Tuesday, May 09, 2006

[911TruthAction] Digest Number 1277

There are 12 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Re: HEY! Yesterday was my BIRTHDAY!
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
2. [Bush_Be_Gone] Fw: Top Journalists Prevented From Reporting Major Ne
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
3. Re: Fw: The most important 9-11 evidence is from the Pentagon attack
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
4. Re: Fw: [frameup] Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon.
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
5. rove
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
6. All Hail Charlie Sheen
From: "amy dalzell" amydalzell@yahoo.com
7. All Hail Charlie Sheen
From: "amy dalzell" amydalzell@yahoo.com
8. A Day in the Life: 5/8/6
From: "President, USA Exile Govt." prez@usa-exile.org
9. Re: [911_free_discussion] no spiritual angle for me -- since invest
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
10. Pan Am 103 & 9/11 Connection
From: "reggie501" reggie501@optonline.net
11. Articles1: Judy Andreas: Zionism is Nobody's Friend -=- Israel Uber
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
12. Articles2: Kholer interviews Faber - "The US dollar is a doomed curr
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net


Message 1
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
Date: Sun May 7, 2006 10:42pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: HEY! Yesterday was my BIRTHDAY!

Well happy Triune Birthday, son of Erin :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Kevin Hammond
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 9:37 AM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] HEY! Yesterday was my BIRTHDAY!

46 going on 16 bordering on 99.LOL

Scott Peden <scotpeden@cruzio.com> wrote:
It must be old age creeping in. So, how young are ya?

-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Caomhain {Kevin} Lee
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 9:19 PM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [911TruthAction] HEY! Yesterday was my BIRTHDAY!

I meant to announce this yesterday or the day before, but got mentally
waylaid. LOL.

Saoirse go deo! www.fightthenwo.org

Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates
starting at 1¢/min.


United state flag
United state citizenship
United state government grant
Trademark united state
United state coin
United state army



* Visit your group " 911TruthAction
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction> " on the web.

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

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .



Message 2
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
Date: Sun May 7, 2006 11:05pm(PDT)
Subject: [Bush_Be_Gone] Fw: Top Journalists Prevented From Reporting Major Ne

On Behalf Of Donna.NeverSurrender

----- Original Message -----
From: WantToKnow.info List <mailto:noreply2@wanttoknow.info>
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 12:01 PM
Subject: Top Journalists Prevented From Reporting Major News Stories

To subscribe to or unsubscribe from this list (one email every few days) or
to reply to this message, see end of email
This message is available online at

"The story was developing a momentum of its own, despite a virtual news
blackout from the major media. Ultimately, public pressure forced the
national newspapers into the fray. The Washington Post, the NY Times, and
the LA Times published stories, but spent little time exploring the CIA’s
activities. Instead, my reporting became the focus. It was remarkable [my
editor] Ceppos wrote, that the four Post reporters assigned to debunk the
series “could not find a single significant factual error.” A few months
later, the Mercury News [due to intense CIA pressure] backed away from the
story, publishing a long column by Ceppos apologizing for “shortcomings.”
The NY Times hailed Ceppos for “setting a brave new standard,” and splashed
his apology on their front page." ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/yjyadaujavawsakajem/click.php> )

-- Pulitzer Prize winner Gary Webb, excerpted from landmark book Into
The Buzzsaw
Dear friends,
We all know that the U.S. and other developed countries have a relatively
free press. Yet we also know that corporate ownership of the press at times
influences what is published. After reading the revealing summary below of
Emmy Award winning reporter Kristina Borjesson's book Into the Buzzsaw
<http://t.ymlp.com/ybsavaujatawsaiajem/click.php> , you may come to agree
with me that the media is much more controlled than most people think.
Please join in calling for a truly free press by spreading this information
to your friends and colleagues and insisting that the media cover the most
crucial stories mentioned here. Thanks for caring, and you have a great day!
With best wishes,
Fred Burks for the WantToKnow.info Team
Former language interpreter
<http://t.ymlp.com/ybearaujarawsadajem/click.php> for Presidents Bush and


Below are concise excerpts from the revealing accounts of 20 award-winning
journalists in the highly acclaimed book Into the Buzzsaw
<http://t.ymlp.com/ybsavaujatawsaiajem/click.php> . These courageous writers
were prevented by corporate media ownership from reporting major news
stories. Some were even fired or laid off. They have won numerous awards,
including several Emmys and a Pulitzer.

Jane Akre <http://t.ymlp.com/ybmaoaujadawsatajem/click.php> —Fox News. After
our struggle to air an honest report on hormones in milk, Fox fired the
general manager of our station. The new GM said that if we didn’t agree to
changes that the lawyers were insisting upon, we’d be fired for
insubordination in 48 hours. We pleaded with him to look at the facts we’d
uncovered. His reply: “We paid $3 billion dollars for these stations. We’ll
tell you what the news is. The news is what we say it is!” After we refused,
Fox’s GM presented us an agreement that would give us a full year of salary,
and benefits worth close to $200,000, but with strings attached: no mention
of how Fox covered up the story and no opportunity to ever expose the facts.
After declining, we were fired. ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/ybjacaujakawsatajem/click.php> )
Dan Rather
arch%2502results-%20> —CBS, Multiple Emmy Awards. What's going on is a
belief that you can manipulate communicable trust between the leadership and
the led. The way you do that is you don't let the press in anywhere. Access
to war is extremely limited. The fiercer the combat, the more the access is
limited, including access to information. This is a direct contradiction of
the stated policy of maximum access to information consistent with national
security...There was a time in South Africa when people would put flaming
tires around people's necks if they dissented. In some ways the fear now in
the U.S. is that you will have a flaming tire of lack of patriotism put
around your neck. That fear keeps journalists from asking the tough
questions. I am humbled to say, I do not except myself from this criticism.
( click for more <http://t.ymlp.com/ybhafaujarawsatajem/click.php> )
Monika Jensen-Stevenson
<http://t.ymlp.com/ybwakaujarawsazajem/click.php> —Emmy-winning producer for
60 minutes. Robert R. Garwood—14 years a prisoner of the Vietnamese—was
found guilty in the longest court-martial in US history. At the end of the
court-martial, there seemed no question that Garwood was a monstrous
traitor. Several years later in 1985, Garwood was speaking publicly about
something that had never made the news during his court-martial. He knew of
other American prisoners in Vietnam long after the war was over. He was
supported by Vietnam veterans whose war records were impeccable….My sources
included outstanding experts like former head of the Defense Intelligence
Agency General Tighe and returned POWs like Captain McDaniel, who held the
Navy’s top award for bravery. With such advocates, it was hard not to
consider the possibility that prisoners (some 3,500) had in fact been kept
by the Vietnamese as hostages to make sure the US would pay the more than $3
billion in war reparations. After the war, American POWs had become
worthless pawns. The US had not paid the promised monies and had no
intention of paying in the future. ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/ybqaxaujapawsaaajem/click.php> )
Kristina Borjesson <http://t.ymlp.com/ybsavaujatawsaiajem/click.php> —CBS,
Emmy award winner. Pierre Salinger announced to the world on Nov. 8, 1996,
that he’d received documents proving that a US Navy missile had accidentally
downed TWA flight 800. That same day, FBI’s Jim Kallstrom called a press
conference. A man raised his hand and asked why the Navy was involved in the
recovery and investigation while a possible suspect. “Remove him!” Kallstrom
yelled. Two men leapt over to the questioner and grabbed him by the arms.
There was a momentary chill in the air after the guy had been dragged out of
the room. Kallstrom and entourage acted as if nothing had happened.
[Kallstrom was later hired by CBS.] ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/ybyataujanawsapajem/click.php> )

Greg Palast <http://t.ymlp.com/yhsaiaujalawsadajem/click.php> —BBC. In the
months leading up to the November 2000 balloting, Gov. Jeb Bush ordered
elections supervisors to purge 58,000 voters on the grounds they were felons
not entitled to vote. As it turns out, only a handful of these voters were
felons. This extraordinary news ran on page one of the country’s leading
paper. Unfortunately, it was the wrong country: Britain. In the USA, it was
not covered. The office of the governor also illegally ordered the removal
of felons from voter rolls—real felons—but with the right to vote under law.
As a result, 50,000 of these voters could not vote. The fact that 90% of
these were Democrats should have made it news as this alone more than
accounted for Bush’s victory. ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/yhuataujavawsanajem/click.php> )
Michael Levine <http://t.ymlp.com/yheaaaujanawsadajem/click.php> —25-year
veteran of DEA, writer for New York Times, Los Angeles Times, USA Today. The
Chang Mai “factory” that the CIA prevented me from destroying was the source
of massive amounts of heroin being smuggled into the US in the bodies and
body bags of GIs killed in Vietnam. Case after case was killed by CIA and
State Department intervention and there wasn’t a thing we could do about
it….In 1980, CIA-recruited mercenaries and drug traffickers unseated Bolivia
’s democratically elected president. Immediately after the coup, cocaine
production increased massively. Bolivia became the source of virtually 100%
of the cocaine entering the US. This was the beginning of the crack
“plague.”…The CIA along with State and Justice Departments had to protect
their drug-dealing assets by destroying a DEA investigation. How do I know?
I was the inside source. I sat down at my desk in the American embassy and
wrote evidence of my charges. I addressed it to Newsweek. Three weeks later
DEA’s internal security called to notify me that I was under
investigation….The highlight of the 60 Minutes piece is when the
administrator of the DEA, Federal Judge Robert Bonner, tells Mike Wallace,
“There is no other way to put it, Mike, what the CIA did is drug smuggling.
It’s illegal.” ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/yhmanaujacawsadajem/click.php> )
Gary Webb <http://t.ymlp.com/yhjapaujaxawsatajem/click.php> —San Jose
Mercury News, Pulitzer Prize winner. In 1996, I wrote a series of stories
that began this way: For the better part of a decade, a Bay Area drug ring
sold tons of cocaine to the Crips and Bloods gangs of LA and funneled
millions in drug profits to a guerilla army run by the CIA. The cocaine that
flooded in helped spark a crack explosion in urban America….The story was
developing a momentum all of its own, despite a virtual news blackout from
the major media. Ultimately, it was public pressure that forced the national
newspapers into the fray. The Washington Post, the New York Times, and the
Los Angeles Times published stories, but spent little time exploring the CIA
’s activities. Instead, my reporting and I became the focus of their
scrutiny. It was remarkable [Mercury News editor] Ceppos wrote, that the
four Washington Post reporters assigned to debunk the series “could not find
a single significant factual error.” A few months later, the Mercury News
[due to intense CIA pressure] backed away from the story, publishing a long
column by Ceppos apologizing for “shortcomings.” The New York Times hailed
Ceppos for “setting a brave new standard,” and splashed his apology on their
front page, the first time the series had ever been mentioned there. I quit
the Mercury News not long after that….Do we have a free press today? Sure.
It’s free to report all the sex scandals, all the stock market news, and
every new health fad that comes down the pike. But when it comes to the real
down and dirty stuff—such stories are not even open for discussion. ( click
for more <http://t.ymlp.com/yjyadaujavawsakajem/click.php> )
John Kelly <http://t.ymlp.com/yhbazaujafawsadajem/click.php> —Author, ABC
producer. ABC hired me to help produce a story about an investment firm that
was heavily involved with the CIA. Part of the ABC report charged that the
CIA had plotted to assassinate an American, Ron Rewald, the president of the
investment firm. Scott Barnes said on camera that the CIA had asked him to
kill Rewald. After the show aired, CIA officials met with ABC executive
David Burke, who was sufficiently impressed “by the vigor with which they
made their case” to order an on-air “clarification.” But that was not
enough. CIA Director Casey called ABC Chairman Goldenson. Thus, despite all
the documented evidence presented in the program, despite ABC standing by
the program in a second broadcast, Peter Jennings reported that ABC could no
longer substantiate the charges. That same day, the CIA filed a formal
complaint with the FCC charging that ABC had “deliberately distorted” the
news. In the complaint, Casey asked that ABC be stripped of its TV and radio
licenses….During this time, Capital Cities Communications was maneuvering to
buy ABC. CIA Director Casey was one of the founders of Cap Cities. Cap
Cities bought ABC. Within months, the entire investigative unit was
dispersed. ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/yhhapaujacawsarajem/click.php> )
Robert McChesney <http://t.ymlp.com/yhwalaujaaawsapajem/click.php> —500
radio & TV appearances. There has been a striking consolidation of the media
from hundreds of firms to an industry dominated by less than ten enormous
transnational conglomerates. The largest ten media firms own all US TV
networks, most TV stations, all major film studios, all major music
companies, nearly all cable TV channels, much of the book and magazine
publishing industry, and much, much more. Expensive investigative
journalism—especially that which goes after national security or powerful
corporate interests—is discouraged. Largely irrelevant human
interest/tragedy stories get extensive coverage….A few weeks after the war
began in Afghanistan, CNN president Isaacson authorized CNN to provide two
different versions of the war: a more critical one for the global audience
and a sugarcoated one for Americans….It is nearly impossible to conceive of
a better world without some changes in the media status quo. We have no time
to waste. ( click for more
<http://t.ymlp.com/yhqadaujavawsatajem/click.php> )


For a powerful 10-page summary of this material:
For other reliable resources on the media cover-up: Media Information Center

Final Note: Remember that with your help
<http://t.ymlp.com/ywuaiaujaxawsakajem/click.php> , we can and will build a
brighter future <http://t.ymlp.com/yweapaujarawsakajem/click.php> for us
all. And for some deeply inspiring stories to provide balance to all of
this: http://www.WantToKnow.info/coverupnews#inspiration
Your donations, however large or small, help greatly to support this
important work.
To make a donation by credit card, check, or money order:
Explore these empowering websites coordinated by the nonprofit PEERS network
<http://t.ymlp.com/ywbalaujanawsagajem/click.php> :
<http://t.ymlp.com/ywhanaujafawsavajem/click.php> - Every person in the
world has a heart
http://t.ymlp.com/ywwakaujavawsaaajem/click.php> - Reliable, verifiable
information on major cover-ups
<http://t.ymlp.com/ywqalaujanawsaoajem/click.php> - Building a Global
Community for All
http://t.ymlp.com/ywyafaujakawsazajem/click.php> - Strengthening the Web of
Love that interconnects us all
Educational websites promoting transformation through information and
To reply to this message, visit http://www.WantToKnow.info/contactus.php
To subscribe to or unsubscribe from the WantToKnow.info list (one email
every few days):


Change email address / Leave mailing list <http://ymlp.com/u.php?WTK>
Hosting by YourMailingListProvider <http://www.ymlp.com>
Trademark united state
United state army
United state grant
United state citizenship
United state military
United state patent



* Visit your group " Bush_Be_Gone
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bush_Be_Gone> " on the web.

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

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


Message 3
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
Date: Sun May 7, 2006 11:21pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Fw: The most important 9-11 evidence is from the Pentagon attack

That wing of the Pentagon had just been completely retrofitted, that was why
it was so devoid of people, we were told, it was all over the papers, should
be easy to look up on the internet, retrofitted Pentagon.

Here are a couple of links, I didn’t read everything but the first one
claims to have details, I do remember being told about the steel mesh to cut
down damage on TV and reading about it later in the papers and on the
internet. Odd things always seem to lodge themselves somewhere in my mind.



Ahh, here we go.

If that was the plane as we are told (but not allowed to see the footage
from 5-7 video cameras) then I can just imagine it making it all the way
through the pentagon and out the other side if that reinforcement hadn’t
been in place, yes?

Using planes as penetrating bombs must be a tactic only Osama could have
figured out! (I also have bridges and desert for sale that will make you a
multi Billionaire, just beware of the DU)

-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Dick Eastman
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 10:26 AM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [911TruthAction] Fw: The most important 9-11 evidence is from
the Pentagon attack Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon

I've looked closely at a lot of pictures of the damaged wall, don't recall
any steel mesh. Could it have been carried into the building by the pushing
fuselage? Certainly the windows didn't stop the killer jet.
----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Peden <mailto:scotpeden@cruzio.com>
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com <mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 9:31 PM
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] Fw: The most important 9-11 evidence is from
the Pentagon attack Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon

The wall had just been retrofitted with steel mesh to stop planes/missles
from penetrating the outer soft sandstone walls. Yet it was just like Osama
said about the WTC, it did a lot more damage than anyone could have thought.

-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com <mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Dick Eastman
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 5:11 PM
To: Peter Wakefield Sault
Subject: [911TruthAction] Fw: The most important 9-11 evidence is from the
Pentagon attack Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon


I respect your opinion, however these was not a total of 9 feet of concret
penetrated by the killer jet. There were no concrete walls within the
building between the entrance hole in ring-E and the exit hole (if that is
what it is) in ring-C. Only one or two walls were penetrated. My own view,
if you had not heard, is that a missile explosion softened up the entry.
Also an F-16 was tested with full remote-control combat capability -- it was
retired to the General Dynamic museum in March of 2001 -- possibly with the
remote control equipment removed. Again, the missile that softened the
outer wall need not have been high velocity, just enough to weaken the
structure in the vacinity of the killer jet's entry. Remember too, that the
Pentagon wall is not a block of solid concret as in the famous test case
with the F-4 Phantom -- the killer jet hit a wall with windows, a wall
softened by the explosion we see in the security cam video (with at least
one witness reporting the same white flash)

Yes, I agree with the Pentagon employee's statement about the reason the
hole was dynamited. The original hole was made before the words "punch out"
were written on the wall (as shown in pictures) -- and so the hole itself
was blasted because it was too perfect, too round, too unlike the hole a
fuselage of a 757 would make. The man's statement is very valuable to any
investigation -- I hope you have his name.


----- Original Message -----

From: Peter Wakefield Sault <mailto:sault@cyberware.co.uk>
To: Dick Eastman <mailto:olfriend@nwinfo.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: The most important 9-11 evidence is from the Pentagon attack
Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon

Hi Dick

Have you seen the footage of a jet fighter on a rocket-sled being slammed
into a 10 foot thick block of concrete? If you have you'll know that the jet
fighter loses, completely disintegrating, and the block of concrete remains
intact. The only object that could blast its way through the total of 9 foot
of steel reinforced military grade concrete to leave an almost perfectly
circular hole through the inner C ring is a DU tipped Mach X cruise missile.
Fighter jets are made the same way as passenger airliners. The nose cone is
kevlar and houses radars, computers and control systems. It is SOFT and
would simply crumple if you threw it at something hard. It is NOT designed
CONCRETE. They are designed only to fly through the air. Planes can launch
missiles but I already told you, not that close to a target and especially
not from a remotely piloted plane.

I think you give far too much importance to the 5 frames of video. The very
fact the they were released should tell you something. They are spurious and
should be treated as such. Once you restrict yourself to examining the
actual damage to the Pentagon it will become a lot clearer. Those 5 frames
are a poisoned well.

Finally, I had an unnamed Pentagon employee write to me because he wanted
the information released but could not do that himself because of his job
(presumably he doesn't want to lose it). Anyway, he said the FBI on the
scene decided to blow that section of wall down with dynamite after the
object struck because the impact damage did not look sufficiently like a

I think possible that any and all airplane parts in that section of the
Pentagon were either display models or were being examined by Naval
Intelligence for some reason or other.

All the best

----- Original Message -----
From: Dick Eastman <mailto:olfriend@nwinfo.net>

To: 911_free_discussion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 12:21 AM
Subject: The most important 9-11 evidence is from the Pentagon attack Re: A
Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon

Ron Winn and Jean-Pierre Desmoulins discussing
the Pentagon attack evidence.

----- Original Message -----
From: < jean-pierre.desmoulins@wanadoo.fr
<mailto:jean-pierre.desmoulins@wanadoo.fr> >
To: < frameup@yahoogroups.com <mailto:frameup@yahoogroups.com> >
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: [frameup] Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon

> Impossible that people inside, on this point which was flooded by debris,
> could do this hole. >From outside, also impossible : see pictures showing
> the thermal insulation or a pipe deflected outside, and also the debris in
> the AE drive...

You insist the the explosive was in the nose of the killer jet. I say
the hole could have been made by planted charges or some
"urban-warfare" weapon. It is absurd to think that explosives would
be added to blow the second wall encountered and not the first.
The hole had an immediate purpose -- probably related to arranging
for the collapse of the front of the building.

Jean-Pierre, no trace of any passenger seat has been noted by witnesses or
photographed. Also we have the proof that 757 debris was deliberately
planted on the lawn -- which would not be done unless there had been no 757
and they wanted to make it look as though there had been one.

> This "punch out" = "punched to let people out" translation is a sad hoax.

Who said the hole was made to "let people out" -- this too is absurd.
In my opinion, if the hole was not made by the killer jet itself, than it
was made in order to introduce the explosive material that caused
the collapse.

> At 22:13 06/05/2006 +0100, you wrote:
> >Dick, I thought the photo evidence showed a clear pathway throught the
> >various rings at an angle of 50 degrees. If the C-ring hole was a escape
> >route for those elite naval intel guys then what was out there around the
> >C-ring looked like a human exit hole more than a radome exit hole.
> >
> >There is someone who could explain the reason for the marking "punch out"
> >but has never done so. I wish he would. In fact, it is about time he did.

Again, after entering the building the only substantial barriers between the
killer jet and the C-wall in question were the pillars at the ground floor
The 9-11 plan did not allow for the naval intelligence personnel to
escape --
the idea was to kill them because they were not controlled by the Zionist

The killer jet entered at an oblique angle. It's fuselage and engine
until stopped by either the pillars or by the C-ring wall. The C-ring wall
may or may not have been made by a solitary engine as reported. If the
hole was made after the killer jet struck, then the purpose was to arrange
the collapse of the structure to hide the too-small not-fitting-a-Boeing
entry hole.
The hole was made before the words "punch out" were written -- as photos
make obvious. Possibly the instructions are to enlarge the hole -- to punch
the boarder of the hole to conceal its too-perfect roundness etc.

What convinced me that 9-11 was a false-flag inside-job.
1 <http://bedoper.com/eastman> , 2
<http://www.apfn.org/apfn/77_deastman1.htm> , 3
<http://www.apfn.org/apfn/77_deastman2.htm> , 4
<http://www.apfn.org/apfn/77_deastman3.htm> , 5
<http://www.bedoper.com/eastman/small_plane/index.html> , 6

United state citizenship
United state flag
United state army
United state grant
United state coin
United state patent



* Visit your group " 911TruthAction
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction> " on the web.

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

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .



Message 4
From: "Scott Peden" scotpeden@cruzio.com
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 0:28am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Fw: [frameup] Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon.

Makes sense with all the other data, starting with Cheney being in the NORAD
control tower early enough to tell the Colonel of the NORAD base responsible
for protecting Wash DC and NYC area to stand down and order the controller
in the same room three times to stand down, send no orders to intercept.

-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Kevin Hammond
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 10:24 PM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [911TruthAction] Fw: [frameup] Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the

You most certainly have MY attention!

Dick Eastman <olfriend@nwinfo.net> wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: <jean-pierre.desmoulins@wanadoo.fr>
To: <frameup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: [frameup] Re: A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon.

> Questions should be asked about the people targeted inside the pentagon.
> I have read that three kind of people were targeted :
> 1 - Account specialists who worked on some financial scandals involving
> companies like Halliburton
> 2 - Naval intelligence people
> 3 - People who gathered to a meeting in the C ring "to analyse the ongoing
> attack at the wtc"...
> What a nice coincidence... le me make an hypothesis : the "control room"
> the war drills of this 9/11 morning was precisely on the path of this
> attacking plane and none of the people pulling the strings of these
> exercises survived.
> At 22:28 06/05/2006 +0100, you wrote:
> >Dick, It is easy to drift within the 9/11 community. I've always been
> >independent. Being a Brit I can't be anything else. I go where the action
> >is. At the moment you have my undivided attention.
> >
> >What we have here is the question. Why were the elite Naval intel guys
> >attacked. It was a targeted attack whoever carried it out. Only you and I
> >have ever looked at this aspect.
> Yahoo! Groups Links

Saoirse go deo! www.fightthenwo.org

Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries
t=39666/*http://messenger.yahoo.com/> for just 2¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger
with Voice.


* Visit your group " 911TruthAction
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction> " on the web.

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

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .



Message 5
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 5:54am(PDT)
Subject: rove

Rove's Time in Limbo Near End in CIA Leak Case

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 8, 2006; Page A01

Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald is wrapping up his investigation into White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove's role in the CIA leak case by weighing this central question:

Did Rove, who was deeply involved in defending President Bush's use of prewar intelligence about Iraq, lie about a key conversation with a reporter that was aimed at rebutting a tough White House critic?

Buy This Photo

Karl Rove, with lawyer Robert Luskin, right, and spokesman Mark Corallo in April, said he had forgotten his conversation with reporter Matthew Cooper. (By Katherine Frey -- The Washington Post)
Understanding the Plame Affair
a.. Key Players in the CIA Leak Case Analysis and short biographies of the main individuals involved in the investigation of the leak of Valerie Plame's identity to the press.
b.. Explaining the Charges
c.. Q&A: The Leak Case Facts
d.. Timeline: Libby's Role
e.. Full Text of Indictment: US v. Libby
f.. Special Counsel's Press Release Detailing Libby Indictment
g.. Transcript: Fitzgerald's 10/28 Press Conf.
h.. Pres. Bush's Remarks

Career Highlights of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby
I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, is at the center of an investigation into the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity.
From FindLaw
a.. Plame Investigation Leaks Links to court rulings, briefs, and government documents pertaining to the leak investigation (and the First Amendment battle).
b.. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982
Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.

a.. Fired Up! Missouri | for responsible government, strong communities, and secure families.
b.. Worldwide Sawdust :: Main Page
c.. Worldwide Sawdust :: Main Page

Full List of Blogs (22 links) »

Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web

Save & Share
a.. Tag This Article

Saving options
1. Sav
e to description:
Headline (required)

2. Save to notes (255 character max):

3. Tag This Article

Fitzgerald, according to sources close to the case, is reviewing testimony from Rove's five appearances before the grand jury. Bush's top political strategist has argued that he never intentionally misled the grand jury about his role in leaking information about undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame to Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper in July 2003. Rove testified that he simply forgot about the conversation when he failed to disclose it to Fitzgerald in his earlier testimony.

Fitzgerald is weighing Rove's foggy-memory defense against evidence he has acquired over nearly 2 1/2 years that shows Rove was very involved in White House efforts to beat back allegations that Bush twisted U.S. intelligence to justify the Iraq war, according to sources involved in the case.

That evidence includes details of a one-week period in July 2003 when Rove talked to two reporters about Plame and her CIA role, then reported the conversations back to high-level White House aides, according to sources in the case and information released by Fitzgerald as part of the ongoing leak investigation.

Additionally, one former government official said he testified that Rove talked with White House colleagues about the political importance of defending the prewar intelligence and countering Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. It was Wilson who accused Bush of twisting intelligence about Iraq's efforts to obtain nuclear material from Africa. The official refused to be named out of fear of angering Fitzgerald and the White House.

Robert Luskin, Rove's lawyer, responded that "just because Rove was involved in the defense of the White House Iraq policy, it does not follow that he was necessarily involved in some effort to discredit Wilson personally. Nor does it prove that there even was an effort to disclose Plame's identity in order to punish Wilson."

Rove expects to learn as soon as this month if he will be indicted -- or publicly cleared of wrongdoing -- for making false statements in the CIA leak case, according to sources close to the presidential adviser.

An indictment would be devastating to a White House already battered by low poll numbers, a staff shake-up and a stalled agenda. If Rove is cleared, however, it would allow Bush's longtime top aide to resume his central role as White House strategic guru without a legal threat hanging over him.

Fitzgerald began his investigation 2 1/2 years ago, looking into whether any administration officials knowingly disclosed Plame's CIA role as part of an effort to discredit Wilson's allegation. The former diplomat had been sent on a CIA mission to investigate whether Iraq had sought nuclear weapons material from Niger.

Wilson reported back that the charge could not be proved, but Bush nevertheless asserted in his 2003 State of the Union address that intelligence existed that Iraq had tried to buy uranium in Africa. After Wilson went public with his allegation a few months later, an embarrassed White House was forced to concede that the Africa claim was not based on solid enough evidence.

Fitzgerald has not charged anyone for the crime he initially set out to prove. But last October, he indicted I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who was then Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, for perjury, making false statements and obstruction of justice during the investigation. It is unclear if anyone other than Rove remains under investigation.

CONTINUED 1 22 NextNext >

Print This Article

Message 6
From: "amy dalzell" amydalzell@yahoo.com
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 6:41am(PDT)
Subject: All Hail Charlie Sheen

All Hail to Charlie Sheen


Amy Dalzell

Having taught Beowulf to reluctant high school seniors for several years, I am continually impressed by the cultural complexity (or stratigraphy) of the document itself. Having begun as a matter of Anglo Saxon verbal lore, the legend of Beowulf, and the heroic defeat of the monster Grendel, has come down to us as part of recorded Christian text, put to paper by monks absorbed in the process of transcribing pagan orality into monotheistic theological script. In the process, of course, fate becomes God, the enemy is demonized as that which is the debris from the Eden/snake fiasco, and the pagan warrior (by virtue of ripping apart another living creature with his bare hands) becomes a candidate for canonization.

But what is doubly curious about this infamous tale is the role of Grendel’s mother. Up until the point where she arrives in the script, we basically have something that wouldn’t seem too inappropriate appearing in a comic book “good vs. evil” patriarchal fantasy. But what do we do with a devil whose death is then avenged by the devil’s mother? The hag approaches Herot bent on murderous revenge against Beowulf, King Hrothgar and the besieged Danes; she does indeed invade Herot and kills Hrothgar’s dearest friend, carrying his body with her back to her lake-becovered lair.

You see, the thing about the Angles and the Saxons is that they were Germanic, patriarchal tribes. They go through all the trouble of invading the British Isles (or Britannia in Latin terminology), and what do they get for it (besides the lousy T-shirt)? – having to deal with a bunch of matriarchal, goddess-worshipping, magic-practicing savages who all belong, from the A/S perspective, at the bottom of a lake. An entire army of Beowulfs finds itself, having defeated the horde of Grendels, having to then subdue a bunch of uppity women who are calling on their war goddesses and casting spells on the invaders right and left. It was unconscionable. They needed a hero from a foreign land to rescue them.

And in some respects so do we. Actor Charlie Sheen has recently been demonized in the national gossip that is our press for questioning the official story of what really happened on 9/11. The messenger standeth accused of mental instability and theoretical unorthodoxy according, to the surfeiting gossipers (Inside Edition 4/24/06), citing his recent split from his wife as evidence including her accusations of prostitution, drug abuse, gambling, violence and pornography. (Charlie, say it ain’t so!)

Little inconvenient details existing in the official version of events, a story that has been recently and, one might say, fortuitously, shored up by the release of “Flight 93” – a story within a story – like the disconnect between the size of the hole in the Pentagon and the size of a Boeing 757, eyewitness commentary that the planes that hit the towers were not commercial airlines, that explosions occurred within the towers after they were struck, that buildings like #7 in the trade tower complex that were not struck by anything but conveniently and neatly fell down anyway into manageable imploded piles– unreported heretical minutia like that, that threaten the sanctity of Herot every bit as much as the hag, are not to be spoken about within the fortress that is now America.

Since when is open debate the subject for character assassination in America?

Charlie Sheen may be an abomination as a husband, and all the more power to the surfeiting gossipers if they make their pound of flesh by promoting that circumstance in the just cause of pursuing ratings and profits, but why does it need to be linked in the public mind with questioning the official story of 9/11? What’s the agenda here?

Our flight brings other monsters swimming to see us…

Those of us who have long since given up on looking to the press for anything but a limited excuse for entertainment are always on the lookout for that hero from the foreign land of the media of the masses willing to challenge the fire-breathing propaganda to which we are daily subjected, someone with a position of influence and power in Herot, someone currently participating in a reasonably funny sit-com, to (using his bare hands) rip apart the narrow confines of debate as defined by corporate news and ask the forbidden (and unfortunately rhetorical) question.

Who is the devil’s mother?

All hail the conquering hero. All hail Charlie Sheen!

And happy mother’s day, now that I think of it.

Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

Message 7
From: "amy dalzell" amydalzell@yahoo.com
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 6:46am(PDT)
Subject: All Hail Charlie Sheen

All Hail to Charlie Sheen


Amy Dalzell

Having taught Beowulf to reluctant high school seniors for several years, I am continually impressed by the cultural complexity (or stratigraphy) of the document itself. Having begun as a matter of Anglo Saxon verbal lore, the legend of Beowulf, and the heroic defeat of the monster Grendel, has come down to us as part of recorded Christian text, put to paper by monks absorbed in the process of transcribing pagan orality into monotheistic theological script. In the process, of course, fate becomes God, the enemy is demonized as that which is the debris from the Eden/snake fiasco, and the pagan warrior (by virtue of ripping apart another living creature with his bare hands) becomes a candidate for canonization.

But what is doubly curious about this infamous tale is the role of Grendel’s mother. Up until the point where she arrives in the script, we basically have something that wouldn’t seem too inappropriate appearing in a comic book “good vs. evil” patriarchal fantasy. But what do we do with a devil whose death is then avenged by the devil’s mother? The hag approaches Herot bent on murderous revenge against Beowulf, King Hrothgar and the besieged Danes; she does indeed invade Herot and kills Hrothgar’s dearest friend, carrying his body with her back to her lake-becovered lair.

You see, the thing about the Angles and the Saxons is that they were Germanic, patriarchal tribes. They go through all the trouble of invading the British Isles (or Britannia in Latin terminology), and what do they get for it (besides the lousy T-shirt)? – having to deal with a bunch of matriarchal, goddess-worshipping, magic-practicing savages who all belong, from the A/S perspective, at the bottom of a lake. An entire army of Beowulfs finds itself, having defeated the horde of Grendels, having to then subdue a bunch of uppity women who are calling on their war goddesses and casting spells on the invaders right and left. It was unconscionable. They needed a hero from a foreign land to rescue them.

And in some respects so do we. Actor Charlie Sheen has recently been demonized in the national gossip that is our press for questioning the official story of what really happened on 9/11. The messenger standeth accused of mental instability and theoretical unorthodoxy according, to the surfeiting gossipers (Inside Edition 4/24/06), citing his recent split from his wife as evidence including her accusations of prostitution, drug abuse, gambling, violence and pornography. (Charlie, say it ain’t so!)

Little inconvenient details existing in the official version of events, a story that has been recently and, one might say, fortuitously, shored up by the release of “Flight 93” – a story within a story – like the disconnect between the size of the hole in the Pentagon and the size of a Boeing 757, eyewitness commentary that the planes that hit the towers were not commercial airlines, that explosions occurred within the towers after they were struck, that buildings like #7 in the trade tower complex that were not struck by anything but conveniently and neatly fell down anyway into manageable imploded piles– unreported heretical minutia like that, that threaten the sanctity of Herot every bit as much as the hag, are not to be spoken about within the fortress that is now America.

Since when is open debate the subject for character assassination in America?

Charlie Sheen may be an abomination as a husband, and all the more power to the surfeiting gossipers if they make their pound of flesh by promoting that circumstance in the just cause of pursuing ratings and profits, but why does it need to be linked in the public mind with questioning the official story of 9/11? What’s the agenda here?

Our flight brings other monsters swimming to see us…

Those of us who have long since given up on looking to the press for anything but a limited excuse for entertainment are always on the lookout for that hero from the foreign land of the media of the masses willing to challenge the fire-breathing propaganda to which we are daily subjected, someone with a position of influence and power in Herot, someone currently participating in a reasonably funny sit-com, to (using his bare hands) rip apart the narrow confines of debate as defined by corporate news and ask the forbidden (and unfortunately rhetorical) question.

Who is the devil’s mother?

All hail the conquering hero. All hail Charlie Sheen!

And happy mother’s day, now that I think of it.

New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

Message 8
From: "President, USA Exile Govt." prez@usa-exile.org
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 8:13am(PDT)
Subject: A Day in the Life: 5/8/6

Free Americans
Reaching Out to Amerika's Huddled Masses Yearning to Breathe Free

Via <prez@usa-exile.org>

May 8, 2006

From: Kevin Barrett <khidria@merr.com>
Date: May 7, 2006 4:16:47 PM EST
To: MUJCA.3@gatorgraphics.net
Subject: Reynolds: “Come Out of the White House with Your Hands Up!”


Reynolds: “Come Out of the White House with Your Hands Up!”

Ex-Bush Official Busts 9/11 Perps at U.W. Historical Society

Madison, WI
Saturday, May 6, 2006
Kevin Barrett, 07.05.2006 13:06

An enthusiastic standing-room-only crowd overfilled the 300-seat
Wisconsin Historical Society auditorium Saturday to hear ex-Bush
Administration insider Morgan Reynolds prosecute top administration and
military officials for the 9/11 inside job.

Reynolds to Cheney: "You're BUSTED!"

Reynolds indicted Richard Cheney, George W. Bush, former Joint Chiefs
Chairman Richard Meyers, confessed WTC demolisher and
insurance-fraudster Larry Silverstein, and others for mass murder,
conspiracy, and other charges including high treason. The enthusiastic
response from the overflow crowd was a de facto vote for conviction on
all counts.

The former Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National
Center for Policy Analysis, showed that the defendants conspired to
create a false cover story of suicide hijackings in order to “blow the
World Trade Center to kingdom come” with explosives—a shock-and-awe
psy-op designed to coerce the American people into supporting a
pre-planned “long war” in the Middle East, massive increases in
military spending, and the rollback of Constitutional civil liberties.

Reynolds stated that everyone in the worldwide intelligence community
knew that 9/11 was an inside job as soon as it happened, with the
obvious stand-down of US air defenses, controlled demolition of the
World Trade Center, and non-protection of the President in Florida
being the biggest tip-offs. The head of the Russian equivalent of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the former head of the German intelligence
service Andreas Von Bulow, former National Security Agency official
Wayne Madsen, and former MI-6 agent David Schayler have all openly
called 9/11 an inside job, while former CIA official Ray McGovern has
confirmed this directly in private, and indirectly in public by way of
his ringing endorsement of David Ray Griffin’s work on 9/11.

Reynolds, who served as George W. Bush’s Labor Department Chief
Economist in 2001-2002, believes that a 9/11 truth victory is looming
on the near-term horizon. He predicted that one or more of the 9/11
insiders will soon “give it up” and come forward with what they know,
saying “Remember, you heard it here first.” He said that most of those
complicit in the attacks did not realize how over-the-top the plot was,
due to the need-to-know compartmentalization of such covert operations,
and that some semi-complicit individuals will probably be coming
forward. Reynolds said that most of his email acquaintances are now
worried that the 9/11 truth movement is going to win, triggering the
greatest Constitutional crisis in U.S. history. For Reynolds, this is
less a cause for worry than for rejoicing: “We need a Constitutional

Reynolds argued that 9/11 truth is a matter of extreme urgency, since
the perpetrators seem to be preparing another 9/11-style terror hoax as
a pretext for attacking Iran with nuclear weapons. He said that
exposing the 9/11 fraud is the best way to stop Cheney’s plan to stage
an unprovoked nuclear attack on Iran, and the military draft and
Pinochet-style prison camps and death squads for dissenters that might
accompany it.

Reynolds urged the audience to help educate the American public about
the 9/11 inside job. Personal contact with family and friends, the
internet, alternative media, and public events like this are all good
educational strategies, he said, adding that a demonstration of 100,000
9/11 truth supporters at Ground Zero next year would be hard for the
media to ignore.

Politicians and the media will help expose the 9/11 inside job, he
said, only after the growing grassroots movement reaches critical mass.
The organizers of Reynolds’ talk urged audience members to come to the
upcoming international 9/11 truth conference in Chicago, 9/11:
Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future, June 2nd-4th, 2006:


* * *

Introduction to Dr. Reynolds Presentation

(delivered in much abbreviated form due to time constraints)

by Dr. Kevin Barrett
Coordinator, Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth:

Member, Scholars for 9/11 Truth:

Member, Scientific Professionals Investigating 9/11 (SPINE):


Friends, we are gathered here today not just to speak truth to power,
but to start fighting back. The information you are hearing today is
political dynamite. It is the stuff of which revolutions are made.

Evil rulers use divide-and-conquer strategies against their subjects.
In Iraq, the occupiers blow up mosques and markets, and murder
thousands of bystanders, in a lame attempt to provoke a Sunni-Shia
civil war. But they’re not fooling anybody. The Iraqis all know who’s
really doing these bombings, just as 90% of the Arab and Muslim world
knows that 9/11 was an inside job. Here in Ersatz America, our criminal
rulers are trying to divide us by whipping up emotional hysteria:
abortion, immigration, gay marriage, liberal versus conservative,
religious versus secular, Christian and Jewish versus Muslim—anything
to distract us and keep us from seeing what they’re doing to all of us.

9/11 truth unites ALL of us – left and right, gay and straight,
religious, spiritual and secular, Muslim, Christian and Jewish,
military and civilian – in revolutionary outrage against this evil
regime, and in determination to overthrow it by any means necessary.

We hope the 9/11 truth revolution will be a nonviolent revolution. We
are starting with education, symbolism, and nonviolent action. Please
honor the request of Veterans for 9/11 Truth (

http://v911t.org) to fly the American flag upside down as a symbol of
Constitutional distress. And please come to Chicago for the
international 9/11 truth strategy conference June 2nd – 4th, sponsored
by 911truth.org and the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11
Truth. Posters are available at the table outside. We are meeting in
Chicago to figure out how to win on 9/11 truth. And we are going to
win. See:


And when we win, the brave man we have invited here today will get a
big chunk of the credit.

Dr. Morgan Reynolds is Professor Emeritus at Texas A & M University. He
served as Chief Economist in the Department of Labor under George W.
Bush during the Cheney regime’s first illegitimate term. He is the
former director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center
for Policy Analysis, and appeared on innumerable political discussion
shows in the mainstream media – back when we used to have a mainstream
media rather than a Ministry of Propaganda. I’m sorry, I shouldn’t say
that – it’s the Ministry of Love. Wait a minute, that’s the one that
runs Abu Ghraib and the sex torture gulag. Or is that der Ministry of
Unheimlich Insecurity? I’m sorry, I grew up back when we had something
vaguely resembling a democracy –I can’t keep all this stuff straight.
In any case, Dr. Reynolds has a stellar resume, and the best part of it
is that he is a Wisconsin Badger with three degrees from this great
university – and he is living up to its motto, The Truth Will Set You
Free! Ladies and gentlemen, Dr. Morgan Reynolds.

* * *

(For Morgan Reynolds’ work, see his website



From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
Date: May 1, 2006 10:41:45 PM EST
Subject: [911TruthAction] Christopher Bollyn: 9-11 Lawsuits Stymied --
victim families under gag order

From: Thomas R. Ascher


9-11 Lawsuits

By Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, 04/24/06

While the media plays up the significance of the government show trial
of the seemingly deranged “20th hijacker” Zacharias Moussaoui, not
one 9-11 victim’s lawsuit has been allowed to be heard in a trial by
jury. Why have the 9-11 victims’ families not been given the same right
to have their cases heard in an open trial?

Ellen Mariani, who lost her husband Neil on United Air Lines (UAL)
Flight 175, filed the first 9-11 wrongful death lawsuit against UAL on
Dec. 20, 2001. Mariani was interviewed on national television in May
2002 by Bill O’Reilly of Fox News, who repeatedly questioned her about
why she had chosen to pursue litigation instead of accepting the
government fund. “I want justice,” Mariani said. “I want
accountability. Who is responsible? I want the truth.”

Today, Mariani, like the other 9-11 plaintiffs, is under a gag order
which prevents her from speaking about her ongoing lawsuit. Likewise,
thousands of employees of federal agencies like the Federal Aviation
Administration have received gag orders in the mail keeping them from
telling what they know about the events of 9-11.

After more than four years, however, Mariani’s determined pursuit for
the truth about 9-11 through the court system has failed to yield any
answers or discovery about who is responsible for 9-11. Today, she is
no closer to obtaining what she has stated she wanted from the
beginning—a trial by jury.

Why have the many victims’ cases like Mariani’s, brought by relatives
of loved ones lost on 9-11, not been allowed to be heard in a trial by
jury—a basic American right? And why have the foreign-owned security
companies involved in the shocking security lapses, which enabled the
attacks of 9-11, been granted immunity by the U.S. Congress?

All of the relatives’ wrongful death criminal lawsuits against the
airlines and their security companies have been consolidated by the
presiding judge into a negligence lawsuit, which is a civil case and
much less likely to be argued or investigated in an open trial with a
jury. The 9-11 wrongful death and personal injury cases against
American Air Lines (AA) or UAL or any of the foreign security
companies, namely Argenbright Security (British), Globe Aviation
Services Corp. (Swedish) and Huntleigh USA Corp. (Israeli) are being
handled by U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the Southern
District of New York.

In the case of at least one of these security defendants, Huntleigh,
there would seem to be a conflict of interest for the judge because the
airline security company who is responsible for the shocking security
lapses at both the Boston and Newark airports on 9-11 is a wholly-owned
subsidiary of an Israeli company (ICTS) headed by men with clear ties
to Israel’s military intelligence agency, Mossad.

Hellerstein, 73, on the other hand, has deep and longstanding Zionist
connections and close family ties to the state of Israel. A Zionist is
a supporter of the state of Israel.

Hellerstein’s wife is a former senior vice president and current
treasurer of a New York-based Zionist organization called AMIT. AMIT
promotes Jewish immigration to Israel and stands for Americans for
Israel and Torah. AMIT’s motto is “Building Israel—One Child at a
Time.” Hellerstein is a member of the Jewish Center of New York and a
former president of the Board of Jewish Education of Greater New York.

This raises the obvious question about why, in the 9-11 terror case in
which an Israeli security company is a key defendant and in which
individuals from Israeli military intelligence are suspected of being
involved, was Hellerstein chosen to preside over all 9-11 victim

Huntleigh USA is a wholly owned subsidiary of an Israeli company called
International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS) International
N.V., a Netherlands-based aviation and transportation security firm
headed by “former [Israeli] military commanding officers and veterans
of government intelligence and security agencies.”

Menachem Atzmon, convicted in Israel in 1996 for campaign finance
fraud, and his business partner Ezra Harel, took over management of
security at the Boston and Newark airports when their company ICTS
bought Huntleigh USA in 1999. UAL Flight 175 and AA 11, which allegedly
struck the twin towers, both originated in Boston, while UAL 93, which
purportedly crashed in Pennsylvania, departed from the Newark airport.
ICTS also operates the German port of Rostock on the Baltic Sea.

Some victims’ families brought lawsuits against Huntleigh claiming the
security firm had been grossly negligent on 9-11. While these relatives
have a right to discovery and to know what Huntleigh did or did not do
to protect their loved ones on 9-11, Huntleigh, along with the other
security companies, was granted complete congressional protection in
2002 and will not be called to account for its actions on 9-11 in any
U.S. court.

Hellerstein, however, is not the only player overseeing the 9-11
litigation process who has close ties to Israel. In fact, all of the
key players and law firms involved are either active Zionists or work
for firms that do a great deal of business representing Israeli
companies and/or the state of Israel.

Kenneth R. Feinberg, for example, the special master of the federally
funded Victims’ Compensation Fund, is also a dedicated Zionist.
Feinberg single-handedly administered the $7 billion fund that paid out
U.S. taxpayer money to some 97 percent of the families who could have
sued to recover tort damages for monetary loss and pain and suffering.
Those who accepted funds signed away their right to litigate against
the government, the airlines or the security companies.

The Kenneth Feinberg Group is listed as one of the top 10 supporters of
the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies for 2004-2005. The Jerusalem
Institute is an Israel-based Zionist organization that, among other
things, supports the building of the illegal separation wall across

The Feinberg Group also lists as its clients major insurance and
re-insurance companies such as Lloyd’s of London. These are the
companies who stood to lose billions of dollars if 9-11 victims’
lawsuits had gone forward.

Feinberg was appointed special master by then Attorney General John
Ashcroft. Ashcroft, a dedicated Christian Zionist and supporter of such
groups as Stand for Israel, is today working as a lobbyist for Israel
Aircraft Industries (IAI), Israel’s major military aerospace company,
which hired the former U.S. attorney general to help secure the U.S.
government’s approval to sell an Israeli weapons system to the South
Korean Air Force.

The Israelis hired Ashcroft to improve their chances against a system
built by Chicago-based Boeing.


From: s culver <sc@lmi.net>
Date: May 7, 2006 11:58:46 AM EST
Subject: Bush The Decider: Watch this drive !

Subject: George Bush - the decider
"I hear the voices and I read the front page and I know the
President Bush told reporters in the Rose Garden. "But I'm the decider
I decide what's best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as
secretary of defense."

"I'm the Decider"

By Roddy McCorley

Well, it took me awhile, but I finally realized what "I'm the decider"
reminds me of. It sounds like something a character in a Dr Seuss book
might say. So with apologies to the late Mr. Geisel, here is some idle
speculation as to what else such a character might say:

I'm the decider.
I pick and I choose.
I pick among whats.
And choose among whos.
And as I decide
Each particular day,
The things I decide on
All turn out that way.
I decided on Freedom
For all of Iraq,
And now that we have it,
I'm not looking back.
I decided on tax cuts
That just help the wealthy.
And Medicare changes
That aren't really healthy.
And parklands and wetlands
Who needs all that stuff?
I decided that none
Would be more than enough!
I decided that schools
All in all are the best,
The less that they teach
And the more that they test.
I decided those wages
You need to get by,
Are much better spent
On some CEO guy.
I decided your Wade
Which was versing your Roe,
Is terribly awful
And just has to go.
I decided that levees
Are not really needed.
Now when hurricanes come
They can come unimpeded.
That old Constitution?
Well, I have decided-
As "just goddam paper"
It should be derided.
I've decided gay marriage
Is icky and weird.
Above all other things,
It's the one to be feared.
And Cheney and Rummy
And Condi all know
That I'm the Decider -
They tell me it's so.
I'm the Decider
So watch what you say,
Or I may decide
To have you whisked away
Or I'll tap your phones.
Your e-mail I'll read.
`cause I'm the Decider -
Like Jesus decreed.
Yes, I'm the Decider!
The finest alive!
And I'm nuking Iran
Now watch this drive!


From: Henri the Celt <henrithecelt@gci.net>
Date: May 7, 2006 1:41:22 PM EST
To: AAAHenri <henrithecelt@gci.net>
Subject: Police chief- Lockerbie evidence was faked!!!


Police Chief: Lockerbie Evidence Was Faked!!!

A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement
claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was

The retired officer - of assistant chief constable rank or higher -
has testified that the CIA planted the tiny fragment of circuit board
crucial in convicting a Libyan for the 1989 mass murder of 270 people.

The police chief, whose identity has not yet been revealed, gave the
statement to lawyers representing Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi,
currently serving a life sentence in Greenock Prison.

The evidence will form a crucial part of Megrahi's attempt to have a
retrial ordered by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
(SCCRC). The claims pose a potentially devastating threat to the
reputation of the entire Scottish legal system.

The officer, who was a member of the Association of Chief Police
Officers Scotland, is supporting earlier claims by a former CIA agent
that his bosses "wrote the script" to incriminate Libya.

Last night, George Esson, who was Chief Constable of Dumfries and
Galloway when Megrahi was indicted for mass murder, confirmed he was
aware of the development.

But Esson, who retired in 1994, questioned the officer's motives. He
said: "Any police officer who believed they had knowledge of any
element of fabrication in any criminal case would have a duty to act on
that. Failure to do so would call into question their integrity, and I
can't help but question their motive for raising the matter now."

Other important questions remain unanswered, such as how the officer
learned of the alleged conspiracy and whether he was directly involved
in the inquiry. But sources close to Megrahi's legal team believe they
may have finally discovered the evidence that could demolish the case
against him.

An insider told Scotland on Sunday that the retired officer approached
them after Megrahi's appeal - before a bench of five Scottish judges -
was dismissed in 2002.

The insider said: "He said he believed he had crucial information. A
meeting was set up and he gave a statement that supported the
long-standing rumours that the key piece of evidence, a fragment of
circuit board from a timing device that implicated Libya, had been
planted by US agents.

"Asked why he had not come forward before, he admitted he'd been wary
of breaking ranks, afraid of being vilified.

"He also said that at the time he became aware of the matter, no one
really believed there would ever be a trial. When it did come about, he
believed both accused would be acquitted. When Megrahi was convicted,
he told himself he'd be cleared at appeal."

The source added: "When that also failed, he explained he felt he had
to come forward.

"He has confirmed that parts of the case were fabricated and that
evidence was planted. At first he requested anonymity, but has backed
down and will be identified if and when the case returns to the appeal

The vital evidence that linked the bombing of Pan Am 103 to Megrahi
was a tiny fragment of circuit board which investigators found in a
wooded area many miles from Lockerbie months after the atrocity.

The fragment was later identified by the FBI's Thomas Thurman as being
part of a sophisticated timer device used to detonate explosives, and
manufactured by the Swiss firm Mebo, which supplied it only to Libya
and the East German Stasi.

At one time, Megrahi, a Libyan intelligence agent, was such a regular
visitor to Mebo that he had his own office in the firm's headquarters.

The fragment of circuit board therefore enabled Libya - and Megrahi -
to be placed at the heart of the investigation. However, Thurman was
later unmasked as a fraud who had given false evidence in American
murder trials, and it emerged that he had little in the way of
scientific qualifications.

Then, in 2003, a retired CIA officer gave a statement to Megrahi's
lawyers in which he alleged evidence had been planted.

The decision of a former Scottish police chief to back this claim
could add enormous weight to what has previously been dismissed as a
wild conspiracy theory. It has long been rumoured the fragment was
planted to implicate Libya for political reasons.

The first suspects in the case were the Syrian-led Popular Front for
the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC), a terror group
backed by Iranian cash. But the first Gulf War altered diplomatic
relations with Middle East nations, and Libya became the pariah state.

Comment: In other words, Western Zionist powers deftly changed the
"Terrorist du Jour" from the Popular Front to Libya!

Following the trial, legal observers from around the world, including
senior United Nations officials, expressed disquiet about the verdict
and the conduct of the proceedings at Camp Zeist, Holland. Those doubts
were first fuelled when internal documents emerged from the offices of
the US Defence Intelligence Agency. Dated 1994, more than two years
after the Libyans were identified to the world as the bombers, they
still described the PFLP-GC as the Lockerbie bombers.

A source close to Megrahi's defence said: "Britain and the US were
telling the world it was Libya, but in their private communications
they acknowledged that they knew it was the PFLP-GC.

Comment: In fact, it was the CIA itself!

"The case is starting to unravel largely because when they wrote the
script, they never expected to have to act it out. Nobody expected
agreement for a trial to be reached, but it was, and in preparing a
manufactured case, mistakes were made."

Dr Jim Swire, who has publicly expressed his belief in Megrahi's
innocence, said it was quite right that all relevant information now be
put to the SCCRC.

Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the atrocity, said last
night: "I am aware that there have been doubts about how some of the
evidence in the case came to be presented in court.

"It is in all our interests that areas of doubt are thoroughly

A spokeswoman for the Crown Office said: "As this case is currently
being examined by the SCCRC, it would be inappropriate to comment."

No one from the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland was
available to comment.


Foxes in the hen-house: Iraqi
puppet government submits candidacy for the UNHRC

Dirk Adriaensens - 06 May 2006

Did you know that the government of Iraq submitted its candidacy for
the newly formed UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC)? Until a few days ago,
its written pledge was not online. Now it is. Look at the document

In that document you can read some incredible things. Iraq presents
itself as being deeply committed to human rights.

Elections take place in New York on Tuesday, 9 May. If elected, Iraq
would be subject to the new "universal review," mandatory on all
members of the UNHRC. Note the pledge (point #24 of the voluntary
commitments) to consider ratifying all Optional Protocols of key human
rights instruments. Relative to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, this could be significant, as the Optional Protocol
allows for individual petitions. Another question is whether the
government of Iraq will sign the Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court. In general, though scandalous in other respects, the
election of Iraq to the UNHRC would be positive... if the Office of the
High Commissioner in Geneva, or the special rapporteur on summary
executions, were soon to propose substantive action. Perhaps a country
visit? The government of Iraq, which more or less has to assent, would
be hard pushed to refuse. Whether Iraq will be elected to the UNHRC is
another matter.

The Iraqi puppet government is so deeply concerned about human rights,
that most of the civilians tortured and killed recently, had been
arrested by officials of the Ministry of Interior. Of course with the
help of that other great democracy: the USA, who created, funded, armed
and trained these death squads.

“After exact counting and documenting, the Iraqi Organisation for
Follow-up and Monitoring has confirmed that 92 % of the 3498 bodies
found in different regions of Iraq had been arrested by officials of
the Ministry of Interior. Nothing was known about the arrestees’ fate
until their riddled bodies were found with marks of horrible torture.
It’s regrettable and shameful that these crimes are being suppressed
and that several states receive government officials, who fail to
investigate these crimes.”

Organisation for Follow-up and Monitoring

30 April, 2006


FBI Puts SOA Watch under “Counterterrorism” Surveillances
By Matthew Rothschild
May 4, 2006

The FBI has been keeping tabs on SOA Watch, the human rights group that
monitors the School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia.

In fact, the FBI has elevated its concern to “priority” level, claiming
that the group is subject to “counterterrorism” monitoring, according
to documents released on May 4 by the ACLU and its Georgia chapter.

SOA Watch was founded by Father Roy Bourgeois back in 1990, and it
organizes annual protests at Fort Benning that now draw about 10,000
protesters. (The School of the Americas, in a PR stunt, has changed its
name to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation.)

“Our intentions are peaceful and our commitment unwavering as we
nonviolently call attention to a school that has trained some of the
worst human rights abusers in this hemisphere,” says Father Bourgeois
in the ACLU press release.

The FBI itself recognizes the nonviolent nature of the group, according
to one memo from October 2003. “The leaders of the SOA Watch have taken
strides to impart upon the protest participants that the protest should
be a peaceful event,” the FBI document states.

The FBI denies doing anything wrong in its investigation of SOA Watch.

“Our reaction is the same to all the other ACLU allegations about FBI
spying,” says Bill Carter, a spokesperson for the agency. “The FBI does
not investigate individuals based on First Amendment activities. The
FBI investigates only when we have information that an individual or a
group may be involved either in violent activity or national security



America's Geopolitical Nightmare and Eurasian
Strategic Energy Arrangements

By F. William Engdahl
May 7, 2006


Part I: The disintegration of the Bush Presidency

By drawing attention to Iraq and the obvious role oil plays in US
policy today, the Bush-Cheney administration has done just that: They
have drawn the world’s energy-deficit powers’ attention firmly to the
strategic battle over energy and especially oil. This is already having
consequences for the global economy in terms of $75 a barrel crude oil
price levels. Now it is taking on the dimension of what one former US
Defense Secretary rightly calls a ‘geopolitical nightmare’ for the
United States.

The creation by Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld and company of a geopolitical
nightmare, is also the backdrop to comprehend the dramatic political
shift within the US establishment in the past six months, away from the
Bush Presidency. Simply put: Bush/Cheney and their band of
neo-conservative warhawks, with their special relationship to the
capacities of Israel in Iraq and across the Mideast, were given a

The chance was to deliver on the US strategic goal of control of
petroleum resources globally, in order to ensure the US role as first
among equals over the next decade and beyond. Not only have they failed
to ‘deliver’ that goal of US strategic dominance. They have also
threatened the very basis of continued US hegemony or as the Rumsfeld
Pentagon likes to term it, ‘Full Spectrum Dominance.’ The move by
Bolivian President Evo Morales, following meetings with Velezuela’s
Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, to assert national control over oil and
gas resources is only the latest demonstration of the decline in US
power projection.

Future of the Bush Doctrine in the balance

As the reality of US foreign policy is obscured by the endless rhetoric
of ‘defending democracy’ and the like, it is useful to recall that US
foreign policy since the collapse of the Soviet Union has been open and
explicit. It is to prevent at any cost the congealing of a potential
combination of nations that might challenge US dominance. This is the
US policy as elaborated in Bush’s June 2002 West Point speech.

There the President outlined a radical departure in explicit US foreign
policy in two vital areas: A policy of preventive war, should the US be
threatened by terrorists or by rogue states engaged in the production
of weapons of mass destruction. Second, the right of self-defense
authorized the USA to launch pre-emptive attacks against potential
aggressors, cutting them off before they are able to launch strikes
against the US.

The new US doctrine, the Bush Doctrine, also proclaimed, ‘the duty of
the US to pursue unilateral military action when acceptable
multilateral solutions cannot be found.’ It went further and declared
it US policy that the ‘United States has, and intends to keep, military
strengths beyond challenge.’ The US would take whatever actions
necessary to continue its status as the world's sole military
superpower. This resembled British Empire policy before World War I,
namely, that the Royal Navy must be larger than the world's next two
largest navies put together.

The policy also included pro-active regime change around the world
under the slogan of ‘extending democracy.’ As Bush stated at West
Point, ‘America has no empire to extend or utopia to establish. We wish
for others only what we wish for ourselves -- safety from violence, the
rewards of liberty, and the hope for a better life.’

Those policy fragments were gathered into an official policy in
September 2002, a National Security Council text entitled the National
Security Strategy of the United States. That text was drafted for the
President’s signature by then NSA head Condi Rice. She in turn took an
earlier policy document prepared under the 1992 Bush senior Presidency
by neo-conservative Paul Wolfowitz.

The Bush Doctrine of Rice had been fully delineated in 1992 in a
Defense Planning Guidance ‘final draft’ done by then Under Secretary of
Defense for Policy, Paul Wolfowitz, and known in Washington as the
Wolfowitz Doctrine. Wolfowitz declared then, that with the threat of a
Soviet attack gone, the US was the unchallenged sole Superpower and
should pursue its global agenda including pre-emptive war and
unilateral foreign policy actions.

An internal leak of the draft to the New York Times then led President
Bush senior to announce it was ‘only a draft and not US policy.’ By
2002 it was officially US policy.

The Bush Doctrine stated that ‘military pre-emption’ was legitimate
when the threat was ‘emerging’ or ‘sufficient, even if uncertainty
remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack.’ That left a
hole large enough for an Abrams tank to roll through, according to
critics. Afghanistan, as case in point, was declared a legitimate
target for US military bombardment, because the Taliban regime had said
it would turn Osama bin Laden over only when the US demonstrated proof
he was behind the September 11 World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks.
Bush didn’t give proof. He did launch a ‘pre-emptive’ war. At the time,
few bothered to look to the niceties of international law.

The Bush Doctrine was and is a neo-conservative doctrine of preventive
and pre-emptive war. It has proven to be a strategic catastrophe for
the United States role as sole Superpower. That is the background to
comprehend all events today as they are unfolding in and around

The future of that Bush Doctrine foreign policy and in fact the future
ability of the United States, as sole Superpower or sole anything to
hold forth is what is now at stake in the issue of the future of the
Bush Presidency. Useful to note is that Deputy Defense Secretary
Wolfowitz wrote his 1992 draft for then Defense Secretary, Dick Cheney.

Bush Administration in crisis

The most fascinating indication of a sea-change within the American
political establishment towards the Bush Doctrine and those who are
behind it is the developing debate around the 83-page paper, first
published on the official website of Harvard University, criticizing
the dominant role of Israel in shaping US foreign policy.

The paper was initially trashed by the ADL of B’nai Brith and select
neo-conservative writers, as ‘anti-semitic’, which it is not, and as
one commentator tried to smear it, as ‘echoing the views of former KKK
leader and white power advocate David Duke,’ who has also attacked the
Israel lobby. However, profoundly significant is the fact that this
time, leading mainstream media, including Richard Cohen in the
Washington Post , have come to defense of Walt and Mearsheimer. Even
certain Israeli press has done so. The taboo of speaking publicly of
the pro-Israel agenda of neo-conservatives has apparently been broken.
That suggests that the old-guard foreign policy establishment, types
such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft and their allies, are
stepping up to retake foreign policy leadership. The neo-cons have
proved a colossal failure in their defense of America’s strategic real
interests as the realists see it.

The paper, ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,’ was written by
two highly respected US foreign policy realists and consultants to the
State Department. The authors are neither neo-Nazi skinheads nor
anti-Semites. John J. Mearsheimer is political science professor and
co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the
University of Chicago. Stephen M. Walt is academic dean and a chaired
professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. Both are members
of the Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy. They are so-called
‘realists’ along with Kissinger, Scowcroft, Brzezinski.

Some of their conclusions about the Israel lobby's goals:

• ‘No lobby has managed to divert foreign policy as far from what the
American national interest would otherwise suggest, while
simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests are
essentially identical.’

• American supporters of Israel promoted the war against Iraq. The
senior administration officials who spearheaded the campaign were also
in the vanguard of the pro-Israel lobby, e.g., then Deputy Defense
Secretary Paul Wolfowitz; Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas
Feith; Elliott Abrams, Mideast affairs at the White House; David
Wurmser, Mideast affairs for Vice President Richard Cheney; Richard
Perle, first among neocon equals, chairman of the Defense Policy Board,
an influential advisory body of strategic experts.

• A similar effort is now under way to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities.

• AIPAC is fighting registering as foreign agents because this would
place severe limitations on its congressional activities, particularly
in the legislative electoral arena. ... American politicians remain
acutely sensitive to campaign contributions and other forms of
political pressure and major media outlets are likely to remain
sympathetic to Israel no matter what it does.

It’s useful to quote the official goals of the Coalition for a
Realistic Foreign Policy, of which Walt and Mearsheimer are members, to
have a better indication of their factional line-up in the current
factional battle inside the US elite. The website of that Coalition

‘Against the backdrop of an ever-bloodier conflict in Iraq, American
foreign policy is moving in a dangerous direction toward empire.

Worrisome imperial trends are apparent in the Bush administration's
National Security Strategy. That document pledges to maintain America's
military dominance in the world, and it does so in a way that
encourages other nations to form countervailing coalitions and
alliances. We can expect, and are seeing now, multiple balances of
power forming against us. People resent and resist domination, no
matter how benign.

Authors Walt and Mearsheimer also note that Richard Perle and Douglas
Feith put their names to a 1996 policy blueprint for Benjamin
Netanyahu's then incoming government in Israel, titled, ‘A Clean Break:
A New Strategy for Securing the Realm [Israel].’

In that document, Perle and Feith advised Netanyahu that the rebuilding
of Zionism must abandon any thought of trading land for peace with the
Palestinians, i.e., repeal the Oslo accords. Next, Saddam Hussein must
be overthrown and democracy established in Iraq, which would then prove
contagious in Israel's other Arab neighbors. That was in 1996, seven
years before Bush launched a near unilateral war for regime change in

When NBC's TV’s Tim Russert on the widely-watched ‘Meet the Press’
asked Perle about his geopolitical laundry list for Israel's benefit,
Perle replied, ‘What's wrong with that?’

For all this to succeed, Perle and Feith wrote, ‘Israel would have to
win broad American support.’ To ensure this support, they advised the
Israeli prime minister to use ‘language familiar to Americans by
tapping into themes of past US administrations during the Cold War,
which apply as well to Israel.’ An Israeli columnist in Ha'aretz
accused Perle and Feith of, ‘walking a fine line’ between ‘their
loyalty to American governments and Israeli interests.’

Today, Perle has been forced to take a low profile in Washington after
initially heading Rumsfeld’s Defense Policy Board at the Pentagon.
Feith was forced to leave the State Department for the private sector.
That was more than a year ago.

Wave of Bush resignations underway

Now White House Chief of Staff and a man who was a Bush family loyal
retainer for 25 years, Andrew Card, has left, and in an announcement
that apparently shocked the neo-conservative hawks like William
Kristol, on May 5 Bush’s pro-neo-con CIA head, Porter Goss, abruptly
announced his resignation in a one line statement.

Goss’ departure was preceded by the growing scandal involving Goss’
Number 3 man at CIA, Executive Director, Kyle ‘Dusty’ Foggo. Last
December the CIA Inspector General opened an investigation into Foggo’s
role in Pengaton-CIA contract fraud. Foggo is also being linked to an
emerging White House-GOP sex scandal which could pale the Monika
Lewinsky affair. As Goss violated seniority precedence in naming Foggo
to No. 3 at CIA, the Goss resignation and the imminent breaking sex and
bribery scandals around Foggo are being linked by some media.

The Foggo case is tied to disgraced Republican Congressman, Randall
‘Duke’ Cunningham. Federal prosecutors have accused, as an un-indicted
co-conspirator, one of Foggo’s closest friends, San Diego businessman
Brent Wilkes, of participating in a scheme to bribe Cunningham, the
former GOP congressman from San Diego. Cunningham in turn is linked to
convicted Republican money launderer and fix-it man, Jack Abramoff.
Foggo oversaw contracts involving at least one of the companies accused
of paying bribes to Congressman Cunningham. The Wall Street Journal
reports that Foggo has been a close friend, since junior high school,
with California defense contractor Brent R. Wilkes. They report, an
ongoing ‘criminal investigation’ centers on whether Mr. Foggo used his
postings at the CIA to improperly steer contracts to Mr. Wilkes's

Wilkes was implicated in the charges filed against Cunningham, as an
un-indicted co-conspirator who allegedly paid $630,000 in bribes to
Cunningham for help in obtaining federal defense and other contracts.
No charges have been filed against Wilkes, though federal prosecutors
in San Diego are working to build a case against him, as well as Foggo.

The FBI and federal prosecutors are investigating evidence that Wilkes
had given gifts to Foggo and paid for various services, including
alleged sex orgies at the Watergate (now Westin), while Foggo was in a
position to help him gain particular CIA contracts.

The CIA inspector general has opened an investigation into the spy
agency's executive director, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, and his connections to
two defense contractors accused of bribing a member of Congress and
Pentagon officials.

The Goss resignation follows on the heels of public calls for Secretary
Rumsfeld’s immediate resignation over the Iraq military debacle coming
from a growing chorus of retired US military generals.

The latest in the slow, systematic ‘let ‘em twist in the wind’ process
of downsizing the Bush regime, was an incident in Atlanta May 4 before
a supposedly friendly foreign policy audience where Rumsfeld spoke.
During the question period, he was confronted with his laying about the
ground for going to war in Iraq.

Ray McGovern, a 27-year CIA veteran who once gave then-President George
H.W. Bush his morning intelligence briefings, engaged in an extended
debate with Rumsfeld. He asked why Rumsfeld had insisted before the
Iraq invasion that there was ‘bulletproof evidence’ linking Saddam
Hussein to Al Qaeda.

‘Was that a lie, Mr. Rumsfeld, or was that manufactured somewhere else?
Because all of my CIA colleagues disputed that and so did the 9/11
commission,’ McGovern asked a startled Rumsfeld. ‘Why did you lie to
get us into a war that was not necessary?’

Significant in terms of the shift reflected in how the establishment
media handles Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush today is the following account
in the Los Angeles Times:

‘At the start of the exchange, Rumsfeld remained his usual unflappable
self, insisting, "I haven't lied; I did not lie then," before launching
into a vigorous defense of the administration's prewar assertions on
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

But Rumsfeld became uncharacteristically tongue-tied when McGovern
pressed him on claims that he knew where unconventional Iraqi weapons
were located.

"You said you knew where they were," McGovern said.

"I did not. I said I knew where suspected sites were," Rumsfeld

McGovern then read from statements the Defense secretary had made that
weapons were located near Tikrit, Iraq, and Baghdad…’

Rumsfeld was stone silent. The entire episode was filmed and shown on
network television. Rumsfeld’s days are clearly numbered. Karl Rove is
rumoured to be days away from being co-indicted with Cheney aide Lewis
Libby for the Valerie Plame CIA leak affair. Recall that that affair
was over alleged Niger uranium evidence as basis for convincing
Congress to waive a War Declaration on Iraq and give Bush carte
blanche. All threads are being carefully woven, evidently by a
re-emerging realist faction into a tapestry which will likely spell
Impeachment, perhaps also of the Vice President, the real power behind
this Presidency.

Part II: Disintegration of US Eurasia Strategic Influence

A Foreign Policy disaster over China

In this context, the recent diplomatic insult from Bush to visiting
China President Hu Jintao, is doubly disastrous for the US foreign
position. Bush acted on a script written by the anti-China
neo-conservatives, to deliberately insult and humiliate Hu at the White
House. First was the incident of allowing a Taiwanese ‘journalist,’ a
Falun Gong member, into the carefully-screened White House press
conference, to rant in a tirade against Chinese human rights for more
than three minutes, with no attempt at removal, at a White House filmed
press conference. Then came the playing of the Chinese National Hymn
for Hu. The ‘Chinese’ hymn, however, was the (Taiwan) Republic of China
hymn, not the (Beijing) Peoples’ Republic hymn.

It was no ‘slip-up by the professional White House protocol people. It
was a deliberate effort to humiliate the Chinese leader. The problem is
that the US economy has become dependent on Chinese trade imports and
on Chinese holdings of US Treasury securities. China today is the
largest holder of dollar reserves in form of US Treasury paper with an
estimated $825 billion. Were Beijing to decide to exit the US bond
market, even in part, it would cause a dollar free-fall and collapse of
the $7 trillion US real estate market, a wave of US bank failures and
huge unemployment. It’s a real option even if unlikely at the moment.

China’s Hu didn’s waste time or tears over the Bush affront. He
immediately went on to Saudi Arabia for a 3 day state visit where both
signed trade, defense and security agreements. Needless to say, this is
no small slap in the fact to Washington by the traditionally ‘loyal’
Saudi Royal House.

Hu signed a deal for SABIC of Saudi Arabia to build a $5.2 billion oil
refinery and petrochemical project in northeast China. At the beginning
of this year, King Abdullah was in Beijing for a full state visit.
Hmmmmm…Since the Roosevelt-King Ibn Saud deal giving US Aramco and not
the British exclusive concession to develop Saudi oil in 1943, Saudi
Arabia has been regarded in Washington as a core strategic sphere of

Hu then went on to Morocco, another traditional US sphere of interest,
Nigeria and Kenya, all regarded as US spheres of interest. Hmmmm. Only
two months ago Rumsfeld was in Morocco to offer US arms. Hu is offering
to finance energy exploration there.

The SCO and Iran events

The latest developments around the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
(SCO) and Iran further underscore the dramatic change in the
geopolitical position of the United States.

The SCO was created in Shanghai on June 15, 2001 by Russia and China
along with four former USSR Central Asian republics-- Kazakhstan,
Kyrgystan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Prior to September 11 2001, and
the US declaration of an Axis of Evil in January 2002, the SCO was
merely background geopolitical chatter as far as Washington was
concerned. Today the SCO, which has to date been blacked out almost
entirely in US mainstream media, is defining a new political
counterweight to US hegemony and its ‘one-polar’ world.

At the next June 15 2006 SCO meeting, Iran has been invited to become a
full SCO member.

Last month in Teheran, the Chinese Ambassador, Lio G Tan announced that
a pending oil and gas deal between China and Iran is ready to be

The deal is said to be worth at least $100 billion, and includes
development of the huge Yadavaran onshore oil field. China’s Sinopec
would agree to buy 250 million tons of LNG over 25 years. No wonder
China is not jumping to back Washington against Iran in the UN Security
Council. The US had been trying to put massive pressure on Beijing to
halt the deal, for obvious geopolitical reasons, to no avail. Another
major defeat for Washington.

Iran is also moving on plans to deliver natural gas via a pipeline to
Pakistan and India. Energy ministers from the three countries met in
Doha recently and plan to meet again this month in Pakistan.

The pipeline progress is a direct rebuff to Washington's efforts to
steer investors clear of Iran. Ironically, US opposition is driving
these countries into each others’ arms, Washington’s ‘geopolitical

At the same June 15 SCO meeting, India, which Bush is personally
attempting to woo as a geopolitical Asian ‘counterweight’ to China,
will also be invited to join SCO. As well, Mongolia and Pakistan will
be invited to join SCO. SCO is gaining in geopolitical throw-weight
quite substantially.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mohammadi told ITAR-Tass in
Moscow in April that Iranian membership in SCO could ‘make the world
more fair.’ He also spoke of building an Iran-Russia ‘gas-and-oil arc’
in which the two giant energy producers would coordinate activities.

US out in cold in Central Asia

The admission of Iran into SCO opens many new options for Iran and the
region. By virtue of SCO membership, Iran can now take part in SCO
projects, which in turn means access to badly-needed technology,
investment, trade, infrastructure development. It will have major
implications for global energy security.

The SCO has reportedly set up a working group of experts ahead of the
June summit to develop a common SCO Asian energy strategy, and discuss
joint pipeline projects, oil exploration and related activities. Iran
sits on the world’s second largest natural gas reserves, and Russia has
the largest. Russia is the world’s second largest oil producer after
Saudi Arabia. These are no small moves.

India is desperate to come to terms with Iran for energy but is being
pressured by Washington not to.

The Bush Administration last year tried to get ‘observer status’ at SCO
but was turned down. The rebuff - along with SCO's demands for a
reduced American military presence in Central Asia, deeper Russia-China
cooperation and the setbacks to US diplomacy in Central Asia – have
prompted a policy review in Washington.

After her October 2005 Central Asian tour, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice announced re-organization of the US State Department's
South Asia Bureau to include the Central Asian states, and a new US
‘Greater Central Asia’ scheme.

Washington is trying to wean Central Asian states away from Russia and
China. Hamid Karzai's government in Kabul has not responded to SCO's
overtures. Given his ties historically to Washington, he likely has
little choice.

Gennady Yefstafiyev, a former general in Russia's Foreign Intelligence
Service, says, ‘The US's long term goals in Iran are obvious: to
engineer the downfall of the current regime; to establish control over
Iran's oil and gas; and to use its territory as the shortest route for
the transportation of hydrocarbons under US control from the regions of
Central Asia and the Caspian Sea bypassing Russia and China. This is
not to mention Iran's intrinsic military and strategic significance.’

Washington had based its strategy on Kazakhstan being its key partner
in Central Asia. The US wants to expand its physical control over
Kazakhstan's oil reserves and formalize Kazakh oil transportation via
Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, as well as creating the dominant US role in
Caspian Sea security. But Kazakhstan isn’t playing ball. President
Nursultan Nazarbayev went to Moscow on April 3 to reaffirm his
continued dependence on Russian oil pipelines. And China, as we noted
back in December, is making major energy and pipeline deals with
Kazakhstan as well.

To make Washington’s geopolitical problems worse, despite securing a
major US military basing deal with Uzbekistan after September 2001,
Washington's relations with Uzbekistan today are disastrous. The US
effort to isolate President Islam Karimov, along lines of the Ukraine
‘Orange Revolution’ tactics, is not working. Indian Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh visited Tashkent in late April.

As well, Tajikistan relies heavily on Russia's support. In Kyrgyzstan,
despite covert US attempts to create dissensions within the regime,
President Burmanbek Bakiyev's alliance with Moscow-backed Prime
Minister Felix Kulov, is holding.

In the space of 12 months Russia and China have managed to move the
pieces on the geopolitical ‘chess board’ of Eurasia away from what had
been an overwhelming US strategic advantage, to the opposite, where the
US is increasingly isolated. It’s potentially the greatest strategic
defeat for the US power projection of the post World War II period.
This is also the strategic background to the re-emergence of the
so-called realist faction in US policy.

F. William Engdahl is a Global Research Contributing Editor and author
of the book, ‘A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New
World Order,’ Pluto Press Ltd. He is about to publish a book on GMO
titled, ‘Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Political Agenda Behind GMO’.
He may be contacted through his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.

To become a Member of Global Research

The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at
www.globalresearch.ca grants permission to cross-post original Global
Research articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on
community internet sites, as long as the text & title are not modified.
The source must be acknowledged and an active URL hyperlink address to
the original CRG article must be indicated. The author's copyright note
must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print
or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to
use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must
request permission from the copyright owner.

To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion at Global
Research's News and Discussion Forum

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com

© Copyright F. William Engdahl, GlobalResearch.ca, 2006

The url address of this article is:


Message 9
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 9:02am(PDT)
Subject: Re: [911_free_discussion] no spiritual angle for me -- since invest

Subject: [911_free_discussion] no spiritual angle for me -- since investigation is for the world, keep it on strick criminological basis

OK, it's "strict", not "strick"

do you want an populist/rationalist observer/commentator here or a speller? -- the universe is too impoverished for you to have both

leave the spelling to the pretty boys who get paid for it

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
To: <Undisclosed-Recipient:;>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 8:36 AM
Subject: [911_free_discussion] no spiritual angle for me -- since investigation is for the world, keep it on strick criminological basis

> but I suppose that many people are more likely to accept the facts when interpreted to them spiritually -- when made to fit their religous understanding -- as the Zionist's feel these wars are G-d's final moves in the chessgame with satan etc. -- certainly a view alternative to that is needed for the non-Zionist religious.
> I'll stick to what I understand -- and what is most usable to people of all persuasions.
> Dick Eastman
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Yahoo! Groups Links


Message 10
From: "reggie501" reggie501@optonline.net
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 9:15am(PDT)
Subject: Pan Am 103 & 9/11 Connection

9/11 News : http://www.tvnewslies.org/news/#911

• Pan Am 103 & 9/11 Connection - The key lies in the fact that
the exact same person "handled" both investigations. In fact,
the person who led the Pan Am 103 investigation for Bush
Sr.'s "Justice" department just happened to be appointed the
director of the FBI by Bush Jr. just seven days prior to 9/11.


Message 11
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 10:03am(PDT)
Subject: Articles1: Judy Andreas: Zionism is Nobody's Friend -=- Israel Uber

From: "Peter Myers" <myers@cyberone.com.au>

May 7, 2006

(1) Zionism Is Nobody's Friend, by Judy Andreas
(2) Lord Goldsmith to consider trial over Britons shot dead in Gaza
(3) Assembly of First Nations giving "cover for another form of settler colonialism"
(4) Israel Uber Alles: British MP latest victim
(5) Gilad and the cartoons

(1) Zionism Is Nobody's Friend, by Judy Andreas

Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 15:18:56 EDT From: Jude10901@aol.com

Zionism Is Nobody's Friend

By Judy Andreas 5-6-6

"I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest
men in the U.S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of
something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so
watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not
speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." The New
Freedom. Woodrow Wilson, 1913

What was this power to which Wilson referred? Why was it talked about in hushed
tones and behind closed doors?

Our public has been and continues to be duped. It is a process which begins
early and is unrelenting. It begins in homes and schools. It begins on the radio
and television. It begins in the print media. And, ultimately, a Pavlovian
reaction occurs; man is no longer a critical thinker. Man has become a machine.
I know the process all too well; I was a part of it for more years than I care
to admit. And now that I am able to see beyond the curtain, even if only
partially, I want nothing more then to alert people to the game that is being
played at their expense.

Jews have played an important role in this duping drama and yet, the average Jew
remains ignorant of what is transpiring. The average Jew has been effectively
brainwashed by cries of anti-Semitism and pictures of the Jewish Holocaust The
average Jew lives in a state of fear and anxiety and feels a part of the victim
class. No matter how much power is amassed, the average Jew feels one step away
from extinction. There is always a threat hanging over his head. Another
swastika appears on a Synagogue. Another "suicide bomber" manages to get through
the labyrinth of checkpoints in Israel. (if you know anything about the
checkpoints, you will find this a bit difficult to believe ) Well placed
occurrences keep the average Jew vulnerable to this "power." And what is this
power? ZIONISM.

Zionism is a political movement that arose in the latter part of the 1800's.
Initially it referred to the effort of certain Jewish people to establish a
Jewish nation in the land of Palestine. But that term has changed over the
years. Today it applies to those who want to expand the borders of what was
already established. It refers to those who think nothing of putting their own
interests ahead of the interests of any nation in which they reside. It refers
to those who will sacrifice anyone, Jews and Gentiles alike, to realize their

It is a grave mistake to believe that all Jews are supporters of Zionism. There
have been many vocal critics as well as some who have, for reasons of fear and
intimidation, not been as vocal. I will mention some of these courageous voices
and my apologies to those I omit. Anti-Zionist writers such as John Sack, Alfred
Lilienthal, Benjamin Freedman, Israel Shamir, Israel Shahack, Norman
Finkelstein, Henry Makow, Ralph Schoenman, Lenni Brenner, Victor Ostrovsky,
Henry Meyer and Jack Bernstein are only of few of this group. These man have
dared to speak out and have, as a result, been forced to suffer vicious attacks
from groups like the "Anti-Defamation League" (ADL). Despite its appealing name,
this group specializes in slander and defamation. Author Jack Bernstein stated:

"I am well aware of the tactics YOU, my Zionist brethren, use to quiet anyone
who attempts to expose any of your subversive acts. If the person is gentile,
you cry "you're anti-Semitic," which is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide
your actions. But if a Jew is the person doing the exposing, you resort to other

First, you ignore the charges, hoping the information will not be given
widespread distribution. It the information starts reacting too many people, you
ridicule the information and the person giving the information. If that doesn't
work, your next step is character assassination. If the author or speaker hasn't
been involved in sufficient scandal, you are adept at fabricating a scandal
against the person or persons. If none of these are effective, you are known to
resort to physical attacks. But NEVER do you try to prove the information wrong.
<snip>" (from The Life Of An American Jew in Racist-Marxist Israel. By Jack
Bernstein, 1984)

Bernstein challenged the ADL to an open debate on television. Not surprisingly,
the challenge was declined.

The Nuturei Karta is the name given to a group of Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem who
refuse to recognize the existence or authority of the so-called "State of
Israel" In their literature they write:

"Zionist propagandists are always given to bullying tactics and censorship. It
is very helpful in this regard to read former Congressman Findley's book, They
Dared to Speak Out. It is the sorry record of the immense resources that the
Zionist lobby invested in destroying the careers of politicians all across the
United States who had voiced some qualms about this nation's subservience to

Of course, anti - Zionist Jews of all political and religious orientations have
long experienced the lash of the Zionist movement. In 1924, a scholarly Dutch
Jew, Dr. Jacob Israel de Hahn, who functioned as a secretary of Rabbi Yosef
Chaim Sonnenfeld (1849 - 1932 ) Chief Rabbi of Palestine, (may their memories be
blessed) was murdered as he returned from evening prayers outside Shaarui Zedek
hospital in Jerusalem. His crime was that he had been involved in discussions
with Arab leaders that offered an alternative to Zionist hegemony. His murderers
were members of the Haganah, a Zionist, so - called "defense organization." In
fact, Dr. de Hahn may well be described as the first victim of Zionist violence
in the Holy Land. Yet, outside of a limited circle of anti - Zionist Jews, this
cowardly and cold blooded murder is completely unknown "

Our history books are replete with blank pages. There is a virtual media
blackout on some of the most prescient occurrences that have led to the
untenable situation in today's world.

In the late 1800's, the Zionists schemed to take over Arab Palestine. Most
people are not aware that the Jews had not controlled Palestine since the days
of the Roman Empire and that the small group of Arab Jews who lived in Palestine
got along well with their Muslim hosts and never expressed any desire to
overthrow the Ottoman rulers and set up a nation called Israel. This movement
came strictly from influential European Zionists.

In 1914, Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Turkish Empire were locked in
conflict against England, France and Russia. By 1916, however, the Germans,
Austrian Turks appeared to have won the war. Germany made an offer to Britain to
end the war. It was an offer that was favorable to Britain, and yet, the British
and the international Zionists had different plans. Led by Chiam Weizmann, they
used their influence to bring the United States into the war on Britain's side.
In exchange, the British would reward the Zionists by taking Palestine from the
conquered Ottoman Empire. Once under British control, the Jews of Europe would
be encouraged to immigrate to Palestine in huge numbers. Zionists such as
Bernard Baruch, Louis Brandeis, Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff and others influenced
President Woodrow Wilson, a man whose closet contained a few skeletons that he
preferred to keep hidden. The press transformed the German Kaiser and his people
into bloodthirsty "Huns". In Germany, the Zionists used their power and
influence to undermine Germany from within. The result was that the German,
Austrian and Ottoman Empires were defeated and their maps were rewritten by the
powers at the Treaty of Versailles in 1918. The Balfour Declaration, which gave
the land of Palestine to the Jews, was issued in 1917, one year before Germany
surrendered. (The Jewish Virtual Library of the American-Israeli co-operative

For the readers who have dismissed what I have written so far, I ask you to turn
your attention to the work of Benjamin Freedman. Freedman was an American
millionaire who severed ties with his fellow Zionists years after the war. He
went on to dedicate much of his life and fortune, from the Woodbury Soap
Company, to exposing the truth about both World Wars and the Zionist grip on
America. This is easily verified. Do not let knee jerk reactions close your
mind. I know how distressing this is. Growing up Jewish, I have 'walked that
walk'. I have felt the sorrow and disbelief. It is important, however, that we
begin to write some real history on those blank pages in your school syllabus.
The Balfour Declaration was a letter prepared in March 1916 and issued in
November of 1917 by the British statesman Arthur James Balfour, the foreign
secretary which expressed the British government's approval of Zionism and "the
establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people." As a
result, Israel was established as an independent state in 1948 in the mandated

The German people resented the Zionist role in bringing about their WW 1 defeat
as well as the incredibly harsh Treaty of Versailles with its brutal monetary
reparations. The German economy was in ruins. The people elected Adolf Hitler in
1932 and the Nazi party soon seized control of the German media, banks and
universities away from the influential Zionists who had controlled them.

Zionists called for action against Germany and boycotts were imposed in the UK
and USA. On March 24, 1933, "The Daily Express" of England carried the following
headline; "Judea Declares War on Germany. Jews of All the World Unite in Action"
( Daily Express (England) March 24, 1933.)

In September of 1939, Germany and Poland went to war over disputed territory
that had been taken away from Germany by the Versailles Treaty of 1918. Great
Britain and France saw an opportunity to declare war on Germany under the
pretext of protecting Poland. They conveniently ignored the fact that Stalin's
Soviet Union had invaded Poland too. Germany pleaded with Britain and France
(the Allies) to withdraw their war declarations, but the Allies continued their
massive military buildup along Germany's frontiers. Germany's neighbors
(Belgium, Holland and also Norway) succumbed to Allied political pressure to
allow their armies to establish bases in their territories. In the spring of
1940, the war in Western Europe began when Germany launched preemptive invasions
of Norway, Holland and Belgium. In the United States, the Zionists applied
pressure to Franklin Delano Roosevelt to involve the United States in the war.

The rest is history, if you'll pardon the poor pun. The United States' entry
into the war resulted in another crushing defeat for Germany. A few years after
the end of the second World War, the plan to establish the nation of Israel in
Palestine materialized. Great Britain, left weakened, were chased from Palestine
by Zionist acts of terror. The most notorious terror group was the Irgun, led by
Menachem Begin. Later on, Begin would go on to become the Prime Minister of
Israel and the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. It kind of leaves you scratching
your head, doesn't it?

July 22, 1946, Irgun terrorists, dressed as Arabs, entered the Kind David Hotel
in Jerusalem. They unloaded 225 kilograms of explosives. The Secretariat of the
Government of Palestine and the Headquarters of the British Forces in Palestine
were housed there. Most of the victims were British but 15 innocent Jews also
died. The radical Zionists had no trouble killing their fellow Jews in their
attempt to advance their mission.

The Irgun terror gang also targeted Arab civilians in order to frighten them
into leaving their homes and villages. The massacre at Deir Yassin, April 9,
1948, was one such occurrence.

Christian Arabs numbering over 254 were dragged from their homes, lined up and
shot. Many were old men, women and children.

By 1948, the UN, UK and US had recognized the nation of Israel. One of its first
acts was to pass "the law of return", which gave any Jew in the world the right
to move to Israel and become a citizen. The land had been stolen from the Arabs
in a brutal fashion and the brutality has not stopped. In the years that have
followed, many "false flag" operations have occurred:

1. In 1955, Israeli agents, impersonating Arab terrorists were caught staging a
series of bombings against US installations in Egypt. The scandal came to be
known as the Lavon affair.

2. In 1967, during a war with the Arabs, Israeli gunboats and fighter jets
attacked the USS Liberty, an unarmed US ship. Thirty five American sailors were
murdered and 170 were injured. Their excuse was that they mistook the ship for
an Egyptian one. However, survivors of the incident have contradicted this.

3. In the 1980's, the Israelis once again succeeded in framing enemy Arabs in
order to anger the United States. Former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky
defected from the Mossad and tried to warn the United States about their evil,
murderous nature. He told how the Israelis framed Libya for the bombing of a
German night club which framed Libya and caused President Reagan to bomb Libya
in 1986, killing the 4 year old daughter of Libyan leader Muamar Qadhafi.
Ostrovsky's 1990 book, By Way of Deception revealed how the Mossad recruits Arab
agents to carry out their missions. He also stated "Israeli agents are skilled
at impersonating Arabs."

It is imperative to emphasize that Zionism is nobody's friend. It is imperative
that Jewish people realize that they too have been betrayed by the Zionists who
have continued using Judaism to hide behind. In fact, when all the details are
carefully examined and carefully considered, the painful reality is that it was
ZIONISM which literally sent Europe's Jews into the bowels of the Holocaust.'

A veil of disbelief shrouds many Jewish eyes. This is because the sordid history
of Zionism has been so effectively suppressed. The plethora of Holocaust movies
and cries of anti-Semitism have left Jewish people with fear and trembling. How
many of these people are aware that the Zionists collaborated with the Nazis?

1. According to Lenni Brenner's book Zionism in the Age of Dictators (Ch.7), the
Zionist party was the only other political party in Nazi Germany that enjoyed a
measure of freedom, and could publish a newspaper. The reason: Zionists and
Nazis had a common interest, making German Jews go to Palestine.

2. "If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by
bringing them over to England and only half of them by transporting them to
Eretz Israel, then I opt for the second alternative." David Ben Gurion informed
a meeting of Labor Zionists in Great Britain in 1938 (Brenner, Zionism, p.149)

3. In November 1942, Rabbi Michael Dov-Ber Weismandel, a Jewish activist in
Slovakia approached Adolph Eichmann's representative, Dieter Wisliceny: "How
much money would be needed for all the European Jews to be saved?" Wisliceny
went to Berlin and returned with an answer.

For a mere $2 million they could have all the Jews in Western Europe and the
Balkans. Weismandel sent a courier to the World Zionist Organization in
Switzerland. His request was refused. The official, Nathan Schwalb sent enough
money to save only Weismandel and his cadre. He wrote:

"About the cries coming from your country, we should know that all the Allied
nations are spilling much of their blood, and if we do not sacrifice any blood,
by what right shall we merit coming before the bargaining table when they divide
nations and lands at the war's end? ....for only with blood shall we get the
land." (Brenner, Zionism, p.237)

"Why would the Zionist leaders betray the Jews of Europe?" You wonder. After
all, the entire rationale for the state of Israel has been that it was intended
to be a refuge for Jews facing persecution.

The Zionists, to the contrary, saw any effort to rescue Europe's Jews not as the
fulfillment of their political purpose but as a threat to their entire movement.
If Europe's Jews were saved, they would wish to go elsewhere and the rescue
operation would have nothing to do with the Zionist project of conquering
Palestine. Their obsession with colonizing Palestine and overwhelming the Arabs
led the Zionist movement to oppose any rescue of the Jews facing death, because
the ability to deflect select manpower to Palestine would be impeded.

>From 1933 to 1935, the World Zionist Organization turned down two-thirds of all
the German Jews who applied for immigration certificates. As late as 1943, while
countless Jews in Europe were dying, the U.S. Congress proposed to set up a
commission to "study" the problem. Rabbi Stephen Wise, who was the principal
American spokesperson for Zionism, came to Washington to testify against the
rescue bill because it would divert attention from the colonization of

One would have, perhaps, expected the Zionists to understand the meaning of
humiliation and the pain of being perpetual refugees. And yet, in place of
compassion, the Zionists celebrated the persecution of others, even as they
first betrayed the Jews and then degraded them. They selected a victim people of
their own on whom to inflict a conquering design. They aligned the surviving
Jews with a new genocide against the Palestinian people, cloaking themselves,
with savage irony, in the collective shroud of the Holocaust.

A chilling tale of Zionist crimes against their brethren is known as The
Ringworm Children.

4. In 1951, the director general of the Israeli Health Ministry, Dr. Chaim Sheba
flew to America and returned with 7 x-ray machines, supplied to him by the
American army.

They were to be used in a mass atomic experiment with an entire generation of
Sephardi youths to be used as guinea pigs. Every Sephardi child was to be given
35,000 times the maximum dose of x-rays through his head. For doing so, the
American government paid the Israeli government 300,000 Israeli liras a year.
The entire Health budget was 60,000 liras. The money paid by the Americans is
equivalent to billions of dollars today.

To fool the parents of the victims, the children were taken away on "school
trips" and their parents were later told the x-rays were a treatment for the
scourge of scalpal ringworm. 6,000 of the children died shortly after their
doses were given, the many of the rest developed cancers that killed them over
time and are still killing them now. While living, the victims suffered from
disorders such as epilepsy, amnesia, Alzheimer's disease, chronic headaches and

Yes, that is the subject of the documentary in cold terms. It is another matter
to see the victims on the screen. ie. To watch the Moroccan lady describe what
getting 35,000 times the dose of allowable x-rays in her head feels like.

"I screamed make the headache go away. Make the headache go away. Make the
headache go away. But it never went away."

To watch the bearded man walk hunched down the street.

"I'm in my fifties and everyone thinks I'm in my seventies. I have to stoop when
I walk so I won't fall over. They took my youth away with those x-rays." To
watch the old lady who administered the doses to thousands of children. "They
brought them in lines. First their heads were shaved and smeared in burning gel.

Then a ball was put between their legs and the children were ordered not to drop
it, so they wouldn't move. The children weren't protected over the rest of their
bodies. There were no lead vests for them. I was told I was doing good by
helping to remove ringworm. If I knew what dangers the children were facing, I
would never have cooperated. Never!"

Because the whole body was exposed to the rays, the genetic makeup of the
children was often altered, affecting the next generation. We watch the woman
with the distorted face explain, "All three of my children have the same cancers
my family suffered. Are you going to tell me that's a coincidence?" Everyone
notices that Sephardi women in their fifties today, often have sparse patchy
hair, which they try to cover with henna. Most of us assumed it was just a
characteristic of Sephardi women. We watch the woman on the screen wearing a
baseball-style hat. She places a picture of a lovely young teenager with flowing
black hair opposite the lens. "That was me before my treatment. Now look at me."
She removes her hat. Even the red henna can't cover the horrifying scarred bald

The majority of the victims were Moroccan because they were the most numerous of
the Sephardi immigrants. The generation that was poisoned became the country's
perpetual poor and criminal class. It didn't make sense. The Moroccans who fled
to France became prosperous and highly educated. The common explanation was that
France got the rich, thus smart ones. The real explanation is that every French
Moroccan child didn't have his brain cells fried with gamma rays.

The film made it perfectly plain that this operation was no accident. The
dangers of x-rays had been known for over forty years. We read the official
guidelines for x-ray treatment in 1952. http://www.rense.com/general67/radd.htm

Have you had enough? I have. I am tired of the manipulation. I am tired of
watching people fighting; people who should be banding together in a common
cause. I am tired of watching Jews and Gentiles being used for the nefarious
gains of an extremely dark force. I am tired of watching the targeting and
extermination of Muslims. I am tired of watching our rights disappear while the
populace falls asleep in front of their televisions. I am tired of hate and
dissension. I am tired of helplessness and hopelessness and an immobilized
populace. I am tired of watching people throw their hands up in despair.

