a universal answer to this question. The
decision always depends on the particular case, and on the people
involved. But it’s clear that this can never be the only means we use:
solidarity and pressure from the street are our main fields of action.

If you’re interested in the legal aspects of the Aubonne-case, have a
look at the online summary; we think these details are kind of beside
the point, they mostly divert attention from the real problem.

Resistance always leads to repression.
Our weapon is solidarity, and our drive is our desire for freedom

Aubonne Support Group

[This message contained attachments]


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:


No comments: