Discussion about 09/11/2001: [911TruthAction] Digest Number 1308

Sunday, May 28, 2006

[911TruthAction] Digest Number 1308

Topics in this digest:

1. Question
From: "jewish_from_brooklyn" jewish_from_brooklyn@yahoo.com
2. Question
From: "jewish_from_brooklyn" jewish_from_brooklyn@yahoo.com
3. Please visit my two (2) new 9-11-related Yahoo! forums ...
From: "jewish_from_brooklyn" jewish_from_brooklyn@yahoo.com
4. A Day in the Life: 5/27/6
From: "President, USA Exile Govt." prez@usa-exile.org
5. R.Dreyfuss: Cheney's control of US govt -- The enforcers
From: "Ronald" bleier.r@gmail.com
6. wAR pRESIDENT? nOT!
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
7. "It Can't Happen Here"
From: "erik larson" 91erik@gmail.com
8. Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors as Pacifiers in Preparation For Mart
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
9. [Fwd: APFN: REl E-MAIL YOUR CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS]
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
10. Protest Hillary Clinton on Pro-War Stance
From: "advokris@aol.com" advokris@aol.com
11. 109th Congress H.R. 4752!
From: "Naveed" flanker12k@yahoo.com
12. Re: 109th Congress H.R. 4752!
From: "Kevin Hammond" sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com
13. Re: Protest Hillary Clinton on Pro-War Stance
From: "Kevin Hammond" sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com
14. Rate My Rep RESULTS: Congressman Doolittle (CA)
From: "RateMyRep" anonymsx@yahoo.fr
15. NIST Says No to Debate On 9/11 Science
From: "Cathy Garger" savorsuccesslady@yahoo.com
16. Teacher Put on Leave for Voicing 9/11 Opinions
From: "Jarrett Smith" Jarret.Smith@ntlworld.com

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 1
From: "jewish_from_brooklyn" jewish_from_brooklyn@yahoo.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 8:58am(PDT)
Subject: Question

Message-ID: <e59ss4+beq8@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 70.129.206.155
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose
Sender: notify@yahoogroups.com
X-Yahoo-GPoster: =J1GuX3LvfMqcDu6

Who's going to stop Israel from staging another attack and then placing bla=
me
for the attack on some fabricated newsmedia villain (s) ?

Yaacov.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 2
From: "jewish_from_brooklyn" jewish_from_brooklyn@yahoo.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 9:14am(PDT)
Subject: Question

Who's going to stop Israel from staging another attack and then placing blame
for the attack on some fabricated newsmedia villain (s) ?

Please visit my two (2) new 9-11-related Yahoo! forums ...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/9-11-01_the_Zionist_Connection/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911_free_discussion/

Yaacov.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 3
From: "jewish_from_brooklyn" jewish_from_brooklyn@yahoo.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 9:15am(PDT)
Subject: Please visit my two (2) new 9-11-related Yahoo! forums ...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/9-11-01_the_Zionist_Connection/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911_free_discussion/

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 4
From: "President, USA Exile Govt." prez@usa-exile.org
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 10:01am(PDT)
Subject: A Day in the Life: 5/27/6

GOVERNMENT OF THE USA IN EXILE
Free Americans
Reaching Out to Amerika's Huddled Masses Yearning to Breathe Free
��
Via <prez@usa-exile.org>

May 27, 2006

From: John Leonard <jpleonard@verizon.net>
Date: May 27, 2006 1:19:32 AM EST
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [911TruthAction] Spooks Cut phone lines for Tarpley - Meyssan
interview

Please post widely -- let Goebbels W. Bush censorship tactics backfire!

Hayden's Heroes Cut Famous French
Dissident's Phone Off
From Live Radio Interview on
Pentagon Videos

Did Regime Dread
Dean of 9/11 Debunkers Would Pop Pentagon Propaganda Bubble?

"New" Videos Dissed as "Pathetic Farce"

Washington DC, May 26th (Progressive Press) -- Who did it? NSA, CIA,
NATO, Mossad, MI-6? Secret services every one -- so it's a secret.

But this much is sure -- they all had means and motive -- and the
chances that Thierry Meyssan's phone went dead right on cue, then came
back to life all by itself after the show, equal one big fat Z�ro.

Meyssan, president of the world-wide Voltaire research network, was
the first author in print to demolish the corrupt US regime's official
conspiracy theory on 9/11.

His book was the all-time French best-seller upon its release in March
2002. He called it "L'Effroyable Imposture" (literally, "the Atrocious
Fraud" -- English title "The Big Lie").

So we've dubbed the "new" video frames of an explosion at the Pentagon
"La Pitoyable Imposture -- The Pathetic Farce!"

Not only do they show nothing remotely resembling the missing Boeing,
but most of them were already released four years ago by the FBI, three
days before Meyssan's book came out, in a crude attempt to quash him.
[1]

To refute the media frenzy over the "new video" rehash at its peak,
and since Meyssan is the foremost expert on the Pentagon hoax, American
author Webster Griffin Tarpley invited him on his weekly World Crisis
Radio talk show last Saturday, May 20th.

But Meyssan was left out in the cold. His phone went dead 15 minutes
before the interview was to start -- something that has never happened
before. An hour and a half later, just as the show was over, his phone
suddenly started working again.

Tarpley has rescheduled Meyssan this week, at the same time Saturday
May 27th on RBNLive.com, around 2 p.m. Eastern, and there will be
streaming archives online.

But the American censors silenced Meyssan while the Pentagon videos
were the top story. It's one more example of the subtle way they work.
They don't rub out every last mention of dissent in the media. They
just make sure it's off the screen 80% of the time, so they can keep on
fooling most of the people most of the time. It works much more
smoothly than heavy-handed Soviet-style censorship.

That said, let's also look at what the Pentagon hoax is not.

The "missing Boeing" at the Pentagon is NOT the cornerstone of "9/11
conspiracy theories" -- far from it. Because the blast occurred at the
Pentagon, a military site, little about it is really certain. The
videos, the witness statements, almost everything could be faked. One
researcher says there is only one photo he is sure is genuine. (Shown
below and at his site.. Taken by a civilian firefighter, it shows a
pristine lawn without a trace of a plane crash, and two firetrucks
putting out what could be a small, smoky fire set to obscure the view.)

The confusing evidence at the Pentagon is why the main-dream media
always serve it up when they are forced to mention that alternative
theories on 9/11 exist at all.

Likewise, it's why the blackout of the demolition of Building WTC-7 on
9/11 is so thorough that most people still have never heard of it. This
is the real smoking gun of "9/11 Truth" skeptics, the embarrassment
that shills for the regime can't even write fiction about. Which is
also why Progressive Press is releasing a new book of objective math
and physics on the impossibility that the three WTC towers could
collapse from fire, under the title "9/11 on Trial."

The dead giveaway: All three WTC towers plummeted at free-fall speed
into their own footprints -- even Bldg 7, whose scheduled flight missed
it by 300 hundred miles. Such a drop is obviously possible only if the
support columns were blasted away by demolition. But just try and get
the media to debate you on that. Silence of the grave. Their paid
pussies can only catcall: "Now this'll show you conspiracy wing-nuts!
Just look at the Emperor's New Video!"

The WTC and Pentagon hoaxes share one thing in common. Kerosene, or
aviation fuel, is certainly flammable, but it's not explosive. The
Pathetic Farce video shows no plane, but it does show a huge fireball
on the outside wall of the Pentagon. Not a bird, not a plane, but a
bomb.

Anyone who has watched TV knows the First Law of Modern Media
Pyrotechnics:
In Hollywood, cars ALWAYS explode into lurid flames the second they
crash.

And we are all familiar with the Antithesis, too:
Everywhere else, in real accidents, you NEVER see a car explode in
flames on impact.

Because gasoline is not an explosive, either. Ditto with the alleged
airline crashes on 9/11 and their spectacular fireballs. Just props
from the skunk works special effects department.

Do you believe your eyes and your brain, or do you believe the
brainwashing?

Well, the fact is, most people don't own their eyes and brains. They
have them on loan from the media monopoly.

-- John Leonard

Further reading:

"The Collapse of World Trade Center 1, 2 and 7," Ch. VI from "9/11
Synthetic Terror: Made in USA"

Short transcript of Thierry Meyssan on World Crisis Radio, 4/22/06

Recent related press releases by John Leonard:
- Pentagon Video should show 6 Frames of Boeing
- Google Gags Whistleblower on Pro-Nazi U.S. Elite
- Call for a Bill of Rights for Political Freedom vs Media Monopoly
- Publisher Sees Only One Way to Stop War on Iraq, Iran: Thru 9/11
Truth
- Readers' Tastes on 9/11 Take Radical Turn -- Best-seller Now Webster
Tarpley's '9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA'
��
[1] "Three days before Meyssan�s pioneering book L�effroyable
imposture (The Big Lie) was published, the FBI gave CNN a meager five
frames from a surveillance video camera which purported to show how the
Pentagon was hit � although these images proved nothing of value to
shore up the official version. The pictures were reported in the
Washington Post of March 7, 2002, and televised on March 8, 2002,
certainly not by coincidence." -- 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA,
p. 250, by Webster G. Tarpley.

Web page of this article:
http://www.waronfreedom.org/press/MeyssanCoup.html

Progressive Press

========================================================================
=================================================================

From: EF! Media Center <hayduke@efmedia.org>
Date: May 26, 2006 8:39:51 PM EST
To: JuliaButterflyNet <juliabutterflynet@yahoogroups.com>, Earth First!
alert <earthfirstalert@yahoogroups.com>, STUMPS@lists.forestcouncil.org
Subject: COLF: Help NOW! Julia in Tree in S. Central LA To:
hayduke@efmedia.org

From: "Circle of Life" <info@circleoflife.org>
Subject: Help NOW!� Julia in Tree in S. Central LA
Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 19:27:02 -0400 (EDT)

Julia Butterfly Is at It
Again: South Central LA Tree Sit
Julia Butterfly Hill, Joan Baez, Darryl
Hannah and John Quigley on the Scene in South Central LA

As many of you have already heard�she�s at it again! Julia is sitting
in a tree along with fellow treesitter, John Quigley and folk singer
and activist superstar Joan Baez.

Read on for more info here or at www.circleoflife.org, but NOW what you
can do is:

1. Go to the FARM NOW for tonight's vigil. For address and info see:��
www.southcentralfarmers.com.

We have heard that tomorrow morning the LA Sheriff's Department will
enter the farm and they need community support tonight. Please forward
this info to anyone you know in Los Angeles.

2. Call Mayor Villaraigosa and tell him that you want the City of Los
Angeles to buy the farm back from the developer and give it in
perpetuity to the South Central Farmers. (213) 978-0600

3. Make a donation to the South Central Farmers
(http://www.southcentralfarmers.com/index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=114&Itemid=32) to help buy back the
farm.

Julia is asking for every person to give at least $1 towards this
historic farm. Together we can make the difference.�� Donate NOW at
www.southcentralfarmers.com

Here's the story:

Just about one week ago, Julia walked into the Circle of Life office
and told us that while she hoped it did not come down to the need for
her to do direct action to save the South Central Farm in Los
Angeles�she would be up in a tree soon if there was a need. On Tuesday,
May 23 Julia stationed herself in the �community watchtower�--a 3 story
high walnut tree on the 14 acre South Central Farm. She joins in
solidarity with 350 poor working class families who use the farm to
grow organic food for themselves and their community.

Fourteen years ago, this spot was a wasteland--and in the wake of the
1992 LA uprising then-Mayor Bradley and Doris Block of the L.A.
Regional Food Bank made a handshake deal to allow it to be used for a
community farm. Today, after thousands and thousands of hours of sweat
and labor, the South Central Farm is the largest urban farm in the
nation. The 350 families who use the farming plots are low&#8209;income
and depend heavily upon the food they grow to feed themselves. In
addition to growing food for themselves, the people involved with the
community garden hold Farmers' Markets, festivals and other cultural
events for the public at large.

In a backroom deal in 1996, the 14-acre farm was offered to a developer
at a discount, but the deal was never approved by the City Council. In
2002, the developers sued the City and a settlement was reached giving
the farm to the developers for a significantly below-market price. To
repurchase the farm, the developer is insisting on over $16 million
(they paid just over $5 million for it four years ago) and $6 million
has already been raised by the South Central Farmers. Mayor Antonio
Villaraigosa has the ability to pay the rest of selling price from the
City budget, or further challenge the original sale. However, he has
done neither.

�This is the Promised Land�, community leader Dele Ailemen emphatically
stated on the encampment�s first day. �It was land that was promised to
this community by the Mayor of Los Angeles after the 1992 uprising.�
�It will not be taken away by broken political promises.�

Circle of Life
P.O. Box 3764
Oakland, California 94609

========================================================================
==================================

Netroots Helps Ensure Net
Neutrality Victory

By Congressman John Conyers
May 26, 2006

GlobalResearch.ca

A very important victory was won today for the rights of internet
consumers. The Judiciary Committee today approved a bill, the Internet
Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act, to preserve net neutrality. This
bipartisan bill would prevent corporate executives from determining
what content you are allowed to view on the internet.

Some companies that provide the lines through which internet traffic
travels are seeking the ability to discriminate against certain content
providers, charging higher rates and providing different levels of
service. Having this ability to charge different rates to different
types of content providers would allow the entities that control 98 per
cent of internet traffic to restrict your access to certain competing
sites wherever it chose.

This bill was a big challenge to some very powerful lobbies on Capitol
Hill, but a massive grassroots operation coordinated by MyDD.com and
MoveOn.org helped put enough pressure on Judiciary lawmakers to ensure
a comfortable victory. Members of Congress heard from plenty of their
constituents about the importance of this bill and not one Democrat
voted against it.

While this was a critical success, we still have more to do. This bill
may or may not come to a vote on the house floor. It may take similar
efforts from the netroots to be ultimately successful on this issue.

http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000458.htm

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:
crgeditor@yahoo.com

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 John Conyers, GlobalResearch.ca, 2006
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?
context=viewArticle&code=CON20060526&articleId=2517
Privacy Policy
� Copyright 2005 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia � Copyright 2005

========================================================================
================================================

http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn9228-mysterious-glowing-
clouds-targeted-by-nasa.html
NewScientist SPACE
NewScientist.com
27 May 2006

Glowing, silvery blue clouds that have been spreading around the world
and brightening mysteriously in recent years will soon be studied in
unprecedented detail by a NASA spacecraft.

The Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere (AIM) mission will be the first
satellite dedicated to studying this enigmatic phenomenon. Due to
launch in late 2006, it should reveal whether the clouds are caused by
global warming, as many scientists believe.

"Noctilucent" clouds, which glow at night, form in the upper
atmosphere, at an altitude of about 80 kilometres, and their glow can
be seen just after sunset or just before sunrise.

"Even though the Sun's gone down and you're in darkness, the clouds are
so high up, the Sun is still illuminating them," explains AIM principal
investigator James Russell at Hampton University in Virginia, US.
Russell described the mission on Thursday at a meeting of the American
Geophysical Union in Baltimore, Maryland, US.
Bigger and brighter

The clouds were first observed above polar regions in 1885 � suggesting
they may have been caused by the eruption of Krakatoa two years before.
But they have spread to latitudes as low as 40� in recent years.
"They're also getting brighter, and each year there are more of them
than in the previous year," Russell told New Scientist.

Many researchers believe this proliferation is down to human
activities. "You need three things for clouds to form: particles that
water can condense onto; water; and cold temperatures," says Russell.
He says pollution and global warming are thought to be responsible for
two of those factors.

Atmospheric water may be boosted by livestock farming and the burning
of fossil fuels, which spew methane into the atmosphere: sunlight
breaks down the methane, releasing hydrogen that can bond with oxygen
to form water.

And greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide actually help to cool the
upper atmosphere, where the clouds form. That is because the
atmospheric density is so low at that altitude that the gases cannot
trap heat as they do closer to the Earth's surface, and the heat is
simply radiated into space.

Alien ice

As yet, it is not clear what the source of the particles that "seed"
the clouds is. The clouds form during the local summer months, when the
pole is bathed in perpetual sunlight. So one possibility is that warm
air rising above the pole could carry dust upwards from lower
atmospheric altitudes, onto which water can condense.

But the dust could also have a cosmic source, dropping into the
atmosphere from space. "It may be there's a constant supply of
particles but a changing temperature and water environment makes the
conditions right to grow ice particles," says Russell.

AIM will use three instruments to study the clouds. One is a suite of
four cameras that will provide panoramic views of the poles and clouds.
Another, called the Solar Occultation for Ice Experiment (SOFIE), will
study the chemistry of the ice particles and clouds � measuring
molecules such as methane. It will also observe the Sun through the
atmosphere to measure how much sunlight is dimmed by dust in the
atmosphere.

The third instrument, called the Cosmic Dust Experiment, is a plastic
film that sits on top of the spacecraft. It will record every "hit"
from a dust particle that rains down on it from space.

Cloud umbrella

"We want to know why the clouds form and why they vary," says Russell.
"If there is a human connection, it'll tell us that we're doing
something to the atmosphere and that we need to determine what the
long-term consequences are."

Some scientists speculate that the clouds might actually help mitigate
global warming, says Russell. "If these clouds were to continue to grow
and cover broad areas of Earth, they would form something like a thin,
semi-transparent umbrella," he told New Scientist. "They would reduce
the amount of solar rays making it to the ground, so they could
actually reduce the effects of global warming."

The AIM satellite will launch into a polar orbit from California's
Vandenburg Air Force Base. Russell says it may lift off in December,
but its exact launch date has not been set because mission planners are
still working to minimise vibration forces on the spacecraft due to its
Pegasus XL launch rocket.

========================================================================
=================================================================

NOTE: I can't vouch for the accuracy of this catalog--but if none of
the elements are exaggerated, it represents a formidable quantity of
suppressed info; the second one sounds like disinfo, though, since bin
Laden wasn't involved in the 9/11 attacks. -- kl, pp

From: TomFlocco@cs.com
Date: May 27, 2006 1:30:30 AM EST
Subject: Top-6 evidence documents obstructed by Congress, media

Top-6 Evidence Documents Obstructed by Congress, Media

Wanta post 911 letter to VP Cheney--Boxes of cash moved to U.S. after
attacks
http://www.tomflocco.com/fs/2ndMemoToCheney.htm

Wanta post 911 memo to VP Cheney--FBI, CIA met with bin Laden aide
after attacks
http://www.tomflocco.com/fs/CheneyKnew.htm

Secret Division 4 report calling JFK Jr. death an assassinationn
http://www.tomflocco.com/Docs/Interpol/index.htm

FBI memo, photo link Bush Sr to JFK Dallas murder scene
http://www.tomflocco.com/fs/FbiMemoPhotoLinkBushJfk.htm

Bank accounts, trust documents proving Bush-Clinton embezzlement of
U.S. Treasury
http://tomflocco.com/fs/SenClintonGrenada.htm

Top-secret Cambone notes detail Iraq War plans on day of 911 attacks
http://www.tomflocco.com/fs/TopSecretNotes.htm

========================================================================
================================================================

From: "paul illich" <paul_illich@hotmail.com>
Date: May 26, 2006 6:09:19 AM EST
To: bluegreenearth@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bluegreenearth] fwd: Timor: A People's State Against A
Capitalist's State?

From: clintonf@optusnet.com.au
Subject: Timor: A defence of Alkatiri (POSTED FYI WITHOUT COMMENT BY ME)

This is a discussion compiled by the Grupu Estudu Maubere on Fretilin
and
the policies of the current Government of Timor-Leste.
This document was put together on the eve of Fretilin's national
congress.
It is open for discussion and any comments or ideas are
welcomed. Note that Grupu Estudu Maubere is not an organisation of,
affiliated or associated with Fretilin.

Grupu Estudu Maubere:

A People's State Against A Capitalist's State

When the occupiers left Timor-Leste after having been defeated in the
1999
referendum, the people of Timor-Leste entered a
transitional phase to set up the independent state of Timor-Leste
through
the auspices of the UN. The transition period in
Timor-Leste marked the first ever in history of UN's direct involvement
in
the governance of country.

In carrying out its mandate as government, the UN handed the World Bank
the
job of managing Timor-Leste's reconstruction and
development effort by administering the funds donated by UN member
states.
In October 1999 the World Bank established the Joint
Assessment Mission to formulate a basic plan for Timor-Leste's
reconstruction. The results of the assessment became the guide to the
reconstruction of Timor-Leste. In carrying out the reconstruction
program
and establishing Timor-Leste's institutions, the leaders
of the organisations which fought for independence under the CNRT were
distanced and their only role became consultative.

Even after sovereignty was handed over in May 2002, the UN and the World
Bank ccntinued to hold on to this role. The involvement of
the UN member states continued to grow through their advisors positioned
within important government institutions as wll as through
various programs that they presided directly such as agricultural
rehabilitation, education and others. These programs were run by
experts from their respective countries based on existing schemes and
not
based on adequate scientific studies of East Timorese
conditions and capacity. The developed countries which dominate the UN
and
the World Bank are of the opinion that for underdeveloped
countries like Timor-Leste, the economy must be handed totally to the
private sector for them to develop. The role of the state is
limited to assisting the private sector's development. If a state is
active
in the economic sector, it would be accused of meddling
and endangering these countries' economic development.

The government of the independent state of RDTL through the leadership
of
Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri has strived to turn
Timor-Leste into a country truly independent by making its decisions
based
on the people's interest.

Opposing Privatisation

The government is not quick to accept programs introduced by
international
institutions, for example on the development of
electrical energy. The World Bank, through the Asian Development Bank
(ADB)
wanted to channel funds but only under the condition
that within 15 years, the electrical energy production ought to be
privatised. The government rejected this initiative after taking
into account the experiences from other poor countries where after
having
privatised their electricity energy production,
electricity became accessible only to the rich. Electrical energy
became a
commodity which can be marketed to profit electrical
companies without considering that the little people also also have a
right
to electricity for light. Thanks to the refusal to
accept World Bank's proposals, today we still face problems relating to
electricity services. However the government is close to
success because in 2007, electrical energy development will start in
order
to respond the community's needs.

In the area of transport the Government wants to establish a public
transport company so that the remote sucos can communicate with
the city to meet their needs, such as marketing their agricultural
products.
But the World Bank is against this idea. Right now the
government wants to set up a state company which will employ the small
fishermen as the majority (share holders). Once again the
World Bank is against this idea. The government hasn't been able to
establish this venture because there isn't enough fund for it.
When the revenue from the Timor Sea is adequate, there will be a better
chance of establishing these state ventures which has the
mission of supporting progress in people's life.

State Petroleum Company and Petroleum Fund

At the moment the government is undertaking plans to set up a state
owned
oil company. The aim of setting up this company is to make
sure that all income from the oil and gas resources is spent towards the
people. As part of this the government is studying other
state owned oil companies such as that of Malaysia and other countries.
The
plan to set up this state owned company has been
rejected by Timor-Leste businessmen (some of whom are members of
Fretilin).
These businessmen are cooperating with foreign
businesses to compete in gaining access to the oil and gas revenues. In
their opinion, the rights to manage these resources should
be given to private companies arguing that these companies can manage
the
resources more efficiently and will benefit the government
in terms of taxes and royalties. According to them a state owned company
will not be as advantageous because government officials
will embezzle the revenues through corruption. This is the same line of
argument put forward by the World Bank in defence of
privatisation.

It is true that in many countrie state owned companies never benefited
the
people because of massive corruption perpetrated by
government officials. But this has occurred because these countries are
rulled by auoritarian regimes. Government activities,
including that of the state owned company, are never kept in check by
the
people. A way of preventing corruption inside the state
owned company is through a direct people's control, through their
representatives elected through democratic elections such as
members of parliament. The Prime Minister understands this issue. That
is
why the revenues from oil and gas from Timor Sea are kept
in the Petroleum Fund which can only be withdrawn by the National
Parliament.

The Petroleum Fund is a financial management system drawn by
Timor-Leste to
manage its oil and gas resources in the Timor Sea. At
the moment the revenue is being invested in the United States in form
of US
government bonds. The account is held in the name of
Banking and Payment Authority (BPA) and is kept at the Federal Reserve
of
the United States. For the funds to be withdrawn, it must
get the approval from the National Parliament together with a
declaration
from independent auditors on the revenues from the oil
resources. This process is further controlled by a consultative councill
called the Petroleum Consultative Councill to be made up by
representatives of the National Parliament, non government
organisations,
religious institutions and the private sector. In the
future this institution will also include former presidents of the
republic,
former speakers of the parliament, former prime
ministers, former ministers of finances and former directors of BPA. The
method of keeping the revenues at the Federal Reserve and
their withdrawal ensures transparency and prevents corruption similar to
other oil rich countries.

With respect to the use of revenues from the Petroleum Fund, Mari
Alkatiri's
political line is very clear and it concerns
investments in the public sectors which benefit the people, such as free
education, free health services, establishing state owned
companies and undertaking new partnership programs with non government
organisations.

The revenues generated from oil and gas are the main income for
Timor-Leste
as well as being the main capital for Timor-Leste's
independence. These revenues, which will continue to grow, will empower
the
government to carry out programs that will benefit the
Maubere People. Timor-Leste is following the path taken by Venezuela
with
regards to the use of oil revenues to empower the people.
In Venezuela, the government led by president Hugo Chavez uses the
revenues
to eradicate illiteracy, provide health services to the
people, develop agricultural and industrial cooperatives, as wll as
assisting people of other countries in the health sector.

The revenues generated by the oil fields can also become a focal point
of
internal conflict. Some groups want the revenues used to
develop the private sector. Perhaps this issue can become the basis for
major contests inside the Fretilin Congress.

Against borrowing

Although there is not enough money to fund development, the Government
of
Mari Alkatiri has decided against borrowing from the World
Bank. In fact the World Bank is inclined to make Timor-Leste a country
with
debt. This is due to the lessons Prime Minister Alkatiri
learnt from other underdeveloped nations where the debts from the World
Bank
only benefited a small elite. In time, it will be left
to the majority of those people to pay off the debts. Furthermore,
countries
which borrow money will loose their political
independence as their political economy will be dictated by the World
Bank.
Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri and President Xanana Gusm�o
have rejected this option for Timor-Leste, an option which would only
serve
the current short term benefit of the elite at the
expense of the future generations.

Health and Education

The Government of Mari Alkatiri recognises that development requires a
healthy and educated population. Because of this the
government gives priority to educationa and health. This is in line
with the
International Convention for Social, Economic and
Cultural Rights which RDTL has signed, to which the United States,
dubbed as
the pioneer of human rights, has yet to ratify until
today. We must be proud that as a new nation and poor, in just four
years we
are able to provide health and education services free
of charge. Without these free services in health and education, only
those
with the means will be healthy and will be able to
provide education for their children. Those without the means will
continue
to live with diseases and ignorance.

In providing free health services with a good quality, the government
has
cooperated with the Cuban government, whose country has
high health standards and is welknown throughout the world. The Worl
Bank
also recognises the quality of health and education of
Cuba which is comparable to industrialised countries like the
Scandinavians,
although Cuba is itself underdeveloped. Cuba has sent
many volunteer doctors to assist in the provision of health in many
remote
sucos. They earn a monthly allowance of US$200. This
earning is only a fraction compared to the "salaries" of doctors from
other
countries who are contracted to work in Timor-Leste for
salaries of more than US$3000.

The Government of Timor-Leste sends hundreds of students to Cuba to
study
medicine. According to government plans, by 2015
Timor-Leste should be able to provide a doctor for every thousand
members of
the community. This doctor to population ratio will be
higher than that of the United States (1 to 1400). The cooperation with
Cuba
is advantageous to Timor-Leste because the students'
scholarships are funded by the Cuban government. The Timor-Leste
government
only provided funds to buy their return tickets to Cuba.
This program indicates that the Department of Health has adequate plans
for
the health system and knows how to prepare the human
resources for it.

The Government is also undertaking programs to improve mother and infant
nutritions. Timor-Leste is known as a nation with high
mother and infant mortality rate. This program is aimed at reducing the
number of mother and infant mortality rate. It has just
started in the districts of Liqui �a and Suai in cooperation of WFP and
Oxfam Australia. It has been achieving some good results
because since it improved the nutrition intake for the participating
mother
and infant.

Unfortunately in the area of education plans are not yet available for
schools, from primary education to university. It is notable
however, that non formal vocational education programs provided by the
governments of Portugal and Brazil only prepares the
participants to market their skills to companies. It does not prepare
them
to become independent and become a valuable member of the
society.

There are a lot of criticism directed towards the area of education and
health. This is to be expected as not everything that is
good for the peope is tolerated by the elite class. Those who reject
free
education argue that this method will bring down the
quality of schools and students will be less responsible for their
education. This line of thinking is inaccurate. In Germany,
education services from primary to tertiary are provided for free by the
state. But Germany is also know for its high quality
education system which attracts many students from countries all over
the
world to study from technology to philosophy and the arts.

Agriculture

In developing the agricultural sector, the government is trying to
improve
infrastructures such as irrigation and roads. However
there are no discussions at the moment on how to organise communities to
improve their production. Perhaps this has to do with the
small government budget resulting from Worl Bank policies. An example of
this is pasture. The government is not offering to provide
free training for the people. According to plans, the World Bank will
set up
and organisation to train participants to become future
trainers. The graduates will deliver these services to the people but
at a
fee. This clearly shows the World Bank's preference
towards privatisation. Essentially the government should provide the
services in this area so that it can be accessible to everyone.
Otherwise only those with the resources will be able to access it. These
measures also occur in other aspects of agriculture.

State: the instrument for the people's liberation vs the instrument to
beef
up the capitalists

These programs demonstrate that Mari Alkatiri's Government is fighting
to
make the state of independent Timor-Leste an instrument
which serves the people and not the elite class. In the meantime the
elite
class is making a lot of profit through businesses in
cooperation with foreign entrepreneurs, which want the state to become
an
instrument to serve the interests of the industrialists.
They want the government to make an economic policy which can deliver
opportunities to them. These objectives compelled them to
become involved in political parties in order to define the policies of
the
state in line with their interests.

The businesses which are involved in these way are parasites. They turn
the
state into an instrument to exploit a country's
resources as well as the people. Much like what has been happening at
the
moment, the exploitation of these resources is not used to
develop activities that will benefit the people. It is used instead to
serve
for their own pleasures. They will not develop the
economy of Timor-Leste because they don't have any long term economic
plan.
They only want to profit in the short term to support
their lifestyle of excess and luxury.

They want Timor-Leste to give more priority to the private sector in its
economic policies through the "neoliberal" multilateral
financial institutions such as the World Bank and other developed
nations
currently running programs in Timor-Leste. They are of the
opinion that a nation's progress can only be achieved when the running
of
the economy is handed totally to the private sector with
the state's only role being that of supporting the private sector. If
Timor-Leste economy is completely dominated by the private
sector, the people of Timor-Leste will descend into a life of poverty
and
suffering in every aspect. But these won't be the only
consequence, a new minority group will also emerge that will become
richer
and richer by day while the majority of the Timor-Leste
people live in extreme poverty forever.

Mari Alkatiri's policies still remain true to the real objectives of
Fretilin in setting the state as the instrument to free the
pople from oppression, exploitation, ignorance and disease. These
objectives
are similar to the ones set out in the first
Constitution drafted in 1975: "to dismantle the colonial structures in
order
to establish a new society free from domination and
exploitation" (article 2, RDTL Constitution of 1975).

Right now there is a major clash between opposing ideals about an
independent Timor-Leste: a state which serves the people versus a
state which serves the interests of the business groups. This
competition
occurs in different sections, including within the
government as well as inside Fretilin party itself. Our role in these
debates is to make sure that the ideals of national liberation
prevail by fighting for a State which belongs to the people, a people
that
dreamed of liberation of the Maubere People.

Farol, 16 May 2006.

Translated unofficially by Alex Tilman from tetum original. All errors
are
of translator's responsibility.

========================================================================
=================================================================

From: Rick Davis <rdavis@yin.or.jp>
Date: May 27, 2006 6:14:34 AM EST
Subject: Court Filing Confirms Spy Docs

Court Filing Confirms Spy Docs
By Ryan Singel

13:30 PM May, 26, 2006

Formerly sealed documents from a lawsuit against AT&T for allegedly
helping the National Security Agency spy on Americans' communications
without a warrant were released in redacted form Thursday, and confirm
the legitimacy of documents published earlier by Wired News...

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71008-0.html?tw=wn_index_2

========================================================================
=================================================================

From: The Truth Campaign <ivan@ivanfraser.com>
Date: May 27, 2006 6:43:00 AM EST
Subject: Attack on Alternative Medicine by Martin J Walker
Reply-To: ivan@ivanfraser.com

THE TRUTH CAMPAIGN
�

Text version attached for non-HTML viewers

[The following is a response from eminent health journalist Martin J
Walker to a recent call for the NHS to stop paying for complimentary
and alternative therapies Full text of the letter to trust chief
executives ]

ARTICLES ON ATTACK ON ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE 23/5/06

>From MARTIN WALKER - Author of Brave New World of Zero Risk and Dirty
Medicine: Science, big business and the assault on natural health care

Every time there is an attack on alternative medicine people write
similar letters in response, defending these therapies but always,
there is a lack of analysis, historical or otherwise. This means that
although the number of replies and combative responses is growing and
we are 'learning' in that sense, no one seems to be describing the
supporters of orthodox medicine in their context and drawing attention
to conflict of interest and vested interest. Consequently it always
looks as if these critics are serious people with important things to
say, rather than shallow half wits guided entirely by vested interest.

Dr Michael Baum was a founder member of the Campaign Against Health
Fraud (now called HealthWatch
http://www.healthwatch-uk.org/committee.html�). HealthWatch, which is
linked to important US lobby groups CSICOP (Committee for the
Scientific Investigation into Claims of the Paranormal) and ACSH
(American Council on Science and Health) has been responsible for a
whole series of attacks on alternative health, CAM and especially
homeopathy.

Other signatories to the Times letter also have links with
HealthWatch, most particularly Ernst who over the last decade has
campaigned consistently against alternative medicine (and can most
accurately be described as the only Professor of alternative medicine
in Britain who argues the case for pharmaceutical medicine). Ernst
spoke at the 15th Annual meeting of CSICOP held in London where he
delivered a quite childish but supposedly humorous deconstruction of
alternative medicine to the assembled twenty odd anoraks in the
audience. At that meeting amongst his own people, Ernst made no attempt
to be even vaguely academic or supportive of alternatives.

Within the last two years, HealthWatch has been taken over - it has
been floundering for years - by the new industry-backed lobby groups,
The Science and Media Centre and Sense About Science (SAS), these
groups are backed with bundles of money from the Association of British
Pharmaceutical Industries (ABPI) as well as individual drug
manufacturing companies. They are linked to some of the most avid
de-regulating 'libertarian' US lobby groups.

The founder of the Campaign Against Health Fraud (HealthWatch)
Caroline Richmond, has been writing for these lobby groups over the
last couple of years and providing information for Mike Fitzpatrick
�who is both a member of SAS and makes journalistic contributions to
Spiked, the online news vehicle of the ex-Revolutionary Communist
Party members who are now deeply embedded in the pro-science Lobby
Groups.

It was the above organisations working out of the Royal Society, which
send a letter to the Times with a list of signatories protesting about
critics of GM crops. In this case however, environmental organisations
and journalists like George Monbiot (the Guardian newspaper)�organised
with considerable effect against them. Why, oh why, can't supporters of
alternative medicine do the same! Apart from my two books, Dirty
Medicine and Zero Risk, no one has come forward to organise web sites
with an ongoing critique of these industry-backed lobbyists.

One last point, Prince Charles is to be congratulated for his
continuing and committed support for alternative medicine but if I was
him I would certainly get frustrated at the lack of serious support. In
the early 1980s, it was Charles who opened and became a patron of �the
Britsol Cancer Help Centre. In 1990, the Centre was wrecked by a bogus
scientific paper published in the Lancet, which claimed that women with
breast cancer who attended the Centre died more quickly and in greater
number than those who had orthodox treatment. The unfortunate response
to this attack, was again, constant picky academic arguments about
whether or not the paper's writers had got their statistical analysis
correct.

What there should have been was a full blooded political assault on
HealthWatch and its associates, the writers of the paper and the
connivance of the Lancet in its publication. Fifteen years later
alternative medicine is coming under increasing attack from industrial
vested interests but we are unfortunately responding in the same
piecemeal manner. It's time that supporters of CAM and alternative
medicine, really did get their political act together.�While
environmentalists, greens, anti-corporate critics and pharmaceutical
company critics, have all formed political fact-gathering organisations
and write consistently about the corporate lobbies which are managing
skewed news, the practitioners of homeopathy and other valuable
therapies appear utterly unable to organise against the threat they are
facing.

Anyone who wants to read in greater depth about any of the above,
should obtain copies of my books Dirty Medicine and Brave New World of
Zero Risk and perhaps visit the websites:

www.zero-risk.org and www.slingshotpublications.com

If we don't make ourselves aware of the history of these attacks we
will never be able to combat them and they will gradually incur
increasing damage.

Regards, Martin Walker.

Further information, e-book download and purchase details for: Dirty
Medicine and Skewed

More about Martin J Walker

For more on this story and daily updated news reports, please see In
The News at www.ivanfraser.com/mainpages/news.html

For a wide range of high quality supplements, healing devices and
related literature go to Good Health Naturally at
www.goodhealth.nu/uk/1445/

For a range of electrosmog pollution/microwave detection and protection
equipment, see see Sensory Perspective Ltd. at

https://secure.demonweb.co.uk/spcom-dwh/ccp51/cgi-bin/cp-app.cgi?
rrc=N&pg=store&affl=truthcam

Together in Truth we can change the world!

www.truthcampaign.co.uk

�=======================================================================
=================================================================
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 5
From: "Ronald" bleier.r@gmail.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 10:26am(PDT)
Subject: R.Dreyfuss: Cheney's control of US govt -- The enforcers

Friends:
Is there anyone reading this who didn't realize from even before day 1 that Cheney was running this country? Robert Dreyfuss brilliantly provides the documentation and it's even worse than some of us naifs might have imagined: it turns out that with remarkable efficiency it gets down to every single policy decision Cheney desires. Read and weep. As if we couldn't tell: we've got the most vicious, most ruthless, most twisted extremist running the most powerful country in the world.

Some details: Here's an intro into how Cheney's group did what they could to make things as bad as possible in Israel/Palestine.

Last February, for example, after Hamas won the Palestinian elections, King Abdullah of Jordan visited Washington to discuss the implications of the vote. With the support of some officials in the State Department, the young king suggested that Washington should bolster beleaguered President Mahmoud Abbas, the Fatah leader, to counter the new power of Hamas

Here's how they control policy.

�The staff that the vice president sent out made sure that those [committees] didn�t key anything up that wasn�t what the vice president wanted,� says Wilkerson. �Their style was simply to sit and listen, and take notes. And if things looked like they were going to go speedily to a decision that they knew that the vice president wasn�t going to like, generally they would, at the end of the meeting, in great bureaucratic style, they�d say: �We totally disagree. Meeting�s over.�� At that point, policymakers from the nsc, the State Department, the Defense Department, and elsewhere would have to go back to the drawing board. And if a policy option that Cheney opposed somehow got written up as a decision memorandum and sent to the Oval Office, he showed up to kill it. �The vice president�s second or third bite at the apple was when he�d walk in to see the president,� says Wilkerson. �And things would get reversed, because of the vice president�s meeting in the Oval Office with no one else there.�

And here's their answer to the need for an enemy, in case we get bored with the bogus war on terror.