There are lone voices crying in the wilderness. Are these voices falling upon
deaf ears? I urge every person of conscience to speak out. Don't be afraid. We
are the many and they are the few. Add your voice to this group until the hushed
whispers become a deafening roar.

Are you doubting what I say? Don't take my word, do your own investigation. It's
a painful exploration but I truly believe that the balance of this planet hangs
on the opening of Jewish eyes. There are many good hearted Jewish people who are
being duped along with their Gentile brethren. Much of the world is waking up to
the manipulations of the few and it is imperative that Jewish people join them.
There is no time to waste. The information is limitless. There is no refuge for
Jewish people in Israel. My dear readers, Zionism will not protect you. Zionism
will crucify you on a bloody cross of avarice. It is only through a union of
Jewish, Christians and Muslims that we will we be able to take back our planet.

Copyright 2006 Judy Andreas www.judyandreas.com JUDE10901@AOL.com

(2) Lord Goldsmith to consider trial over Britons shot dead in Gaza

Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 00:26:02 +0200 From: "Kristoffer Larsson"


Lord Goldsmith to consider trial over Britons shot dead in Gaza

Jeevan Vasagar

The Guardian Saturday May 6, 2006

The attorney general confirmed yesterday he was considering whether to seek the
extradition and prosecution of an Israeli soldier who shot dead British
cameraman James Miller in Gaza.

Mr Miller, 34, was making a documentary when he was killed as he tried to leave
a Palestinian house in May 2003.

At an inquest in London last month, a jury returned a verdict that he had been
murdered. The jury also said Israeli authorities had "not been forthcoming"
about how and why Mr Miller was killed.

Lord Goldsmith was also considering a request by the family of peace activist
Tom Hurndall, who was shot as he tried to rescue children as a soldier opened
fire. Sergeant Taysir Hayb was convicted of manslaughter of Mr Hurndall by an
Israeli court last August and jailed for eight years. But the family has called
for the prosecution of senior Israeli officers who are being held responsible
for his death in Gaza in April 2003.

The families of both men visited the attorney general's offices in London
yesterday. Speaking after meeting the Miller family, Lord Goldsmith, said: "They
have explained to me the circumstances and given me a lot of insight into the

"I have assured them I will give this my personal consideration and that will be
a consideration unaffected by political considerations."

Mr Miller's family want the attorney general to consider prosecuting the Israeli
soldier, named at the inquest as Lieutenant Heib, for intentionally shooting
dead an unarmed non-combatant.

The film-maker's widow, Sophy, 35, said: "When an innocent man is killed in cold
blood there should be accountability. If the Israelis can't provide that then
the onus is on our government to do that."

(3) Assembly of First Nations giving "cover for another form of settler

Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 16:31:51 +0500 From: "Eric Walberg" <eric@albatros.uz>

This is disgusting, especially at this time - there is a major occupation by the
6 Nations natives (including Iriquois) in Caledonia, Ontario against a developer
putting up a new residential subdivision on their lands ILLEGALLY.

A local Palestinian support group is participating in the stand-off with the
police and hoisted a Palestinian flag beside the 6 Nations' flag. But this is
grassroots action, and the AFN is clearly a bought-out native bureaucracy.

(4) Israel Uber Alles: British MP latest victim

Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 21:23:29 -0700 From: Jeff Blankfort


Revenge of the Jewish lobby?

David Hirsh

May 5, 2006 12:49 PM


Chris Davies, MEP for the northwest of England, has resigned as the leader of
the Liberal Democrat group in the European Parliament. He was not sacked because
he criticized Israel or because the "Jewish lobby" forced him out.

A reader of Jewish News sent him an angry e-mail criticising him for a remark
that he made a couple of weeks ago (the whole correspondence is available here)
in which he said that after a visit to Auschwitz, he found it difficult to
understand why "those whose history is one of such terrible oppression", ie
Jews, "appear not to care that they have themselves become oppressors". She
criticized him for comparing current Israeli policy to the Holocaust. He replied
with a one-line e-mail: "Sounds like racism to me. I hope you enjoying wallowing
in your own filth."

She responded that this was a disgraceful way to reply to a constituent's
e-mail. Rather than apologise, he wrote back to her denouncing Israeli policy
and the "Jewish lobby". When Jewish News asked him to comment he said that at
the time he had received a number of abusive emails. He then offered to enter
into a dialogue with his constituent on the condition thatn she first detail her
own disagreements with Israeli policy.

Nearly a week later, Liberal Democrat Central Office reported that Chris Davies
had now offered a "fulsome apology" for his remarks to the constituent. Menzies
Campbell, the leader of the Lib Dems said that he had agreed with Davies that it
would be proper for him to resign.

Some people will try to spin this story as an example of how the powerful and
international Israel lobby is able to force the resignation of politicians who
criticise Israel. So lets analyse carefully at how "the lobby" achieved this.

Firstly, Jewish News reported Chris Davies' comments which he had already put on
his own website. Then a number of people sent abusive emails to Davies. Then the
Jewish News reader sent him an email criticising him for comparing Israel's
treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank with the Holocaust.

In the meantime, I myself had written a piece criticising Davies' use of the
clicheed Jews-should-know-better argument.

Jewish News went to the leadership of the Liberal Democrats for a comment, and
Menzies Campbell sacked Chris Davies (by mutual agreement).

One freebie weekly newspaper; a number of nutters sending abusive e-mails; at
least one more considered e-mail writer; a sociology lecturer with a website and
a CIF blog. This constellation of mighty influence will, I guarantee, be
presented as a manifestation of the power of the global "Lobby" which smoothly
moved into action to have this critic of Israel punished.

Chris Davies was not forced to resign because he criticised Israel but he did
say a number of things that one could argue made him an unsuitable person to
hold the post of Lib Dem leader in the European Parliament. None of these things
include criticising Israeli policy. I believe that he is right to criticise
Israeli policy.

Firstly he made use of two analogies which are routinely used not to shed light
on the Israel/Palestine conflict, but to demonize Israel and to foster a
commonsense popular loathing of Israel. The Israel/Palestine conflict is a nasty
and long-running dispute over (on a global scale) a small amount of territory,
in which neither party is entirely right or wrong. The Israeli occupation of the
West Bank relies on organised daily violence, repression and humiliation of
Palestinians. Many Palestinian responses to the occupation (and to the presence
of Jews in Israel) have been murderous and self-defeating. But the idea that
Israel is a Nazi state is absurd and offensive. There is not, and there never
has been, a genocide of Palestinians; there are no Israeli gas-chambers,
concentration camps or Einsatzgruppen; the numbers of deaths on both sides
throughout the conflict are analogous to the number of murders that the Nazi
regime routinely committed every few minutes.

The apartheid analogy is also false, employed to elicit an emotional reaction,
not to clarify issues. Arabs within Israel have full citizenship, legal rights,
representation in the Knesset and freedom of movement. While there is a serious
problem of racism against Arabs in Israel, and this includes significant
institutionalised racism, this is not an apartheid state. Things are worse in
the West Bank, where Jewish settlers, backed by Israel, do live in a colonial
relationship with Palestinians. But the Jewish settlers ought to go home to
Israel; a peace between Israel and Palestine will not be forged in a unitary
state (like the new South Africa). It will be a two state solution precisely
because this is a struggle between two national communities, not a struggle
against an apartheid system of racism.

So Davies made use of two demonizing analogies. He also claimed that Jews had
now become "oppressors" and that they don't seem to care. This claim is
particularly inflamatory in the context of the northwest of England, where the
BNP is trying to organise the "white" vote and the Islamists are trying to
organise the "Muslim" vote.

And then Davies insulted his constituent who criticized him by denouncing her as
a racist (because he assumed she was a "Zionist") and writing "I hope you
enjoying wallowing in your own filth."

He denounced what he called the "Jewish lobby" that, he claimed, has too much
influence. He later said that he stood by this comment, but admitted that didn't
understand the distinction between the claim that there is a "Jewish lobby" and
the claim that there is a "pro-Israel" lobby. The claim that Jews have an
inordinate influence is, of course, an old and well-worn antisemitic theme. This
is an excellent illustration of how the formal care to avoid openly antisemitic
rhetoric taken by sophisticates like Mearsheimer and Walt and Robert Fisk is
missed by less sophisticated people who seek to use what they understand the
respectable academics and journalists have argued.

Chris Davies is not an antisemite. He is not motivated by Jew-hatred. But he is
guilty of serious negligence. Davies has gone out of his way to intervene in the
Israel/Palestine conflict and he has taken an extremist position that he has
fiercely defended. But he never bothered to educate himself with any seriousness
about the conflict. More importantly, he never bothered to educate himself about
the nature of contemporary antisemitism. He is not a racist but he has shown
himself to be careless, thoughtless and ignorant about anti-Jewish racism. When
he was publicly challenged over the potentially antisemitic discourse that he
seemed to be buying into through ignorance, instead of stopping to think about
it, he angrily refused to consider the possibility. You can be sure that he is
not similarly careless, thoughtless or ignorant when it comes to anti-black
racism or anti-Muslim racism. Liberals and politicians on the left don't make
the same kind of "mistakes" when emailing their black or asian constituents.

Davies has not had to resign because he is a racist or because he criticized
Israel or because the global Jewish Lobby has taken its revenge. He has had to
resign because his laudable instinct to side with the underdog was not tempered
by care, thought or self-education. His self-righteous anger at one injustice
led him to close his eyes to the possibility of another.

We should not feel that we have to make a choice about whether to oppose
anti-Arab racism or anti-Jewish racism. We must oppose both. If we fail to stand
against both then we become partisans for the extreme end of one nationalism or
the other; we become bigots, not liberals and we cannot rightfully claim to be
on the left.

(5) Gilad and the cartoons

Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 16:33:44 +0500 From: "Eric Walberg" <eric@albatros.uz>

<As for Gilad, he doesn't seem to have grasped that the Jewish cartoonists are
attempting to discredit the standard 'anti-Semtiic' tropes by exaggerating them
to the point of gross absurdity. This is not easy, because much standard Jewish
thinking is already absurd, without needing to be exaggerated, so consequently
the intention behind the cartoons is not always evident.

Nice one, Rowan. I was duped as well, or rather puzzled. The cartoons all make
perfect sense as hard-edged critiques of J-Izzy thinking/ actions, and work
(mostly) on face value. It never occurred to me that the idea is to take anti-J
prejudice to an *absurd* length to refute it. There really is no room left on
the absurd scale these days. So their project backfires! Ha, ha.

I sent an article about Izzy SS arresting a 5 yr old (!) along with this cartoon
from Gilad's article to my soft zio lefty friends in Toronto (who have no doubt
written me off as an aunti-s).

Peter Myers, 381 Goodwood Rd, Childers 4660, Australia ph +61 7 41262296
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers Mirror: http://mailstar.net/index.html I
use the old Mac OS; being incompatible, it cannot run Windows viruses or
transmit them to you. If my mail does not arrive, or yours bounces, please ring
me: this helps beat sabotage. To unsubscribe, reply with "unsubscribe" in the
subject line; allow 1 day.


Message 12
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 10:05am(PDT)
Subject: Articles2: Kholer interviews Faber - "The US dollar is a doomed curr

From: Peter Myers

May 08, 2006

(1) A Short History of Lobotomy - over 40,000 in US underwent psychosurgery by 1955
(2) Passports to get RFID chips
(3) ALAN KOHLER interviews Marc Faber - "The US dollar is a doomed currency"
(4) Neo-cons promoting Cold War against Russia, China & "informal league of dictators"
(5) Bush 'wants to close' Guantanamo

(1) A Short History of Lobotomy - over 40,000 in US underwent psychosurgery by 1955

Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 21:33:09 -0500 From: "Gary Kohls" <gkohls@cpinternet.com>

Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter # 260

ADVENTURES WITH AN ICE PICK: A Short History of Lobotomy,

A Not-So-Ancient Form of Psychosurgery

Dr. Walter Freeman, Barbiturate Addict and President of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology in 1948, popularized the ice pick lobotomy that destroyed the brains and personalities of thousands of Americans, including famous Hollywood actress and political dissident Frances Farmer.


(full text at the link has interesting pictures)


ADVENTURES WITH AN ICE PICK: A Short History of Lobotomy [...snip...]

It took a few years...to establish the various forms of lobotomy as everyday treatment for psychiatric patients. But by 1955 over 40,000 men, women and children in the United States alone had undergone psychosurgery which left large parts of their brains irreparably vandalized by doctors who didn't even need a formal qualification to practice the operation. The greatest advocate of psychosurgery was Walter Freeman. [...snip...]

Up until 1945, Freeman had never actually performed a lobotomy himself. He had always worked in tandem with Watts, and his surgical experience was limited to performing "spinal taps". What was still lacking, for Freeman, was a version of the operation that could be performed not just by neurosurgeons, but by anyone anywhere, in a few minutes: an off-the-peg, rapid technique, so that one could pop down to the local psychiatrist and get lobotomized in the lunch break. [...snip...]

Freeman had experienced a nervous breakdown, brought on by overwork. He had been particularly scared by this experience, and ever since had taken at least three capsules of Nembutal every night to guarantee sleep. Nembutal also gave him a dreamless sleep. Freeman did not like his dreams.

His depression had deepened his prejudice against personal introspection; he believed that there was nothing to be gained from self-examination except pessimism. He himself was a great believer in activity and exercise. He went off vigorously walking whenever possible, and often prescribed the same remedy for depressed patients. Trying to talk to them was nonsense. Something that had always been a perverse source of amusement to him was the number of psychoanalysts who committed suicide. He could not help pointing out with a certain amount of glee that no fewer than eight of Freud's associates killed themselves. [...snip...]

Walter Freeman performed his most famous transorbital lobotomy when he hammered his ice pick into the head of the movie star and radical political activist Frances Farmer. She had rebelled all her life against every form of authority.... no treatment yet devised seemed to work on her; she would not be tamed. But her communist sympathies and her aggression towards officialdom had offended too many people for them to give up without "curing" her.

Hither rode Walter Freeman, knight to the rescue, ice pick in one hand, hammer in the other. On an October morning, in front of an eager audience of staff, curious visiting psychiatrists, and photographers, female patients in wheelchairs were ranged before the great showman of psychosurgery. After giving a brief lecture to the assembled crowd on the wonders of the ice pick lobotomy --no more complex then a shot of penicillin, no scar, amazing potential for controlling society's misfits, viz, schizophrenics, homosexuals, communists, etc ... (Freeman was always quick to seize on new selling points for his art) -- he went to work. [...snip...]

First sold as an operation to be used as a last resort, the lobotomy had now become the first step to creating a manageable personality. Even problem children were being lobotomized. If everybody had their frontal lobes snipped at birth, there would bean end to sorrow in the world. By 1950, in his frenzy of activity, Freeman had crossed and re-crossed America 11 times on what he called his "head hunting" expeditions, promoting the ice pick, looking for new patients, checking up on his old ones. He found a partner, Dr. Jonathan Williams, to replace the departed Watts. Williams was often shocked at Freeman's cavalier use of the ice pick, wielded anywhere at any time, but for Freeman, the passionate prophet of psychosurgery, these were his golden years.

By the early 1950s, reservations about the effects of the lobotomy could be heard. Its use as a first, rather than a last, resort, by amateur surgeons who did not even bother to give the patient a preliminary psychiatric report, was rife. Postoperative infections, and simple fatalities were common; autopsies showed that large areas of brains, not selected nerves, were utterly destroyed. Astonishingly, there had still been no reliable sustained studies of the effects on patients, only Freeman's eternally optimistic data. Though some patients did continue to pursue their professional, and private lives after the operation .it was impossible to state that this was because of the surgery. It was, furthermore, impossible to judge "recovery" in many; they were often so different. The inert, emotionless, inhuman quality of many lobotomized, who were everywhere to be seen, began to revolt the public, though thousands still submitted relatives for the operation. As early as 1951, even the Soviet Union, where psychiatric abuse was rife, had stopped performing the lobotomy on ideological grounds: it produced unresponsive people who were fixed and unchangeable.

Lobotomy was finally seen for what it was: not a cure, but a way of managing patients. It was just another form of restraint, a mental strait jacket nailed permanently over the brain. It did not create new people; it subtracted from the old ones. It was an act of defeat, of frustration. [...snip...]

(2) Passports to get RFID chips

Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 11:38:43 +0530 From: A.S.

Passports with RFID chips is absolutely not a good idea.