For the Cheneyites, Middle East policy is tied to China, and in their view China�s appetite for oil makes it a strategic competitor to the United States in the Persian Gulf region. Thus, they regard the control of the Gulf as a zero-sum game. They believe that the invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. military buildup in Central Asia, the invasion of Iraq, and the expansion of the U.S. military presence in the Gulf states have combined to check China�s role in the region. In particular, the toppling of Saddam Hussein and the creation of a pro-American regime in Baghdad was, for at least 10 years before 2003, a top neoconservative goal, one that united both the anti-China crowd and far-right supporters of Israel�s Likud. Both saw the invasion of Iraq as the prelude to an assault on neighboring Iran.

(It's not exactly clear from this last that Dreyfuss understands that these guys actually want a nuclear war with China.)

See also the details on Cheney's shadow NSC and Cheney's control of foreign policy.

Incredible article. Very revealing. This is how power works, and nobody knows how to play it better than Cheney and Rumsfeld.

Thanks to Amy Goodman's Democracy Now for featuring this article a few weeks ago.

--Ronald

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=11423

Vice Squad
From our May issue: They terrorize other government officials, and they�re so secretive that their names aren�t even revealed to a harmless federal employee directory. And they�ve helped ruin the country. Meet Dick Cheney�s staff.
By Robert Dreyfuss
Web Exclusive: 04.17.06

Print Friendly Email Article

Bad heart, errant shotgun, and Halliburton stock options in tow, Dick Cheney has ruled the White House roost for the past five years, amassing enough power to give rise to the joke that George W. Bush is �a heartbeat away from the presidency.�

Yet, despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of words have been written on Cheney�s role in the Bush administration, most of what�s been written fails to explain how the vice president wields his extraordinary authority. Notoriously opaque, the Office of the Vice President (OVP) is very difficult for journalists to penetrate. But a Prospect investigation shows that the key to Cheney�s influence lies with the corps of hard-line acolytes he assembled in 2001. They serve not only as his eyes and ears, monitoring a federal bureaucracy that resists many of Cheney�s pet initiatives, but sometimes serve as his fists, too, when the man from Wyoming feels that the passive-aggressive bureaucrats need bullying. Like disciplined Bolsheviks slicing through a fractious opposition, Cheney�s team operates with a single-minded, ideological focus on the exercise of American military power, a belief in the untrammeled power of the presidency, and a fierce penchant for secrecy.

Since 2001, reporters and columnists have tended to refer to Cheney�s office obliquely, if at all. Rather than explicitly discuss the neoconservative cabal that has assumed control of important parts of U.S. policy since September 11, they couple references to �the civilians at the Pentagon� with �officials in the vice president�s office� when referring to administration hard-liners. But rarely do the mainstream media provide much detail to explain who those people are, what they�ve done, and how they operate.

At the high-water mark of neoconservative power, when coalition forces invaded Iraq in March 2003, the vice president�s office was the command center for a web of like-minded officials in the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department, and other agencies, often described by former officials as �Dick Cheney�s spies.� Now, thanks to a misguided war and a bungled occupation, along with a string of foreign-policy failures that have alienated U.S. allies and triggered a wave of anti-American feeling around the globe, the numbers and influence of those Cheneyites outside the office have receded. No longer quite so commanding, the office seems more like a bunker for neoconservatives and their fellow travelers in the administration. Yet if only because of Dick Cheney�s Rasputin-like hold over the president, his office remains a formidable power indeed.

Still, for the first time, nervous Republicans are raising serious questions about Cheney. With his public approval plummeting to previously unknown depths for a major U.S. politician -- by late February he had fallen to just 18 percent -- he has lost all but the most reflexive of knee-jerk conservatives. With the vice president increasingly seen as a liability, there is a quiet murmur among GOP insiders about dumping him. The Moonie-linked Insight magazine, wired into right-wing Republicans, last month reported that moves are afoot to �retire� Cheney in 2007. Writing in The Wall Street Journal, former Bush Senior speechwriter Peggy Noonan gave full voice to the dump-Cheney idea. �I suspect what they�re thinking and not saying is, �If Dick Cheney weren�t vice president, who�d be a good vice president?�� she wrote. �And one night over drinks at a barbecue in McLean one top guy will turn to another top guy and say, � �wouldn�t you like to replace Cheney?��

More often than not, from policy toward China and North Korea to the invasion of Iraq to pressure for regime change in Iran and Syria, and on issues from detentions to torture to spying by the National Security Agency, the muscle of the vice president�s office has prevailed.

Usually, that muscle is exercised covertly. Last February, for example, after Hamas won the Palestinian elections, King Abdullah of Jordan visited Washington to discuss the implications of the vote. With the support of some officials in the State Department, the young king suggested that Washington should bolster beleaguered President Mahmoud Abbas, the Fatah leader, to counter the new power of Hamas.

Then John Hannah intervened. A former official at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a pro-Zionist think tank founded by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, Hannah is a neoconservative ideologue who, after the resignation of Irving Lewis �Scooter� Libby, moved up to become Vice President Dick Cheney�s top adviser on national security.

Hannah moved instantly to undermine Abdullah�s influence. Not only should the United States not deal with Hamas, but Abbas, Fatah, and the entire Palestinian Authority were no longer relevant, he argued, according to intelligence insiders. Speaking for the vice president�s office, Hannah instead sought to align U.S. policy with the go-it-alone strategy of Israel�s hard-liners, including Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his stricken patron and predecessor, Ariel Sharon. Olmert soon stunned observers by declaring that Israel would unilaterally set final borders in the West Bank, annexing large swaths of occupied land, by the year 2010. His declaration precisely mirrored Hannah�s argument that Israel should act alone.

Whether that viewpoint will prevail in the United States is unclear, but early indications are that the Bush administration is swinging in that direction. Hannah�s intervention is typical of how the OVP staff has engaged at all levels of the U.S. policy-making process to overcome opposition from professionals in the State Department, the intelligence community, and even the National Security Council (NSC) itself.

Richard Perle, who formerly served on the Defense Policy Board, insists that the power of those who share his worldview is exaggerated. �The myth of the power of the neoconservatives in the administration is exactly that,� says Perle. �The president holds the views that he holds. And the people you�re talking about are much closer to the president�s view than the people they are arguing against.� But officials who have opposed Cheney believe that President Bush has �views� only about basic principles, and that in making dozens of complex decisions he relies on pre-determined staff papers. Says one insider deeply involved in U.S. policy toward North Korea: �The president is given only the most basic notions about the Korea issue. They tell him, �Above South Korea is a country called North Korea. It is an evil regime.� � So that translates into a presidential decision: Why enter into any agreement with an evil regime?�

Last fall, when U.S. envoy Christopher Hill was planning to visit North Korea to try to resolve the impasse over that country�s nuclear weapons, Cheney�s staff intervened to kill Hill�s mission, according to sources involved in planning his trip. That the Office of the Vice President can kill a major initiative by the State Department and the NSC, on an issue of the highest priority, is stark testament to the sustained power of the vice president�s office. And despite Cheney�s unpopularity -- and the parallel decline of neoconservative influence -- it remains a potent force.

* * *
Devoid of well-known names and faces, the OVP was nearly invisible to the public until last fall. That�s when �Scooter� Libby was indicted for lying to federal investigators in the Valerie Plame case, focusing the media spotlight on the vice president�s chief of staff and top national security adviser, who resigned immediately. Aside from Libby, however, virtually none of Cheney�s current aides has endured any scrutiny. Outside the Washington cognoscenti, it�s a safe bet that not one in a hundred Americans could name a single Cheney aide. Since 2001, the list has included David Addington, who replaced Libby; top national security advisers such as Eric Edelman and Victoria Nuland; radical-right Middle East specialists such as Hannah, William J. Luti, and David Wurmser; anti-China, geopolitical Asia hands like Stephen Yates and Samantha Ravich; an assortment of conservative apparatchiks and technocrats, often neoconservative-connected, including C. Dean McGrath, Aaron Friedberg, Karen Knutson, and Carol Kuntz; lobbyists and domestic policy gurus, such as Nancy Dorn, Jonathan Burks, Nina Shokraiil Rees, Cesar Conda, and Candida Wolf -- and a host of communications directors, flacks, and spokespeople over the years, notably �Cheney�s angels�: Mary Matalin, Juleanna Glover Weiss, Jennifer Millerwise, Catherine Martin, and Lee Anne McBride.

It is the latter, especially Cheney�s press secretaries -- he has run through seven of them -- whose job is saying nothing, and saying it often. His press people seem shocked that a reporter would even ask for an interview with the staff. The blanket answer is no -- nobody is available. Amazingly, the vice president�s office flatly refuses to even disclose who works there, or what their titles are. �We just don�t give out that kind of information,� says Jennifer Mayfield, another of Cheney�s �angels.� She won�t say who is on staff, or what they do? No, she insists. �It�s just not something we talk about.� The notoriously silent OVP staff rebuffs not just pesky reporters but even innocuous database researchers from companies like Carroll Publishing, which puts out the quarterly Federal Directory. �They�re tight-lipped about the kind of information they put out,� says Albert Ruffin, senior editor at Carroll, who fumes that Cheney�s office doesn�t bother returning his calls when he�s updating the limited information he manages to collect.

The OVP�s enduring obsession with absolute secrecy first became obvious during the long court battle early in Bush�s first term over the energy task force chaired by Cheney. Neither the coalition of watchdog and environmental groups that sued the ovp nor members of Congress and the Government Accountability Office discovered much about the workings of the task force. Addington, then Cheney�s general counsel, enforced the say-nothing policy ultimately upheld by federal courts. �He engineered an extraordinary expansion of government power at the expense of accountability,� says Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, the conservative gadfly group that sued Cheney. �We got a terse letter back from Addington saying essentially, �Go jump in the lake.��

Addington, 49, has spent almost exactly half of his life working for or working alongside Dick Cheney, from an impressionable youngster in his early 20s to the hard-nosed ideologue that he is today. They first met in the early 1980s, when Addington served as a counsel for the Central Intelligence Agency, the Iran-Contra Committee, and then the House Intelligence Committee, when Cheney was a member of the committee. When Cheney became secretary of defense, Addington was his special assistant and then the Defense Department�s general counsel. When Cheney toyed with running for president in the 1990s, Addington ran his political action committee. In the ovp, Addington has emerged as the single most militant advocate for the unfettered power of the presidency. �Early on, with the detainee issues, the torture issues, even before Abu Ghraib, people [would say] that David Addington is the source of all this stuff,� says a senior national security lawyer in Washington. �This stuff� includes the spectrum of controversial counterterrorism powers, from military tribunals for captured terror suspects, to justifying torture of prisoners, to detention of alleged terrorists without access to courts or counsel, to the legal rationale for ignoring the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in allowing the National Security Agency to spy on Americans. �He believes that in time of war, there is total authority for the president to waive any rules to carry out his objectives,� is how Congresswoman Jane Harman, the intelligence committee�s ranking Democrat, described Addington to The Washington Post. �Those views have extremely dangerous implications.�

Addington is typical of the staffers brought on in 2001, when Cheney began assembling what was dubbed, even then, a �shadow NSC.� Unlike previous administrations, including Bill Clinton�s, Cheney�s office was loaded for partisan bear from day one. Leon Fuerth, who led Al Gore�s office of national security affairs for eight years, says that their far smaller operation was led by nonpolitical or military staffers who weren�t vetted for political loyalties or ideology.

�The people who worked for me were all seconded from federal agencies, every one of them. They were uniformed officers from all three branches, people from the Department of Commerce, from the CIA, but all of them were professionals and civil servants,� says Fuerth. �I was the only politically appointed person. My deputy was at first an Air Force colonel, and after he retired, an Army colonel.� He recalls that one appointee, settling into an office in Fuerth�s shop, hung a portrait of Ronald Reagan.

There probably aren�t any portraits of Bill Clinton or FDR on the walls of Cheney�s OVP, which sprawls throughout the executive office building across the street from the White House. Instead, the staff -- hand-picked by Libby -- was drawn from the ranks of far-right think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute, and WINEP, and from carefully screened Cheney loyalists in law firms around town -- all of whom hit the ground running.

Larry Wilkerson, formerly a top aide to Secretary of State Colin Powell, is a no-nonsense, ex-military man who has spoken out bluntly about what he calls a �cabal� led by Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and their top aides. Time after time, in various interagency meetings, all the way up to the Cabinet-level �principals committee,� Wilkerson would watch in astonishment as Cheney�s staffers muscled everyone else.

According to Fuerth, such a skewed modus operandi was unthinkable in the Clinton-Gore administration. �There is no doubt that we exercised a great deal of influence, but it was never in the form of a peremptory, you-may-not-go-down-this-path, or you-must-go-down-this-path,� he says. �It was advisory.�

Former Cheney aides tend to confirm Wilkerson�s version of how the OVP operates. Dean McGrath, who served as Cheney�s deputy chief of staff under Libby from 2001 until last year, says he didn�t hesitate to express the vice president�s views during the policy-making process. �I tried to convey at meetings where he would come down on issues,� says McGrath. An important mission of the OVP was to do battle with a resistant bureaucracy. �Often you�d have the permanent bureaucracy that was not on board, especially on all of the issues where you�re trying to change things,� he says.

Aaron Friedberg, who served as Cheney�s director of policy planning for three years, agrees that the bureaucracy was often an obstacle. �It�s not an active resistance. It�s a passive skepticism about the whole direction of policy.� Friedberg, who says that he worked on issues of �terrorism, Asia, Europe, Russia, North Korea, Iran, just about everything outside of Iraq,� suggested that the biggest issue on which Cheney had to confront the bureaucracy was over the administration�s push for democracy, especially in the Middle East. That program�s overseer is his daughter Liz Cheney, a top State Department official.

Wilkerson portrays the vice president�s office as the source of a zealous, almost messianic approach to foreign affairs. �There were several remarkable things about the vice president�s staff,� he says. �One was how empowered they were, and one was how in sync they were. In fact, we used to say about both [Rumsfeld�s office] and the vice president�s office that they were going to win nine out of ten battles, because they are ruthless, because they have a strategy, and because they never, ever deviate from that strategy � They make a decision, and they make it in secret, and they make in a different way than the rest of the bureaucracy makes it, and then suddenly foist it on the government -- and the rest of the government is all confused.�

Often the rest of the U.S. government -- including even the NSC -- would operate outside the normal interagency process to prevent the OVP from interfering, according to officials who asked to remain anonymous. Perhaps most startling is the sidetracking of the NSC, which is by statute the ultimate arbiter for policy options and recommendations that go to the president�s desk.

According to Wilkerson, Cheney�s office and the NSC were completely separate on foreign policy. Cheney, says Wilkerson, �set up a staff that knew what the statutory nsc was doing, but the NSC statutory staff didn�t know what his staff was doing. The vice president�s staff could read the statutory NSC�s e-mail, but the NSC couldn�t read their e-mail. So, once someone on the statutory NSC figured it out, they used various work-arounds. Like, for example, they would walk to someone�s office, rather than send an e-mail, if what they were going to talk about they didn�t want to reveal to the vice president�s very powerful staff.� But that was difficult because of Cheney �spies� within the bureaucracy, including people like John Bolton at the State Department, Robert Joseph at the NSC, certain staffers at WINPAC (the arms control shop at CIA), and various Pentagon officials, he adds.

Two of the people most often encountered by Wilkerson were Cheney�s Asia hands, Stephen Yates and Samantha Ravich. Through them, the fulcrum of Cheney�s foreign policy -- which linked energy, China, Iraq, Israel, and oil in the Middle East -- can be traced. The nexus of those interrelated issues drives the OVP�s broad outlook.

Many Cheney staffers were obsessed with what they saw as a looming, long-term threat from China. Several of Cheney�s highest-ranking national security aides came out of Congresswoman Christopher Cox�s rather wild-eyed 1990s investigation of alleged Chinese spying in the United States, tied to the overblown allegations about Chinese contributions to the Clinton-Gore campaign. Cox, a California Republican, chaired a highly partisan committee that issued a scathing report about China. According to The New York Times, his 700-page report portrayed China as �nothing less than a voracious, dangerous, and fully-equipped military rival of the United States.� Among the top Cheney aides who joined the OVP in 2001 from Cox�s staff were Libby, who served as legal adviser to the committee; McGrath, a key staffer for Cox; and Jonathan Burks, a senior Cox aide who became Cheney�s special assistant. Yates, who joined the team from The Heritage Foundation, is a China specialist who has long urged a more confrontational policy. In 2000, he wrote a Heritage paper offering advice to the Bush administration, and slamming Clinton for accommodating China. He urged a stronger, pro-Taiwan policy while predicting a Chinese attack. Charles W. Freeman, who served as U.S. ambassador to China and has known Yates for many years, puts him in the same category as former Defense Department officials Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, who �all saw China as the solution to �enemy deprivation syndrome.��

Yates, who left Cheney�s office recently to join the ultraconservative lobbying and law firm of Barbour, Griffith, Rogers, had an important impact on Asia and Middle East policy. Says Wilkerson: �Generally Steve was quiet. But when there came a time for him to speak, the room grew very silent, and that did it. We weren�t going any further in that discussion item if Steve said that the vice president didn�t like it. And it didn�t take too long to understand that the real power in the room was sitting there from the vice president�s office.� Yates declined to comment for this story, but in an interview with National Journal he pooh-poohed the idea that Cheney�s office had set itself up as a shadow NSC. �The idea that 10 or 15 people can replicate or supplant the work of the 100 to 200 people on the NSC � is a bit unrealistic,� he said.

Several of Cheney�s top aides, as well as the vice president himself, were early supporters of the neoconservative flagship Project for a New American Century, whose founding statement called for a return to a �Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity.� Among them were Libby, Friedberg, and Robert Kagan, who is married to Victoria Nuland, the U.S. ambassador to NATO who served as national security adviser in the OVP. She, in turn, succeeded Eric Edelman, another neoconservative who left the vice president�s office to serve as ambassador to Turkey before taking over Douglas Feith�s job as chief of policy for the Department of Defense.

The pivotal role of Cheney�s staff in promoting war in Iraq has been well documented. Cheney was the war�s most vocal advocate, and his staff -- especially Libby, Hannah, Ravich, and others -- worked hard to �fit� intelligence to inflate Iraq�s seeming threat. William J. Luti, a neoconservative radical, left Cheney�s office for the Pentagon in 2001, where he organized the war planning team called the Office of Special Plans. David Wurmser, another neoconservative from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), joined the Pentagon to found the forerunner of the OSP, the so-called Counterterrorism Evaluation Group, which then manufactured the evidence that Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda were allies. To that end, Wurmser worked closely with Hannah, Libby, Luti, and Harold Rhode, a Defense Department official in Andy Marshall�s Office of Net Assessment. Ravich, along with Zalmay Khalilzad, a neoconservative Middle East analyst and now U.S. ambassador to Iraq, worked hard to build the Iraqi National Congress�linked opposition forces under Ahmad Chalabi. Libby and Hannah produced key propaganda for the war, including the most inflammatory and inaccurate speeches delivered by Cheney and Bush. The Libby-Hannah team also authored a 48-page speech for Colin Powell�s 2003 United Nations appearance so extreme that Powell trashed the entire document. That version has never been released.

David L. Phillips, the author of Losing Iraq, was a State Department consultant during the prelude to the war in 2003, and he watched Ravich operate. His account provides a perfect paradigm for the OVP�s role in interagency meetings, in this case involving the most important decision of the administration�s tenure: the decision to go to war in Iraq. During meeting after meeting in London, in Brussels, or in Washington with Chalabi, the Iraqi National Congress (INC), and the rest of the Iraqi opposition (including its Shiite fundamentalist component), the youthful, inexperienced Ravich dominated the course of events because of her association with Cheney. �The State Department officials showed extraordinary deference to her,� says Phillips. �It was almost a sense that their efforts would be judged by Ms. Ravich and reported to the OVP.� The INC and Chalabi �would run to Samantha when there were disagreements.� In those meetings, the INC �would hold forth on their ties to the OVP as a form of threat over U.S. officials or other Iraqis. And U.S. officials felt that if there was a misstep, the Iraqis would go running to the OVP and they would have their chains yanked,� says Phillips. In Washington, Hannah served as the INC�s chief political point of contact, according to Entifadh Qanbar, an INC official who is serving as defense attach� at the Iraqi embassy.

Like Hannah, who came to the OVP from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Wurmser traipsed a roundabout path to Cheney�s staff: He worked with Hannah at WINEP in the 1990s, and then went to AEI, where he directed Middle East affairs, to the Pentagon�s Office of Special Plans, to John Bolton�s arms control shop at the State Department, and then to the OVP. Even among ardent supporters of Israel, Wurmser -- and his wife, Meyrav, who runs the Hudson Institute�s Middle East program -- is considered an extremist. In 1996, the Wurmsers, Perle, and Feith co-authored the famous �Clean Break� paper for then�Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, which called for radical measures to redraw the map of the entire Middle East (Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Palestine) to benefit Israel. Later, in a series of papers and a book, Wurmser argued that toppling Saddam was likely to lead directly to civil war and the breakup of Iraq, but he supported the policy anyway: �The residual unity of [Iraq] is an illusion projected by the extreme repression of the state.� After Saddam, Iraq will �be ripped apart by the politics of warlords, tribes, clans, sects, and key families,� he wrote. �Underneath facades of unity enforced by state repression, [Iraq�s] politics is defined primarily by tribalism, sectarianism, and gang/clan-like competition.� Yet Wurmser explicitly urged the United States and Israel to �expedite� such a collapse. �The issue here is whether the West and Israel can construct a strategy for limiting and expediting the chaotic collapse that will ensue in order to move on to the task of creating a better circumstance.� Later, with former CIA director James Woolsey and others, Wurmser proposed restoring the Jordan-based Hashemite monarchy in Iraq. While Wurmser�s OVP allies may share his neoconservative fantasies of the willy-nilly reorganization of the Middle East, few experts do. �I�ve known him for years, and I consider him to be a naive simpleton,� says a former U.S. ambassador. Adds Wilkerson, �A lot of these guys, including Wurmser, I looked at as card-carrying members of the Likud party, as I did with Feith. You wouldn�t open their wallet and find a card, but I often wondered if their primary allegiance was to their own country or to Israel. That was the thing that troubled me, because there was so much that they said and did that looked like it was more reflective of Israel�s interest than our own.�

Today Wurmser, Hannah, Liz Cheney, and her father are pushing hard for confrontations with both Iran and Syria. Liz Cheney, who exercises enormous power inside the State Department, has secured millions of dollars to support opposition elements in both countries, and she has met with Syria�s version of Ahmad Chalabi, a discredited businessman from Virginia named Farid al-Ghadry. Hannah sat in on the meeting with Ghadry, which was arranged through Meyrav Wurmser, a friend of the would-be Syrian leader. Hannah and Wurmser�s boss, the vice president, talks freely about the need for a military showdown with Iran to destroy its alleged nuclear program. The true measure of how powerful the vice president�s office remains today is whether the United States chooses to confront Iran and Syria or to seek diplomatic solutions. For the moment, at least, the war party led by Dick Cheney remains in ascendancy.

Robert Dreyfuss is a Prospect senior correspondent.

� 2006 by The American Prospect, Inc.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 6
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 11:48am(PDT)
Subject: wAR pRESIDENT? nOT!

"Sad day in Crawford, they're hanging their heads," said William J. Bennett, the former education secretary and conservative radio talk show host. Mr. Bennett said many of his listeners expressed dismay at what they considered Mr. Bush's groveling.

"One of the attractive things about the president is that he talks Texas," Mr. Bennett continued. "But what broke my heart is when he said, 'I need to be more sophisticated.' What is this, Kerry talk? Is he going to use 'elan' the next time he speaks?"

With a Few Humble Words, Bush Silences His Texas Swagger

By ELISABETH BUMILLER
Published: May 27, 2006
WASHINGTON, May 26 � What happened to the Texas swagger?

Bush and Blair Concede Errors, but Defend War (May 26, 2006)
Maybe it went the way of his poll numbers. Maybe this is a newly reflective President Bush. Or maybe the first lady had her say.

Whatever the case, when Mr. Bush said at a news conference on Thursday night that he regretted some personal mistakes, like declaring "bring 'em on" in 2003, he seemed a little like the chastened husband who finally admitted he had done something wrong. Whether it worked or not depends on whom you ask.

Hold on a minute, said Kenneth M. Duberstein, President Ronald Reagan's last chief of staff. "The country loves mea culpas from the president," Mr. Duberstein said. "It makes them human. This is part and parcel of the influence of Josh � making sure you don't go out there and thumb your nose at the entire world."

"Josh" is Joshua B. Bolten, the new White House chief of staff, who was reared inside the Beltway, educated at Princeton and has never uttered a Texas colloquialism that anyone has heard.

Mr. Bush's Texas twang intensifies and recedes depending on the setting. But he has always prided himself on being plain spoken. When it comes to military and national security, he made the heaviest use of Texas talk in the first term, initially after the Sept. 11 attacks and then after the Iraq invasion.

On Sept. 15, 2001, Mr. Bush declared that he would go after the perpetrators of the World Trade Center attack and "smoke them out of their holes." On Sept. 17, 2001, Mr. Bush declared that he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." On July 2, 2003, Mr. Bush taunted militants attacking American forces in Iraq with "bring 'em on."

White House officials have defended his Texas talk as the kind of plain-spoken language Americans like to hear, but Laura Bush has at times tried to rein him in. In a widely reported comment at the time, Mrs. Bush sidled up to her husband after he said he wanted Mr. bin Laden "dead or alive" and asked, "Bushie, are you gonna git 'im?"

On Thursday, in response to a question about what he thought was his biggest mistake, Mr. Bush termed his words "kind of tough talk, you know, that sent the wrong signal to people." He added that "I learned some lessons about expressing myself maybe in a little more sophisticated manner" and that "in certain parts of the world it was misinterpreted."

White House officials would not say Thursday whether Mr. Bush's response had been planned, but they did say they had prepared for the question. In fact, they have prepared for the question ever since John Dickerson, then of Time magazine, asked Mr. Bush at a news conference in April 2004 if he could name the biggest mistake he had made, and Mr. Bush, struggling, said nothing popped into his head.

But Mr. Bush's comments were his most personal so far about mistakes he has made, and they mirrored, friends said, his private conversations.

"What he did last night, which was obviously thought out, was the most complete public expression of what's happened," said Tom Rath, a New Hampshire Republican with ties to the White House. "Anybody who has seen him talk about it privately has seen that he's been consumed with this for three years."

Others were less impressed and said Mr. Bush had made far worse mistakes. "If there were decisive mistakes, these were not them," said Paul Burka, senior executive editor of Texas Monthly, who closely followed Mr. Bush when he was Texas governor. "It's easy to say that he was popping off. But then you get to issues like should the Iraqi army have been disbanded, did Bremer know what he was doing?"

But Mr. Burka, who was referring to L. Paul Bremer III, the former top American civilian administrator in Iraq, said Mr. Bush's Texas talk was popular in the state.

"I don't think he ever had a self-reflective moment in Texas," Mr. Burka said. "And let me tell you, even worse, we liked it that way."

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 7
From: "erik larson" 91erik@gmail.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 0:13pm(PDT)
Subject: "It Can't Happen Here"

Everyone see this article?

"Make no mistake about it: those images from Paris and Los Angeles
scare the shit out of the criminals in Washington, as can be discerned
from the tone of the news coverage provided by the Western media. They
look at those masses of humanity and begin picturing such scenes in
every big city across this nation. And then they imagine public anger
becoming so widespread that they begin to lose control of the
militarized law enforcement agencies all across the country that they
rely upon to keep the masses at bay."

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr81.html

--
Zogby Poll Finds Over 70 Million Voting Age Americans Support New 9/11
Investigation
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060522022041421

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 8
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 1:39pm(PDT)
Subject: Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors as Pacifiers in Preparation For Mart

Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors as Pacifiers in Preparation For Martial Law

Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors as Pacifiers in Preparation For Martial Law
Nationwide initiative trains volunteers to teach congregations to "obey the government" during seizure of guns, property, forced inoculations and forced relocation

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com May 24 2006

A Pastor has come forward to blow the whistle on a nationwide FEMA program which is training Pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for a declaration of martial law, property and firearm seizures, and forced relocation.

In March of this year the Pastor, who we shall refer to as Pastor Revere, was invited to attend a meeting of his local FEMA chapter which circulated around preparedness for a potential bio-terrorist attack, any natural disaster or a nationally declared emergency.

The FEMA directors told the Pastors that attended that it was their job to help implement FEMA and Homeland Security directives in anticipation of any of these eventualities. The first directive was for Pastors to preach to their congregations Romans 13, the often taken out of context bible passage that was used by Hitler to hoodwink Christians into supporting him, in order to teach them to "obey the government" when martial law is declared.

It was related to the Pastors that quarantines, martial law and forced relocation were a problem for state authorities when enforcing federal mandates due to the "cowboy mentality" of citizens standing up for their property and second amendment rights as well as farmers defending their crops and livestock from seizure. It was stressed that the Pastors needed to preach subservience to the authorities ahead of time in preparation for the round-ups and to make it clear to the congregation that "this is for their own good."

We have received confirmation from other preachers and Pastors that this program is a nationwide initiative and a literal Soviet model whereby the churches are being systematically infiltrated by government volunteers and used as conduits for martial law training and conditioning. The Pastor was told that over 13,000 counties were already on board.

It falls under the umbrella of the NVOAD program which is training volunteers in a "Peer to Peer" program in a neighborhood setting.

Pastors were told that they would be backed up by law enforcement in controlling uncooperative individuals and that they would even lead SWAT teams in attempting to quell resistance.

Police provide cover for a FEMA house-by-house search in New Orleans.

"We get the the picture that we're going to be standing at the end of some farmer's lane while he's standing there with his double barrel, saying we have to confiscate your cows, your chickens, your firearms," said Pastor Revere.

The Pastor elaborated on how the directives were being smoke screened by an Orwellian alteration of their names.

"They're not using the term 'quarantine' - this is the term they're going to be using - it's called 'social distancing' don't you like that one," said the Pastor.

He also highlighted how detention camps had been renamed to give them a friendly warm veneer.

"Three months ago it was quarantine and relocation centers and now it's 'community centers' and these are going to be activated at the local schools," he said.

Pastor Revere outlined the plan to carry out mass vaccination and enforced drugging programs in times of crisis such as a bird flu outbreak.

"In the event of an outbreak or a bio-terrorist attack, there'd be a mass vaccination....they have a program nationwide 'Pills in People's Palm In 48 Hours'," said the Pastor who was told that Walmart had been designated as the central outlet of this procedure.

Pastor Revere said that many attendees believed in the necessity of the program and were completely unaware to the motivations behind its true purpose and were offered incentives to become volunteers such as preferential treatment and first access for themselves and their families to vaccines and food shipments in times of emergency.

Which roads to close off after martial law was declared had also already been mapped out.

The precedent for mass gun confiscation in times of real or manufactured emergency was set during Hurricane Katrina when police and national guard patrols forced homeowners even in areas unaffected by the hurricane to hand over their legally owned firearms at gunpoint as is detailed in the video below.

WATCH THE VIDEO
In the following video Alex Jones exposes FEMA's deliberate sabotage of Hurricane Katrina relief efforts which were used as a platform for a beat test of forced relocation and gun confiscation.

WATCH THE VIDEO

Alex Jones' 2001 documentary film 9/11: The Road to Tyranny featured footage from a FEMA symposium given to firefighters and other emergency personnel in Kansas City in which it was stated that the founding fathers, Christians and homeschoolers were terrorists and should be treated with the utmost suspicion and brutality in times of national emergency.

We have highlighted previous training manuals issues by state and federal government bodies which identify whole swathes of the population as potential terrorists. A Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Law Enforcement pamphlet gives the public characteristics to identify terrorists that include buying baby formula, beer, wearing Levi jeans, carrying identifying documents like a drivers license and traveling with women or children.

A Virginia training manual used to help state employees recognize terrorists lists anti-government and property rights activists as terrorists and includes binoculars, video cameras, pads and notebooks in a compendium of terrorist tools.

Shortly after 9/11 a Phoenix FBI manual that was disseminated amongst federal employees at the end of the Clinton term caused waves on the Internet after it was revealed that potential terrorists included, "defenders of the US Constitution against federal government and the UN, " and individuals who "make numerous references to the US Constitution." Lawyers everywhere cowered in fear at being shipped off to Gitmo.

In December 2003 the FBI warned Americans nationwide to be on the lookout for people reading Almanacs as this could indicate an act of terrorism in planning. Almanacs are popular glove box inventory of any vehicle and this ludicrous fearmongering was met with a raucous response from satirists and news commentators.

In another twilight zone Nazi-like spectacle, Pastors were asked to make a pledge or an affirmation during the meeting to fulfil the roles ascribed to them by FEMA. They were given assurances that they would be covered by full compensation in the event of resisters injuring them during property seizures and round-ups.

The Pastor said that his county had already succumbed to a tattle-tale like mentality where neighbors were reporting neighbors to the authorities for things like having chickens in their back yard. The brown shirt precedent has been set whereby people immediately turn to the authorities in fealty whenever their paranoid suspicions, fueled by zealous government and media fearmongering, are heightened.

Pastor Revere said the completion of the first stage of the program was slated for August 31st. At this point all the counties within the United States would be networked as part of the so-called disaster relief program.

We issue a challenge to all of our readers to print off this article and the supporting documents we will subsequently provide and confront their local preacher with it. If they don't receive a response within a week they should investigate further into whether their preacher is involved and hand out information to other members of the congregation.

Click here to listen to the Pastor's interview on the Alex Jones Show.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 9
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 3:28pm(PDT)
Subject: [Fwd: APFN: REl E-MAIL YOUR CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS]

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.7.2/349 - Release Date: 5/26/2006

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 10
From: "advokris@aol.com" advokris@aol.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 6:35pm(PDT)
Subject: Protest Hillary Clinton on Pro-War Stance

Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:33:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: CODEPINK NYC <codepink @ mail.democracyinaction.org>
Subject: Code Pink NYC: Bird-dog Hillary in June
May 26, 2006

Join CODEPINK NYC as we continue our campaign to pressure Senator
Hillary Clinton to take a stand against the war.

MONDAY, JUNE 5TH: BIRD-DOG HILLARY PROTEST
New York Women for Hillary are hosting a luncheon in support of Hillary
Clinton’s re-election campaign at the Hilton New York’s Grand Ballroom.
CODEPINK NYC will be outside letting women know that HILLARY SUPPORTS
THE WAR.

Who: CODEPINK, BROOKLYN PARENTS FOR PEACE, PEACE ACTION NYS
What: HILLARY YOU’RE (STILL) NOT LISTENING PROTEST
When: Monday, June 5th from 11:30-1:30
Where: outside the Hillton on Avenue of the Americas @53rd Street
Attire: PINK

THURSDAY, JUNE 8TH: ANOTHER BIRD-DOG EVENT
And if you can’t meet us for lunch on Monday, meet us in the evening on
Thursday, as President Bill Clinton hosts a downtown fundraiser for his
wife’s Senatorial campaign.

Who: CODEPINK and others
What: BILL FOR HILL PROTEST
When: June 8th from 5:30-7:30 p.m.
Where: outside the Stephen Weiss Studio at 711 Greenwich Street (corner
of Charles)
Attire: PINK

On Friday, May 19th we were outside two fundraisers—one for Senator
Robert Byrd on the Upper West Side and one for gubernatorial candidate
Ted Strickland in the West Village—where Hillary Clinton was in
attendance. We handed out our HILLARY SUPPORTS THE WAR flyers to guests
and passersby and we had the opportunity to speak with Senator Clinton
as she passed our HILLARY YOU’RE NOT LISTENING signs. We said, “When
are you going to help end the war in Iraq?” and she replied, “We’re
working on it.”

How exactly, we would like to know, is she WORKING ON IT? By saying an
immediate withdrawal from Iraq would be a “big mistake”? By
consistently dodging, waffling and avoiding the topic as much as
possible? By calling for military action against Iran as she did at a
speech at Princeton this winter?

Hillary still isn’t listening. She sent out a letter to her supporters
last week decrying the right wing WAR AGAINST CONTRACEPTION. We applaud
her support for the basic right of contraception, but what about the
WAR IN IRAQ? What about the basic rights to security and
self-determination for the women, children and all people of Iraq?
There will be no solution to that conflict—no security, no democracy,
and no peace---as long as there are American boots on the ground in
Iraq.

Hope to see you in the streets! For more info contact codepinknyc @
hotmail.com.

Peace,

C0DEPINK New York

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 11
From: "Naveed" flanker12k@yahoo.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 7:06pm(PDT)
Subject: 109th Congress H.R. 4752!

forgive me for the profuse profanity

ATTENTION YOU MOTHERFUCKERS (NSA take note)

I'm NOT going over there to to kill people I don't know who haven't done shit to me

NOR am I going to serve as homeland gestapo actively taking part in destroying america!

109TH CONGRESS
H. R. 4752
2D SESSION

To provide for the common defense by requiring all persons in the United
States, including women, between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform
a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance
of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
Mr. RANGEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Armed Services

A BILL
To provide for the common defense by requiring all persons
in the United States, including women, between the ages
of 18 and 42 to perform a period of military service
or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the na-
tional defense and homeland security, and for other pur-
poses.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.--This Act may be cited as the
5 ``Universal National Service Act of 2006''.
2
1 (b) TABLE CONTENTS.--The table of contents for
OF

2 this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. National service obligation.
Sec. 3. Two-year period of national service.
Sec. 4. Implementation by the President.
Sec. 5. Induction.
Sec. 6. Deferments and postponements.
Sec. 7. Induction exemptions.
Sec. 8. Conscientious objection.
Sec. 9. Discharge following national service.
Sec. 10. Registration of females under the Military Selective Service Act.
Sec. 11. Relation of Act to registration and induction authority of military se-
lective service Act.
Sec. 12. Definitions.

3 SEC. 2. NATIONAL SERVICE OBLIGATION.

4 (a) OBLIGATION SERVICE.--It is the obligation
FOR

5 of every citizen of the United States, and every other per-
6 son residing in the United States, who is between the ages
7 of 18 and 42 to perform a period of national service as
8 prescribed in this Act unless exempted under the provi-
9 sions of this Act.
10 (b) FORM NATIONAL SERVICE.--National service
OF

11 under this Act shall be performed either--
12 (1) as a member of an active or reserve compo-
13 nent of the uniformed services; or
14 (2) in a civilian capacity that, as determined by
15 the President, promotes the national defense, includ-
16 ing national or community service and homeland se-
17 curity.

HR 4752 IH
3
1 (c) INDUCTION REQUIREMENTS.--The President
2 shall provide for the induction of persons covered by sub-
3 section (a) to perform national service under this Act.
4 (d) SELECTION MILITARY SERVICE.--Based
FOR

5 upon the needs of the uniformed services, the President
6 shall--
7 (1) determine the number of persons covered by
8 subsection (a) whose service is to be performed as a
9 member of an active or reserve component of the
10 uniformed services; and
11 (2) select the individuals among those persons
12 who are to be inducted for military service under
13 this Act.
14 (e) CIVILIAN SERVICE.--Persons covered by sub-
15 section (a) who are not selected for military service under
16 subsection (d) shall perform their national service obliga-
17 tion under this Act in a civilian capacity pursuant to sub-
18 section (b)(2).
19 SEC. 3. TWO-YEAR PERIOD OF NATIONAL SERVICE.

20 (a) GENERAL RULE.--Except as otherwise provided
21 in this section, the period of national service performed
22 by a person under this Act shall be two years.
23 (b) GROUNDS EXTENSION.--At the discretion of
FOR

24 the President, the period of military service for a member

HR 4752 IH
4
1 of the uniformed services under this Act may be ex-
2 tended--
3 (1) with the consent of the member, for the
4 purpose of furnishing hospitalization, medical, or
5 surgical care for injury or illness incurred in line of
6 duty; or
7 (2) for the purpose of requiring the member to
8 compensate for any time lost to training for any
9 cause.
10 (c) EARLY TERMINATION.--The period of national
11 service for a person under this Act shall be terminated
12 before the end of such period under the following cir-
13 cumstances:
14 (1) The voluntary enlistment and active service
15 of the person in an active or reserve component of
16 the uniformed services for a period of at least two
17 years, in which case the period of basic military
18 training and education actually served by the person
19 shall be counted toward the term of enlistment.
20 (2) The admission and service of the person as
21 a cadet or midshipman at the United States Military
22 Academy, the United States Naval Academy, the
23 United States Air Force Academy, the Coast Guard
24 Academy, or the United States Merchant Marine
25 Academy.

HR 4752 IH
5
1 (3) The enrollment and service of the person in
2 an officer candidate program, if the person has
3 signed an agreement to accept a Reserve commission
4 in the appropriate service with an obligation to serve
5 on active duty if such a commission is offered upon
6 completion of the program.
7 (4) Such other grounds as the President may
8 establish.
9 SEC. 4. IMPLEMENTATION BY THE PRESIDENT.

10 (a) IN GENERAL.--The President shall prescribe
11 such regulations as are necessary to carry out this Act.
12 (b) MATTER BE COVERED REGULATIONS.--
TO BY

13 Such regulations shall include specification of the fol-
14 lowing:
15 (1) The types of civilian service that may be
16 performed for a person's national service obligation
17 under this Act.
18 (2) Standards for satisfactory performance of
19 civilian service and of penalties for failure to per-
20 form civilian service satisfactorily.
21 (3) The manner in which persons shall be se-
22 lected for induction under this Act, including the
23 manner in which those selected will be notified of
24 such selection.

HR 4752 IH
6
1 (4) All other administrative matters in connec-
2 tion with the induction of persons under this Act
3 and the registration, examination, and classification
4 of such persons.
5 (5) A means to determine questions or claims
6 with respect to inclusion for, or exemption or
7 deferment from induction under this Act, including
8 questions of conscientious objection.
9 (6) Standards for compensation and benefits
10 for persons performing their national service obliga-
11 tion under this Act through civilian service.
12 (7) Such other matters as the President deter-
13 mines necessary to carry out this Act.
14 (c) USE PRIOR ACT.--To the extent determined
OF

15 appropriate by the President, the President may use for
16 purposes of this Act the procedures provided in the Mili-
17 tary Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.),
18 including procedures for registration, selection, and induc-
19 tion.
20 SEC. 5. INDUCTION.

21 (a) IN GENERAL.--Every person subject to induction
22 for national service under this Act, except those whose
23 training is deferred or postponed in accordance with this
24 Act, shall be called and inducted by the President for such
25 service at the time and place specified by the President.

HR 4752 IH
7
1 (b) AGE LIMITS.--A person may be inducted under
2 this Act only if the person has attained the age of 18 and
3 has not attained the age of 42.
4 (c) VOLUNTARY INDUCTION.--A person subject to in-
5 duction under this Act may volunteer for induction at a
6 time other than the time at which the person is otherwise
7 called for induction.
8 (d) EXAMINATION; CLASSIFICATION.--Every person
9 subject to induction under this Act shall, before induction,
10 be physically and mentally examined and shall be classified
11 as to fitness to perform national service. The President
12 may apply different classification standards for fitness for
13 military service and fitness for civilian service.
14 SEC. 6. DEFERMENTS AND POSTPONEMENTS.

15 (a) HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.--A person who is pur-
16 suing a standard course of study, on a full-time basis, in
17 a secondary school or similar institution of learning shall
18 be entitled to have induction under this Act postponed
19 until the person--
20 (1) obtains a high school diploma;
21 (2) ceases to pursue satisfactorily such course
22 of study; or
23 (3) attains the age of 20.
24 (b) HARDSHIP DISABILITY.--Deferments from
AND

25 national service under this Act may be made for--

HR 4752 IH
8
1 (1) extreme hardship; or
2 (2) physical or mental disability.
3 (c) TRAINING CAPACITY.--The President may post-
4 pone or suspend the induction of persons for military serv-
5 ice under this Act as necessary to limit the number of per-
6 sons receiving basic military training and education to the
7 maximum number that can be adequately trained.
8 (d) TERMINATION.--No deferment or postponement
9 of induction under this Act shall continue after the cause
10 of such deferment or postponement ceases.
11 SEC. 7. INDUCTION EXEMPTIONS.

12 (a) QUALIFICATIONS.--No person may be inducted
13 for military service under this Act unless the person is
14 acceptable to the Secretary concerned for training and
15 meets the same health and physical qualifications applica-
16 ble under section 505 of title 10, United States Code, to
17 persons seeking original enlistment in a regular compo-
18 nent of the Armed Forces.
19 (b) OTHER MILITARY SERVICE.--No person shall be
20 liable for induction under this Act who--
21 (1) is serving, or has served honorably for at
22 least six months, in any component of the uniformed
23 services on active duty; or
24 (2) is or becomes a cadet or midshipman at the
25 United States Military Academy, the United States

HR 4752 IH
9
1 Naval Academy, the United States Air Force Acad-
2 emy, the Coast Guard Academy, the United States
3 Merchant Marine Academy, a midshipman of a Navy
4 accredited State maritime academy, a member of the
5 Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps, or the
6 naval aviation college program, so long as that per-
7 son satisfactorily continues in and completes at least
8 two years training therein.
9 SEC. 8. CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION.

10 (a) CLAIMS CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR.--Noth-
AS

11 ing in this Act shall be construed to require a person to
12 be subject to combatant training and service in the uni-
13 formed services, if that person, by reason of sincerely held
14 moral, ethical, or religious beliefs, is conscientiously op-
15 posed to participation in war in any form.
16 (b) ALTERNATIVE NONCOMBATANT CIVILIAN
OR

17 SERVICE.--A person who claims exemption from combat-
18 ant training and service under subsection (a) and whose
19 claim is sustained by the local board shall--
20 (1) be assigned to noncombatant service (as de-
21 fined by the President), if the person is inducted
22 into the uniformed services; or
23 (2) be ordered by the local board, if found to
24 be conscientiously opposed to participation in such
25 noncombatant service, to perform national civilian

HR 4752 IH
10
1 service for the period specified in section 3(a) and
2 subject to such regulations as the President may
3 prescribe.
4 SEC. 9. DISCHARGE FOLLOWING NATIONAL SERVICE.

5 (a) DISCHARGE.--Upon completion or termination of
6 the obligation to perform national service under this Act,
7 a person shall be discharged from the uniformed services
8 or from civilian service, as the case may be, and shall not
9 be subject to any further service under this Act.
10 (b) COORDINATION WITH OTHER AUTHORITIES.--
11 Nothing in this section shall limit or prohibit the call to
12 active service in the uniformed services of any person who
13 is a member of a regular or reserve component of the uni-
14 formed services.
15 SEC. 10. REGISTRATION OF FEMALES UNDER THE MILI-

16 TARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT.

17 (a) REGISTRATION REQUIRED.--Section 3(a) of the
18 Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. 453(a)) is
19 amended--
20 (1) by striking ``male'' both places it appears;
21 (2) by inserting ``or herself'' after ``himself'';
22 and
23 (3) by striking ``he'' and inserting ``the per-
24 son''.

HR 4752 IH
11
1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.--Section 16(a) of
2 the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 466(a))
3 is amended by striking ``men'' and inserting ``persons''.
4 SEC. 11. RELATION OF ACT TO REGISTRATION AND INDUC-

5 TION AUTHORITY OF MILITARY SELECTIVE

6 SERVICE ACT.

7 (a) REGISTRATION.--Section 4 of the Military Selec-
8 tive Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 454) is amended by in-
9 serting after subsection (g) the following new subsection:
10 ``(h) This section does not apply with respect to the
11 induction of persons into the Armed Forces pursuant to
12 the Universal National Service Act of 2006.''.
13 (b) INDUCTION.--Section 17(c) of the Military Selec-
14 tive Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 467(c)) is amended by
15 striking ``now or hereafter'' and all that follows through
16 the period at the end and inserting ``inducted pursuant
17 to the Universal National Service Act of 2006.''.
18 SEC. 12. DEFINITIONS.

19 In this Act:
20 (1) The term ``military service'' means service
21 performed as a member of an active or reserve com-
22 ponent of the uniformed services.
23 (2) The term ``Secretary concerned'' means the
24 Secretary of Defense with respect to the Army,
25 Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, the Secretary

HR 4752 IH
12
1 of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast
2 Guard, the Secretary of Commerce, with respect to
3 matters concerning the National Oceanic and At-
4 mospheric Administration, and the Secretary of
5 Health and Human Services, with respect to matters
6 concerning the Public Health Service.
7 (3) The term ``United States'', when used in a
8 geographical sense, means the several States, the
9 District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Is-
10 lands, and Guam.
11 (4) The term ``uniformed services'' means the
12 Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard,
13 commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and At-
14 mospheric Administration, and commissioned corps
15 of the Public Health Service.

HR 4752 IH

In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.
- Notebook, 1904

http://www.fightthenwo.org/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 12
From: "Kevin Hammond" sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 8:45pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: 109th Congress H.R. 4752!

There is nothing to be forgiven my friend. For your use of such is quite appropriate. Besides, I have a tendency to be a bit profane as well.

Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com> wrote:
forgive me for the profuse profanity

ATTENTION YOU MOTHERFUCKERS (NSA take note)

I'm NOT going over there to to kill people I don't know who haven't done shit to me

NOR am I going to serve as homeland gestapo actively taking part in destroying america!

109TH CONGRESS
H. R. 4752
2D SESSION

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 14, 2006
Mr. RANGEL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on Armed Services

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.--This Act may be cited as the
5 ``Universal National Service Act of 2006''.
2
1 (b) TABLE CONTENTS.--The table of contents for
OF

3 SEC. 2. NATIONAL SERVICE OBLIGATION.

4 (a) OBLIGATION SERVICE.--It is the obligation
FOR

24 the President, the period of military service for a member

10 (a) IN GENERAL.--The President shall prescribe
11 such regulations as are necessary to carry out this Act.
12 (b) MATTER BE COVERED REGULATIONS.--
TO BY

25 national service under this Act may be made for--

10 (a) CLAIMS CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR.--Noth-
AS

HR 4752 IH
10
1 service for the period specified in section 3(a) and
2 subject to such regulations as the President may
3 prescribe.
4 SEC. 9. DISCHARGE FOLLOWING NATIONAL SERVICE.

16 TARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT.

5 TION AUTHORITY OF MILITARY SELECTIVE

6 SERVICE ACT.

HR 4752 IH

In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.
- Notebook, 1904

http://www.fightthenwo.org/

SPONSORED LINKS
United state coin United state flag United state grant Trademark united state United state military United state government grant

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

Visit your group "911TruthAction" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---------------------------------

Saoirse go deo! www.fightthenwo.org

---------------------------------
Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone calls as low as 1�/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 13
From: "Kevin Hammond" sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 8:58pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Protest Hillary Clinton on Pro-War Stance

Code pink is limited hangout, controlled oppisition horseshit. They had had NUMEROUS opportunities to publicly raise 9/11 issues have NOT ONCE have they EVER done so! So please do not post any more of this hogwash. Perhaps you are unaware of there lack of REAL action. I am now informing you of there limited hangout/controlled stance. Also, Please do not take offense, but do some research on this matter for yourself.

Kevin.

advokris@aol.com wrote:

Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:33:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: CODEPINK NYC <codepink @ mail.democracyinaction.org>
Subject: Code Pink NYC: Bird-dog Hillary in June
May 26, 2006

Join CODEPINK NYC as we continue our campaign to pressure Senator
Hillary Clinton to take a stand against the war.

Who: CODEPINK and others
What: BILL FOR HILL PROTEST
When: June 8th from 5:30-7:30 p.m.
Where: outside the Stephen Weiss Studio at 711 Greenwich Street (corner
of Charles)
Attire: PINK

Hope to see you in the streets! For more info contact codepinknyc @
hotmail.com.

Peace,

C0DEPINK New York

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

SPONSORED LINKS
United state citizenship United state army United state coin United state flag United state government grant United state military

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

---------------------------------

Saoirse go deo! www.fightthenwo.org

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 14
From: "RateMyRep" anonymsx@yahoo.fr
Date: Sat May 27, 2006 11:49pm(PDT)
Subject: Rate My Rep RESULTS: Congressman Doolittle (CA)

RateMyRep Survey Results For : John T. Doolittle

Someone out there has stepped up to the challenge! Here are the results for� Representative John Doolittle

The House Ethics committee outlines 10 general points of conduct that every elected official or representative should adhere to. Now, using these 10 points as a gauge you too can evaluate the performance of your elected official!

Evaluated Representative
MERGEFIELD "Evaluated_Representative" John T. Doolittle
Does this representative have a website?
Yes
If so, what is the website address?
http://www.house.gov/doolittle/
Which office of the Representative did you call? Please enter the location of the office (District or Capitol), the telephone number (e.g. 555-555-1212), and the address (e.g.123 Milliner Street, Boise, ID 56666).
Representative John T. Doolittle United States House of Representatives 4230 Douglas Blvd. Suite 200 Granite Bay, CA 95746 (916) 786-5560 (916) 786-6364 (fax)
The following questions relate to the subjective assessment on how well a person who took the RateMyRep survey thought their elected Representative completed the following tasks. If the survey-taker was/is not familiar with the issue or activity, the RateMyRep survey-taker indicated so where applicable.
Put loyalty to the highest moral principals and to country above loyalty to Government persons, party, or department.
Poor
Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion. (Has your member of Congress been convicted of tax evasion recently? Stock scandal? The answer would be 'mediocre' or less here.)
Poor
Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought. In other words, is there evidence to prove that my representative was sleeping or vacationing on the job and still is getting paid for it? If the answer is "Yes," Their performance is mediocre at best.
Mediocre
Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished. (How does this representative optimize his or her time while doing his job?)
Mediocre
Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept for himself or his family, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties. (Has your representative been accused of cronyism, nepotism, or "the good ol'boys/'girls" attitudes? If so, your representative has not performed so well.)
Poor
Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.(Has your representative given campaign gifts after election? Installed a few business partners in key government roles? Promised future gifts? If so, your representative has not performed so well.)
Poor
Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of his governmental duties. (Does your representative happen to be a shareholder of a large oil corporation? Halliburton? Major pharmaceutical firm? Does he still have a financial stake in those companies, while in office? If so, your representative has not performed so well.)
Poor
Never use any information coming to him confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means for making private profit. ( Has your representative ever used, or been accused of using, confidential government data to endow their own financial interests? If so, your representative as not performed so well.)
Mediocre
Expose corruption wherever discovered.
Mediocre
Uphold the principles of the previous 8 questions, ever conscious that public office is a public trust.
Mediocre
Are you one of this representative's constituents?
MERGEFIELD Are_you_one_of_this_representatives_co

Datetime
12/24/2005 12:08:00 AM

Here's the link: http://ratemyrep.blogspot.com

I am developing a non-partisan website that quantifies the customer service value of elected officials. The blog/site is, in essence, premised on this: "As a taxpayer, some of my money is going toward my representative's salary. As one of their constituents, I should receive decent "customer service" from their staff, and the representative should have materials available to constituents as required, and whenever requested."

The point of the site is to send a messege to our elected officials that constituents come first, and to drive home the messege that if our representatives are not doing what their constitutents want, voters will vote them out. I think people from both sides of the aisle can understand this sentiment.

---------------------------------
Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone calls as low as 1�/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message 15
From: "Cathy Garger" savorsuccesslady@yahoo.com
Date: Sun May 28, 2006 4:59am(PDT)
Subject: NIST Says No to Debate On 9/11 Science

As many of you have already read, Philip Berg, Esq., Dr. James Fetzer, Dr. David Ray Griffin, Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. Morgan Reynolds, Col. George Nelson, USAF (ret.) and Dr. Judy Wood are planning to participate in the National 9/11 Debate on September 16, 2006 in Charleston, South Carolina.

Members of the 9/11 Commission, government scientists from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and other supporting experts were invited to participate and represent the government�s debate team.

I received this document (below and attached) from Dr. Griffin last night. It states that NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) is not interested in a debate with these 9/11 experts.

One can hardly blame NIST. After all, how can NIST hope to go up against expertly presented technical and scientific proof?

Also, here is an Open Letter to the 9/11 Commission that sure packs a punch. http://www.teamliberty.net/id264.html

The fact that NIST is unwilling to defend the claims it has made to the American public - must be spread far and wide. They are gallinas - and for good reason. NIST and the rest of the federal workers can say whatever they want to the controlled media, but when it comes down to being able to defend their case in front of learned experts with hard science? Of course NIST fully realizes that their efforts can only turn to ultra-fine particulate GZ dust.

Cathy Garger
http://mytown.ca/garger/

Ed Haas, "Government spokesman says, �I don�t understand the public�s fascination with World Trade Center Building Seven,�" Muckraker Report, March 21, 200 (http://www.teamliberty.net/id235.html).
�

March 21, 2006 � Michael E. Newman, Public and Business Affairs spokesman for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), in a phone interview with the Muckraker Report on Monday, March 20th, said that he didn�t "understand the public�s fascination with World Trade Center Building Seven."� Newman was contacted by the Muckraker Report to discuss when the National Institute of Standards and Technology anticipated releasing its report regarding how World Trade Center Building Seven collapsed onto its footprint at 5:20p.m. EST on September 11, 2001.
�
What I found so interesting about my 30-minute conversation with Newman was how easily he discounted as unfounded conspiracies, the findings and opinions of scientists who are operating outside of the government�s payroll.� He frequently used analogies to conspiracy theories and urban legends such as Bigfoot and UFO�s.� At one point Newman said that he has joked with members of his Public and Business Affairs that they might as well conduct press conferences wearing "Bigfoot" costumes because "no matter what we say, some people will not believe the government".� Newman continued, "For some people, no matter what the government says about 9/11, they will still believe that the government is lying.� Some people still believe the world is flat and there are UFO�s.� There�s nothing the federal government can say to convince these people otherwise."�
�
When I mentioned to Newman that we�re not talking about nutcases from Kooksville, but rather credentialed scientists such as BYU Physics Professor, Stephen E. Jones, Claremont Professor Emeritus, David Ray Griffin, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Engineer, Jeff King, he said, "Just because a person is from MIT doesn�t mean that they know what they�re talking about."� Assuming that Newman is right, then it must be noted that the Lead Technical Investigator for the NIST National Construction Safety Team for WTC Investigation is a gentleman named Shyam Sunder, who incidentally, received his doctoral degree in structural engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1981.[1]�
�
I asked Newman whether his agency had a compelling interest to produce a report regarding the collapse of the Twin Towers that substantiated the 9/11 Commission Report.� He indicated that NIST had no such interest.� When asked if NIST would produce and release a report on World Trade Center Building Seven, even if the Institute�s conclusions reveal that WTC-7 did in fact collapse as the direct result of a controlled demolition, Newman said that NIST would release such a report if that turns out to be its findings.�
�
Intrigued by Newman�s ability to maintain a persona of impartiality and claimed dedication to truthfulness while he simultaneously scoffed, if not ridiculed any scientist who disagrees with the government�s scientists and their findings, I decided to test his dedication to impartiality and whether NIST had any predisposition towards finding a cause of collapse of WTC Building Seven that will coincide with the government�s account of 9/11. I asked him about the now infamous public statements made by Larry Silverstein, the controller of the World Trade Center Complex.� Recall that on a PBS documentary that aired in September 2002, Silverstein said that he and the New York Fire Department decided jointly to "pull" WTC-7.� Here is the exact Silverstein quote from the 2002 PBS documentary.�
�
"I remember getting a call from the ER, Fire Department Commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, �We�ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is �pull it.�� And they made the decision to �pull� and we watched the building collapse."�
�
Almost immediately after I finished referencing Silverstein as saying that the "smartest thing to do is pull it", Newman responded with a condescending chuckle to remind me that the federal government is always right, and the people, always wrong.� He then said, "Silverstein already explained that what he meant was that they decided to pull the firefighters and emergency rescue workers from World Trade Center Building Seven."� One can only hope that NIST doesn�t consider its investigation into what Silverstein meant by his usage of the words, "pull it" as complete, solely on an ambiguous clarification offered years later by a man (Silverstein) that certainly has a financial and personal interest in the government�s official account of 9/11 prevailing.��
�
After Newman finished minimizing the value of the Silverstein comment as essentially worthless, I pointed out to him the fact that organizations such as Scholars for 9/11 Truth and 9/11 Revisited certainly seemed to be presenting thoughtful and scientific information that refuted much of the work by the government�s scientists at NIST.� I expressed to him my concern that more than half of all Americans now believe the U.S. government has some complicity if not culpability regarding 9/11, with many people now believing that 9/11 is nothing more than a massive government cover-up; a public perception Newman did not refute. However, when I suggested that a possible method to reconcile the division in the United States between the government and its people might be for a series of televised national debates between his thirty scientists assigned to investigate how World Trade Center Buildings � 1, 2, & 7 collapsed onto their footprints on September 11, 2001, I was abruptly
interrupted and told that none of the NIST scientists would participate in any public debate.�
�
Curious, I asked why the National Institute of Standards and Technology would avoid public debate, particularly if it was confident in its work.� Newman responded, "Because there is no winning in such debates."� When I pointed out that such a debate between the thirty scientists who worked on the NIST 9/11 Investigation and thirty equally-qualified scientists who dispute, and claim to be able to refute the NIST findings; that such a public, televised debate might actually help answer many of the public�s questions and possibly restore some national unity, the NIST spokesman emphatically insisted that such a debate will never occur.
�
As precociously as Michael E. Newman presented himself as a government man, and therefore trustworthy, the inconsistencies in his agency�s work pertaining to how the Twin Towers collapsed will persist if NIST and its lot of government scientists don�t publicly debate with non-government scientists that are presently and publicly disputing the government�s findings.�
�
Glaring evidence of a fallible, if not predisposed government agency is found on the National Institute of Standards and Technology web site.� For example, NIST lists as one if its main 9/11 investigation objectives as to determine:
�
* Why and how World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 collapsed after the initial impact of the aircraft [2]�
�
Note: In the event that NIST changes the aforementioned misleading language on its web site, go here http://teamliberty.net/id236.html to see how the web page read as of March 20, 2006.�
�
Why is the false statement on the NIST web site?� The National Institute of Standards and Technology knows, along with the rest of the world, that no aircraft impacted WTC-7.� Yet on its web site, it uses language that suggests that WTC-7 was also collided into by an aircraft.� Is it any wonder why Americans are struggling to accept the government�s 9/11 story when a federal agency intended to set the standard is demonstrating to the world that its own standard of accuracy regarding the dissemination of information is woefully inadequate?�
�
This lack of standards is demonstrated again in the National Institute of Standards and Technology - Executive Summary, which is a portion of its report regarding how the Twin Towers collapsed.�� Listed as Finding 59, NIST reported:
�
* NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001.� NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers.� Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.�

Amazingly, the government sees the dust clouds produced during the collapse of the Twin Towers as an obstruction of view, while scientists, outside the government�s control, see the volume, density, and speed of outward projection from the buildings during the collapse that the dust clouds demonstrated, as evidence of secondary explosive devices.�� Whether secondary explosive devices caused or assisted the collapse of the Twin Towers or not, the dust clouds were and remain compelling evidence that the government, by their own admission, missed or ignored.
�
Seeing as NIST scientists couldn�t see the fact that the dust clouds were themselves, evidence, and not obstructions, is it possible for the National Institute of Standard and Technology to be taken seriously, let alone, trusted?� Why is the public so fascinated with WTC-7 Mr. Newman?� We are so fascinated by it because the events of September 11, 2001 were a national tragedy with many valid and unanswered questions remaining in the public mind.�
�
If there is a weak link in a government cover-up, World Trade Center Building Seven is it.� If WTC-7 is found to have collapsed as a result of a controlled demolition, than the NIST report on the Twin Towers will be aggressively scrutinized because the question of how and when explosive devices were wired into WTC-7 would have to be answered. By answering that question, a new truth regarding WTC-1 and WTC-2 might be revealed.��
�
Does NIST have a compelling interest to report that WTC-7 defied the laws of physics also on September 11, 2001 and miraculously collapsed at freefall speed as the result of office fires?� You bet it does!� Can the National Institute of Standards and Technology be trusted as a competent federal agency that will deliver an untainted, truthful analysis of WTC-7 regardless of what that truth might be?� I�ll leave the answer to that question up to you.�

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] National Institute of Standards and Technology, Project Leaders, National Construction Safety Team for WTC Investigation, Shyam Sunder, http://wtc.nist.gov/pi/wtc_profiles.asp?lastname=sunder, [Accessed March 20, 2006]
[2] NIST & The World Trade Center, Fact Sheets, http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs.htm, [Accessed March 20, 2006]

#############################################################################

If the crazies and the psy ops aren't after you, then you're barking up the wrong tree.

~ S.P. ~

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

Message 16
From: "Jarrett Smith" Jarret.Smith@ntlworld.com
Date: Sun May 28, 2006 7:01am(PDT)
Subject: Teacher Put on Leave for Voicing 9/11 Opinions

Teacher Put on Leave for Voicing 9/11 Opinions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg0PV8gQOcQ

http://www.911blogger.com/2006/05/substitute-teacher-put-on-leave-for.
html

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion about 09/11/2001

Sunday, May 28, 2006

[911TruthAction] Digest Number 1308

No comments:

About Me

Last posts