Putting RFID chips in passports creates an absolutely new way for terrorists to operate, who may have an agenda against citizens of any particular country. It is easy for any person who is even half-tech-savvy to see how various antisocial outfits could leverage this into simple low-tech devices that would be triggered in the proximity of a RFID enabled passport of a particular country. Imagine mines that are not triggered by weight, but by the nationality of the citizen. Imagine incendiaries that are spare everyone else but only get triggered when a person of a specific nationality walks by. Imagine mini missiles that follow a particular passport. I mean, is this so hard for a tech-savvy govt. to imagine, or is this being deliberately ignored?? Considering this, I believe that citizens should actively oppose this technology, on the grounds of personal security, and not so much on the grounds of privacy. Use RFID for grocery items - don't even think of using it for personal or nationality idetification.

(3) ALAN KOHLER interviews Marc Faber - "The US dollar is a doomed currency"

Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 07:24:33 +0100 From: Rowan Berkeley <rowan.berkeley@googlemail.com>

ABC Online, Inside Business - 07/05/2006: Gold price to kick into full gear: Faber http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/content/2006/s1632456.htm

ALAN KOHLER: Well, the death of the Greenback, gold at $US6,000 an ounce with commodity and energy prices rising vertically, spurred on by growing international tensions and war - no, that's not the background to the latest sci-fi pot boiler, but the tentative vision of one of the world's most respected contrarian economic forecasters, Marc Faber. Dr Faber must be taken seriously though because of his record in predicting, among other things, the global stock market crash of 87, Japan's collapse in 1990 and the Asian meltdown of 1997 - forecasts that earned him the moniker Dr Doom. He's also the editor and publisher of the influential The Gloom, Boom and Doom Report. And, as you'll hear, he has some very interesting views on the relative merits of the Australian and US central banks. I spoke to Marc Faber from New York this week.

Marc Faber, just to put this week's interest rate increase in Australia into a global perspective, do you think the developed world in general is in a process of increasing interest rates and reducing liquidity that has a way to run yet?

MARC FABER, 'THE GLOOM, BOOM AND DOOM REPORT': Yes, I think so because we have a global boom and interest rate increases have been very slow. In other words, in the US, we went from 1 per cent on the Fed fund rate in June 2004 to 4.75 per cent, but I think that inflation is higher than 4.75 per cent. And if you look at long growth in the US and credit market growth, then we haven't had tight money yet because if money was tight, then asset markets wouldn't rally as they do at the present time.

ALAN KOHLER: There is a lot of debate in the financial markets about whether the US will have a pause in its interest rate tightening cycle. What do you think?

MARC FABER: Well, I basically think that Mr Bernanke is a money printer and it's interesting to see that since he was appointed Fed chairman, the price of gold has risen by 42 per cent so the market is not very happy with his bias towards money printing.

ALAN KOHLER: Do you think that Mr Bernanke is losing control of the situation, in fact? I mean, I notice the markets are testing him now.

MARC FABER: I think that on his recent comments that the Fed might pause, immediately the US dollar became very weak, the bond market sold off and gold prices shot up another $20, $30, so that is a lesson for him that the market begins to see through his inflationary monetary policies.

ALAN KOHLER: What do you think of the Australian central bank and its decision this week to increase interest rates?

MARC FABER: I think actually that the Australian central bank is probably relatively better than others in the sense that they have further tightened monetary policies and so we have in Australia an interesting situation. The economy is kind of weakening, but there are some inflationary pressures and the Australian Reserve Bank has increased interest rates so I find it is actually quite courageous.

ALAN KOHLER: What do you think it means for the Australian dollar?

MARC FABER: Actually what has happened, the Australian dollar along with the New Zealand dollar was weakening recently but in the last, say, two weeks the Australian dollar has again strengthened from 70 cents to 76 cents, so I would say the Australian dollar is supported by relatively high interest rates.

ALAN KOHLER: What do you think about the length of the current commodities boom? You've written recently about firstly how the long wave of commodities could last for another 15 to 20 years and you've also talked about the impact of India on commodities, so where do you see prices of commodities going from here?

MARC FABER: Basically we had a bear market in commodities between 1980 and 2001, or 1998 and 2001, so we had more than 20 years bear market in commodities. By the late 1990s in real terms, in other words inflation-adjusted, commodity prices were at the lowest level in the history of capitalism in the last 200 years and now they have risen substantially - the price of copper from around 60 cents to over $3 a pound, the price of gold has more than doubled. But in real terms, commodities are still relatively low compared to equities and therefore, also given the length of the cycle - the cycle for commodities lasts usually 45 to 60 years peak to peak or trough to trough - in other words the upward wave in commodities lasts around 22 to 30 years and we are now in year 2006. The bull market started in 2001 so we are five years into the bull market. I do concede that the markets are overbought and there is a lot of speculation and I expect a correction but I think longer term from here onwards commodities will outperform the Dow Jones and financial assets.

ALAN KOHLER: You've been reported as predicting that the price of gold will rise to $US6,000 per ounce. Is that correct - is that what you said?

MARC FABER: What I said is that if Mr Bernanke prints money, it is entirely conceivable that the Dow Jones goes to 33,000 or 40,000 or 100,000 or 1 million. All I am saying is if the Dow Jones here goes up three times because of money printing by Mr Bernanke and we have examples in financial history where a central bank printed money and everything went up, but in this instance I think that gold would significantly outperform the Dow Jones. So if someone says to me the Dow will go to 33,000, I say yes, it's possible but it will decline against the price of gold which will go up to $US5,000, $US6,000 an ounce.

ALAN KOHLER: Did you notice that Steven Roach, the chief economist of Morgan Stanley, who has been a bear for a very long time, seems to have changed his tune now, saying he's feeling better about the world than for a long time. Do you think that the fact that Steve Roach has kind of thrown in the towel is a sell signal or do you think he's onto something?

MARC FABER: Well, Steve is a good friend of mine and he gave already a sell signal two years ago. He suddenly turned bullish about bonds and since then the bond market has been weak. And I agree with him that we are in a global boom but it doesn't change the fact that it is an imbalanced boom and it's driven largely by credit creation in the US, leading to overconsumption, leading to a growing trade deficit, current account deficit, the accumulation of reserves in Asia and a global boom. But it is nevertheless an imbalanced boom and one day there will be a problem, certainly with the US dollar. The US dollar is a doomed currency. Doomed? Doomed. Will be worthless. Actually each one of your listeners should buy one US Treasury bond and frame it - put it on the wall so they can show their grandchildren how the US dollar and how US dollar bonds became worthless as a result of monetary inflation.

ALAN KOHLER: You made at least three great calls - you warned of the 87 crash just before it happened, you warned investors to get out of Japan in 1990 and out of Asia in general in 1997. So what specifically is your call right now?

MARC FABER: I think we are in a bear market for financial assets. There's a bear market where the Dow Jones, say, would go from here - 11,000 to 33,000. It would go up in dollar terms but the dollar would collapse against, say gold or foreign currencies. That's what I think will happen with Mr Bernanke at the Fed because he has written papers and he has pronounced speeches in which he clearly says that the danger for the economy would be to have not deflation in the price of a fax machine or PC, but deflation in asset prices. And so I believe that he is a money printer. If I had been a university professor, I would not have let him pass his exams to become an economist. I would have said, "Learn an apprenticeship as a money printer."

ALAN KOHLER: (Laughs) So, a big mistake putting him in charge of the Fed then?

MARC FABER: I think it's very dangerous, very dangerous.

ALAN KOHLER: You've talked in the past about the links between the commodity price cycles and political tensions in the world and you've pointed out that when the Soviet Union collapsed, commodity prices were weak and you've said that rising commodity prices leads to the conditions for war. Now that we're in a commodities boom - which you now say is going to go for a long time - do you think that we're in for a period of rising political tension as well?

MARC FABER: Basically the way we economists have business cycles theories, the historians have war cycles theories and I don't want to go into all of them, but when commodity prices decline, countries are not concerned about getting supplies of vital commodities, whereas when commodity prices go up, it's a symptom of shortages. America needs oil for consumption and China and increasingly India need oil for their economic growth. If you are growing your industries at a production of 15 per cent per annum, as China, you need increasing quantities of oil and China was self-sufficient until 1994 and today they are the largest consumer of oil and import most of it from the Middle East. So the tensions of course arise and I can see that some people have become very powerful whereas the balance of power in the 80s and 90s shifted to the industrialised countries of the West that consume a lot of oil, now the balance of power has shifted to people like Evo Morales, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Mr Putin - Mr Putin is the most powerful man in the world, it's not Mr Bush because Mr Putin controls a production of oil of 10 million barrels, plus he controls all the pipelines going to Europe. And it has also shifted to Mr Ahmadinejad. Mr Ahmadinejad of Iran would be very quiet, as well as Mr Chavez, if oil prices were at $12. But at $70 they have a lot of leverage and so the tensions have also increased. It doesn't mean that it comes to war but the conditions for war have improved and I think that eventually this commodity cycle will last so long until there is a major war and during war times, the best hedge is to be low in commodities, then commodities really go up vertically.

ALAN KOHLER: Bit of a grim way to make money, I suppose?

MARC FABER: Hedge funds make money anyway. It doesn't - morals are not the most important issue.

ALAN KOHLER: Well, on that note we'll have to leave it there. Thanks very much, Marc Faber.

MARC FABER: It is my pleasure.

(4) Neo-cons promoting Cold War against Russia, China & "informal league of dictators"

Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 09:12:09 -0400 From: "David Chiang" <sino.economics@verizon.net>

Hawks Looking for New and Bigger Enemies? by Jim Lobe http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=8950

As if rallying fading public support for keeping more than 100,000 U.S. troops in a disintegrating Iraq and preparing the ground for a possible military attack on Iran were not enough, some influential hawks are now promoting a more confrontational stance against Russia and China, as well.

Their eagerness to take on new and bigger enemies, signaled by Vice Pres. Dick Cheney's blistering verbal assault on Russia Thursday, could be a calculated effort to intimidate the two Eurasian giants at a moment when the U.S. and the European Union (EU) appear to have forged greater unity on key foreign policy issues than at any time since Washington invaded Iraq three years ago.

Russia and China, which were initially treated as allies in the "global war on terror", are now seen as the two biggest obstacles to Washington's drive to impose U.N. Security sanctions against Iran, the administration's current top foreign policy priority. Hardliners may believe that putting them on the defensive at this moment could persuade them to show greater flexibility, at least with respect to Iran.

At the same time, however, a more aggressive stance toward the two powers risks driving them further together in opposition to U.S. geo-strategic designs, particularly isolating Iran and asserting more control over the flow of oil and gas out of Central Asia and the Caucasus.

It could also revive trans-Atlantic tensions despite the convergence between the major western European powers and the United States at the Security Council over Iran. That unity could turn out to be fleeting, particularly if Washington fails to heed increasingly urgent pleas by its allies to offer the Islamic Republic security guarantees in exchange for a verifiable freeze on its nuclear programme.

"I don't see how antagonising (Russian President Vladimir) Putin at this particular moment will make it any easier for him to support you on Iran," said one Congressional foreign policy aide. "And I can't imagine that the Europeans think this is such a good idea at this moment either."

The administration's position toward both Russia and China has gradually hardened over the past year for a number of reasons, including what appears to be their joint strategy of pushing the U.S. military out of bases in Uzbekistan and elsewhere in Central Asia; their relations with what the administration considers hostile or rogue states, such as Sudan and Belarus; their failure to "deliver" Iran and North Korea in negotiations over their nuclear programmes; and their refusal to respond to U.S. bilateral concerns, from human rights to trade.

While Beijing had come to expect hawkish statements from the Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon, Chinese leaders -- as well as her hosts in Australia -- were taken aback when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sounded alarms about Beijing's becoming a "negative force" in Asia during a swing through Southeast Asia in March.

The administration's ongoing and increasingly ardent courtship of both Japan and India as strategic allies against Beijing in what it calls its "hedge" strategy has also done little to promote greater trust.

In that context, the many procedural slights and disruptions -- from introducing the national anthem of "The Republic of China" to permitting a well-known Falun Gong activist to infiltrate the White House welcoming ceremony -- that soured President Hu Jintao's visit here two weeks ago have reportedly been interpreted in Beijing as deliberate efforts by at least some forces in the administration to embarrass the Chinese leader.

Similarly, Cheney's blast against Russia -- the harshest U.S. attack on Moscow since the Bush administration took power -- delivered right next door at a NATO-EU conference in Vilnius, Lithuania and just two months before Putin plays host to the G-8 Summit in St. Petersburg, strongly suggests that the hawks are once again ascendant.

Among other points, Cheney accused Moscow of using its control over energy supplies as tools of "intimidation or blackmail" against its neighbours, "undermin(ing) (their) territorial integrity", and "interfer(ing) with democratic movements".

"Russia has a choice to make," he declared in terms that reminded some observers of the "Iron Curtain" speech delivered by former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in Missouri at the outset of the Cold War and prompted others to predict that hardliners around Putin would be strengthened.

"When making these kind of statements, you always have to keep in mind what the reaction from the other side will be, and it's difficult for me to imagine that Russia is simply going to agree with these reproaches." Vyacheslav Nikonov, a Moscow political analyst described as close to the Kremlin, told the Financial Times.

Indeed, it is likely that Washington's growing hawkishness will strengthen hardliners in both Beijing and Moscow and make it harder for the administration to enlist their help with respect to either Iran or the " global war on terror."

But according to a leading neo-conservative strategist, Robert Kagan, larger goals may be at stake.

In a Washington Post column published last Sunday, Kagan, whose spouse, Victoria Nuland, worked as Cheney's deputy national security advisor until last year and now serves as U.S. ambassador to NATO, argued that Washington now faces as much of an ideological struggle against the two great powers as a contest for control over resources.

"Until now the liberal West's strategy has been to try to integrate these two powers into the international liberal order, to tame them and make them safe for liberalism," argued Kagan, a co-founder with Weekly Standard editor William Kristol of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

"If, instead, China and Russia are going to be sturdy pillars of autocracy over the coming decades, enduring and perhaps even prospering, then they cannot be expected to embrace the West's vision of humanity's inexorable evolution toward democracy and the end of autocratic rule," he said.

Given their own autocratic nature, the two nations have emerged as the protectors of "an informal league of dictators" -- that, according to Kagan, currently includes the leaders of Belarus, Uzbekistan, Burma, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Venezuela, Iran and Angola, among others -- around the world who, like the leaders of Russia and China themselves, resist any efforts by the West to interfere in their domestic affairs, either through sanctions or other means.

"The question is what the United States and Europe decide to do in response," wrote Kagan. "Unfortunately, al Qaeda may not be the only challenge liberalism faces today, or even the greatest."

(5) Bush 'wants to close' Guantanamo

Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 07:49:32 +0930 From: "Adelaide Institute" <info@adelaideinstitute.org>

Bush 'wants to close' Guantanamo - http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200605/s1632592.htm

US President George W Bush says he would like to close the US-run prison at Guantanamo Bay but is awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on where suspects held there might be tried.

Human rights groups have accused the US of mistreating Guantanamo detainees through cruel interrogation methods, a charge denied by the US Government.

They also criticise the indefinite detention of suspects captured since the military prison was opened in 2002 as part of the Bush administration's declared war on terrorism.

Mr Bush was asked by the German public television station ARD how the United States could restore its human rights image after reports of prisoner abuse.

"Of course Guantanamo is a delicate issue for people. I would like to close the camp and put the prisoners on trial," Mr Bush said.

"Our top court must still rule on whether they should go before a civil or military court. They will get their day in court.

"One can't say that of the people that they killed. They didn't give these people the opportunity for a fair trial."

The quotes were translated by news agency Reuters from a German transcript.

Court ruling

The US Supreme Court is expected to rule by the end of June on whether military tribunals of foreign terrorist suspects can proceed.

Australian David Hicks is one of those facing trial.

He is charged with conspiracy to commit war crimes, attempted murder and aiding the enemy.

The US has 480 detainees at Guantanamo and has freed or handed over to their home governments a total of 272.

The Pentagon has said it has no interest in holding anyone longer than necessary, but that it has been unable to arrange for some to return to their home countries.

The Pentagon says the detainees come from 40 countries and the West Bank, with the largest number from Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Yemen.

In a report last week for the UN Committee against Torture, Amnesty International said torture and inhumane treatment was "widespread" in US-run detention centres, including Guantanamo Bay.

The US defended its treatment of foreign terrorism suspects in a hearing before the committee in Geneva on Friday, saying it backed a ban on torture.

- Reuters

Peter Myers, 381 Goodwood Rd, Childers 4660, Australia ph +61 7 41262296
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers Mirror: http://mailstar.net/index.html I use the old Mac OS; being incompatible, it cannot run Windows viruses or transmit them to you. If my mail does not arrive, or yours bounces, please ring me: this helps beat sabotage. To unsubscribe, reply with "unsubscribe" in the subject line; allow 1 day.


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: