| uruknet.info |
www.uruknet.info: a site gathering daily information concerning occupied Iraq: news, analysis, documents and texts of iraqi resistance available in Italian and English.
You receive this newsletter because you subscribed it. If you think it was an abuse, or simply if you don't want to receive it any more, click here to unsubscribe from the newsletter. |
There are 21 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. [David McReynolds] Open Letter to the New York Times
From: "Edward Pickersgill" <edward@mytown.ca>
2. [Sakin] Generals Dissent
From: "Edward Pickersgill" <edward@mytown.ca>
3. [Harlan] WHEN IS ENOUGH GOING TO BE "ENOUGH"?
From: "Edward Pickersgill" <edward@mytown.ca>
4. RE: Leslie, can you explain this message from qmail-sent programe at yahoo that you forwarded?
From: "Leslie Schwartz" <lhs_emf@pacbell.net>
5. Israeli Connection to 9/11 (top part with links)
From: Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com>
6. Re: Hersh vs. Bush: Who Would You Believe? -- Behind the Campaign to Attack Iran
From: "scol202" <yahooboxx@ntlworld.com>
7. Iran Showdown Tests Power of "Israel Lobby"
From: "scol202" <yahooboxx@ntlworld.com>
8. Bush sits apparently shielded from accountability
From: APFN <apfn@apfn.org>
9. Re: Re: Hersh vs. Bush: Who Would You Believe? -- Behind the Campaign to Attack Iran
From: Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com>
10. What Censored emails ??
From: ranger116@webtv.net
11. Re: Confused
From: Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com>
12. Re: [Sakin] Generals Dissent
From: Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com>
13. Fw: BIG Media Lie: "Flight 93 Tapes Played in Public" -- NOT!!
From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
14. John Pilger: .Freedom Dies Quickly by John Pilger
From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
15. Re: TO ALL NEW MEMBERS A QUESTION
From: Jolly Roger <slicingthroats@yahoo.com>
16. RE: Re: Fw: Jew Baiting
From: Jolly Roger <slicingthroats@yahoo.com>
17. Chicago's use of a flawed computerized voting system operated by a privately held foreign company
From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
18. Rumsfeld allowed prison abuse - Had Direct Involvment Rumsfeld allowe
From: ranger116@webtv.net
19. Re: John Pilger: .Freedom Dies Quickly by John Pilger
From: "scol202" <yahooboxx@ntlworld.com>
20. Mods: Ban the 'ygcache' message blocker in your Groups
From: "Ozzy bin Oswald" <hisholiness@rome.com>
21. Re: What Censored emails ??
From: John Perna <savefreedom2005@yahoo.com>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:38:14 -0400
From: "Edward Pickersgill" <edward@mytown.ca>
Subject: [David McReynolds] Open Letter to the New York Times
David McReynolds
LEFT LETTERS
14 April 2006
Open Letter to the New York Times
Bill Keller, Executive Editor
229 West 43rd St.
New York City 10036
The New York Times has long been (and remains) essential reading for me though, as I've told various audiences, it is a bit like Pravda was in the old days - you have to learn how to read it. All the news is generally there - but often buried. As the story of Seymour Hersh and his article in the New Yorker was buried on page 23 in your Sunday (April 9th) edition.
That George Bush had on his desk plans for possible use of tactical nuclear weapons in Iran, that plans for a military strike were far advanced, and that key officials were threatening to resign if the nuclear option, at least, was not "taken off the table" was clearly front page news, not for page 23. (There was, as if to confirm my point that the Times was taking a "pause" until it decided how to deal with this, nothing at all on this in the April 10th edition, though, as if your editorial board had finally had a crucial meeting, there was a moderately good editorial on Tuesday, the 11th).
Seymour Hersh is a first class reporter - his credibility far exceeds that of Bush, the White House press secretary, or the British Foreign Office. In this case the various denials of Hersh's piece, issued by all of the above, only served as a kind of confirmation. I don't mean Hersh can't make a mistake - it is the rare reporter who doesn't. I do mean that, given the source, this was a front page story and that's not where you put it.
http://www.mytown.ca/mcreynolds/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My Homepage: http://www.mytown.ca/ourvoices/
and http://www.mytown.ca/edzart/
New: http://www.mytown.ca/elections101/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:38:31 -0400
From: "Edward Pickersgill" <edward@mytown.ca>
Subject: [Sakin] Generals Dissent
Larry Sakin
Generals Dissent
14 April 2006
It's just plain old horse sense. When your nation is at war, the last people you want to piss off are the generals who are prosecuting that war for you. Yet, in a stunning display of puerile obstinacy, President Bush has decided again to support his friend Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld despite the countless number of military generals and other senior officers calling for Rumsfeld's resignation.
All this week, military leaders who've served in Iraq have been criticizing Rumsfeld's inept and dictatorial direction of the war, saying he cast aside the judgment of the people doing the fighting over his own views about battle. Major General John Swannick, Jr., Major General John Riggs, and Major General John Batiste have joined the scores of men they commanded during their tours in Iraq in calling for Rumsfeld resignation. This is quite an unusual move for military officers, who generally keep their opinions about the Defense Department elites to themselves. However, it's painfully obvious to these men, all of whom have served many years in the military that the Bush Administration has absolutely no idea what its doing.
http://www.mytown.ca/sakin/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My Homepage: http://www.mytown.ca/ourvoices/
and http://www.mytown.ca/edzart/
New: http://www.mytown.ca/elections101/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:39:01 -0400
From: "Edward Pickersgill" <edward@mytown.ca>
Subject: [Harlan] WHEN IS ENOUGH GOING TO BE "ENOUGH"?
WHEN IS ENOUGH GOING TO BE "ENOUGH"?
Harlan Bennett
13 April 2006
I TELL you, dear readers, it just gets better and better. Quite aside from his horrific endeavour in Iraq (kinda like beating up the crippled kid that lives next door), and NOT content with his saber-rattling routine against Iran, NOW we find out that (SURPRIZE, SURPRIZE) Bu$hit is INDEED the world's biggest liar and its most egregious fool. Remember Scooter Libby? Well, siree, he's got quite a tale to tell - and he's TELLING it. There is indeed no honour among thieves! A bombshell has just emerged from the investigation of Scooter Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice that our Commander-In-Thief, pResident Bu$hit HIMSELF, leaked information to discredit critics of his rush to war. He's repeatedly said he wants to get to the bottom of this matter, and that he would fire anyone found to have leaked classified information. GOSH, does this mean that he is, finally, going to fire HIMSELF????
http://www.mytown.ca/ev.php?URL_ID=112525&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201
or via: http://www.mytown.ca/harlan/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My Homepage: http://www.mytown.ca/ourvoices/
and http://www.mytown.ca/edzart/
New: http://www.mytown.ca/elections101/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:52:08 -0500
From: "Leslie Schwartz" <lhs_emf@pacbell.net>
Subject: RE: Leslie, can you explain this message from qmail-sent programe at yahoo that you forwarded?
Dick,
Sorry for the garbage text, this am I wanted to forward the response I wrote sometime ago which seems to have not been sent by yahoo
or my email service.
I was unable to focus much time on you comments in our earlier exchange sufficiently the end of this week. I will try to get back to
them and review.
Leslie
-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Dick Eastman
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 12:44 PM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [911TruthAction] Leslie, can you explain this message from qmail-sent programe at yahoo that you forwarded?
What is this saying? What has happened here?
I am no yahoo expert.
Dick Eastman
----- Original Message -----
From: Leslie Schwartz
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 4:47 AM
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] I rest my case. Re: Fw: Jew Baiting Leslie Schwartz, Dick Eastman
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at yahoo.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<Undisclosed-Recipient:;@smtp106.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com>:
Unable to switch to /nonexistent: file does not exist. (#4.3.0)
I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long.
--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
Return-Path: <lhs_emf@pacbell.net>
Received: (qmail 54994 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2006 03:19:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO muse) (lhs?emf@pacbell.net@24.1.11.49 with login)
by smtp106.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Apr 2006 03:19:52 -0000
Reply-To: <lhs_emf@pacbell.net>
From: "Leslie Schwartz" <lhs_emf@pacbell.net>
To: <911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com>,
<Undisclosed-Recipient:;>
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] Eastman answers McBride Re: Why we believe Zionists are masterminds of September 11
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 22:19:49 -0500
Message-ID: <HBEKIINIJPGLMFPBKNBNAEGHDPAA.lhs_emf@pacbell.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_038F_01C65E7F.36A02400"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
In-Reply-To: <008701c65e9f$f8f2a3a0$5c32b2d8@nwinfo.net>
Importance: Normal
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_038F_01C65E7F.36A02400
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Rumsfeld is Protestant.
There are more non-Jewish neo-cons than there are Jewish neocons.
Even if every American neocon were Jewish that still is not proof of Israeli involvement in 9/11, that is exactly the kind of
ill-logic you recognize is invalid below.
Please refer me to actual proof that the perpetrators of 9/11 were Zionists.
Just because Israel is an indirect beneficiary of some of the outcomes of the American invasion, that does not mean that
therefore
that they engineered, masterminded or caused the invasion to happen in the first place.
Is the CIA a Zionist organization and who says so that can actually prove the statement? Are the progeny of Reinhart Galen
Jewish
Zionists? What known black ops agencies of the US are verifiable Zionists? The CIA were clearly involved at least in the cover
up
and obfuscation of evidence that would have alerted anyone as to the coming event.
Zionist is an overloaded word, it raises too many emotions for many people to deal with and not everyone is going to agree on
all of
the definitions of who is a Zionist and who is not.
Don't tell me someone is Jewish that therefore they are Zionists. Also, just because someone is a Zionist that does not make
them
some incarnation of evil and guilty of every wrong you are angry about.
All this does is substitute one hate word - Jew for another hate word - Zionist.
Just because the media is not fair or balanced in its coverage of the Israel - Palestinian conflict does not mean that the media
are
Zionists, what it means that people who favor Zionism have more influence over the content of the media than do people who favor
Palestinians have over the media. I have heard this accusation that the US media is run by Zionists, this is something I always
hear
from hate groups and never from anyone else. I want to see the proof for that as well, not just more sloppy logic and more name
calling.
This is exactly the kind of illogic and hate speech I was referring to before.
Comments of this caliber just below are a complete waste of time.
-----Original Message-----
-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Leslie Schwartz
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 1:04 PM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] I rest my case. Re: Fw: Jew Baiting Leslie Schwartz, Dick Eastman
No Dick, I will reply in more detail later. This event is not all that substantially different in character than Gulf of
Tonkin, and many other similar, etc. Its done by the arms and arms finance industry, with key government official taking the lead
role in the disinformation campaign. You’re mixing too many factors together and as with so many similar events in our history it
originates from within our power structure. Israel is an incidental beneficiary, even if mossad or some other free lance foreign
black op covert agencies were used. It is also like Hitler’s Reichstag fire; purpose to use domestic terror gain control of the
government and the internal political agenda. Don’t blind yourself with the anger towards Israel or Zionists.
Further your contention;
“Mossad would be the agency that would then oversee the positioning of accomplices/moles/operatives in all of the
critical/strategic/necessary/sufficient positions in the U.S. and British institutions (MI5, MI6, NSA, CIA, FBI, WHite House,
Pentagon, FAA)”
Sorry, but that Is (respectfully) ridiculous on its face.
If that really is your conclusion start presenting the facts and prove it and stop just offering opinions and theories and
conjecture as conclusions, just because you see some overlapping categories among these groups and some possible motives, all that
is not proof.
Later …
Leslie
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dick Eastman
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 11:59 AM
To: 911-disc@yahoogroups.com; 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [911TruthAction] I rest my case. Re: Fw: Jew Baiting Leslie Schwartz, Dick Eastman
----- Original Message -----
From: Leslie Schwartz
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 4:17 PM
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] Re: Fw: Jew Baiting
>I have seen a number of messages on this message board NOT making that distinction, and in fact lumping together, Jews,
Zionists, Neocons, mossad, Judaism, Israelis, Ashkenazi Jews, the Rothschild’s, the illuminati, the Rockefellers, the Warburg’s,
PNAC, the CFR, the etc. and etc., and mentioning specific high profile people who may fall within one or more of those categories.
Leslie, all these terms are in use by people doing their own detective work on 9-11 and the origin of the Arab-American wars.
When Wolfowitz has Perle, Kissinger, Feith etc. in a group at the Pentagon in the months leading up to 9-11 and when there is proof
that the attack on the Pentagon was an inside-job -- then we must ask ourselves what these men -- Wolfowitz, Perle, Kissinger,
Feith, Dov Zakheim, Rumsfeld have in common that may be clues to their organization/motives/network/method etc. When dealing the
Perle, Wolfowitz and Kissinger a great many leads are obvious -- Jews, Zionists, Neocons, Mossad, Likud, the Rothschild’s, the
Rockefellers, PNAC, the CFR.
Think about this: An operation like 9-11 -- if it was an inside-job false-flag operation at all -- could not have originated
in the overt organization charts of U.S. agencies -- it must have had its origins in secret groups of people who could trust each
other with such (dastardly, illegal, secrecy-demanding) plans. Mossad is one of only a few possibilities of where the idea could
have been hatched (the other possibility is that the idea was hatched among a group of the world's billionaires -- Perle and
Kissinger being their agents -- but even in this case, the next step would have had to have been to bring in Mossad as the primary
"caterer" -- because only Mossad (unlike CIA, NSA, MI6) had the ethnic, religious and ideological unity/solidarity (let's call it
'radical likudnikism' if not "Zionism") to work in confidence of the unlikliness of betrayal.
Mossad would be the agency that would then oversee the positioning of accomplices/moles/operatives in all of the
critical/strategic/necessary/sufficient positions in the U.S. and British institutions (MI5, MI6, NSA, CIA, FBI, WHite House,
Pentagon, FAA) as well as the key control positions of the private sector (sufficient mass media, ADL, think tanks, opinion makers).
This could not be accomplished by any organization -- say the NSA -- within the U.S. -- the American leadership by "yes-men" is not
that dependable. And so Mossad made sure that all strategic points within the Pentagon were made secure for 9-11. etc.
You yourself are being unfair, Leslie, when you say we "lump together" these terms. When I say "Zionist" I do not mean
"Jews" (as in all Jews) -- when I say CFR or PNAC or ADL I mean exactly those organizations and nothing else. No one is "lumping"
(i.e., equating) all these things anywhere. Remember, I have said again and again that only individuals commit crimes, not
groups -- but individuals work in groups and for groups and it is in groups that we find them and understand them.
>I also recall some hater using the term “crypto-Jews” on this message board as if any self respecting individual is going to
hide the fact they are Jewish becomes THAT writer hates Jews. This is delusional and it is offensive.
I also heard someone refer to the Charlie Sheen as a "crypto-Jew" -- a term I don't understand -- maybe Charlie has Jewish
people in his family tree, and maybe he does not advertize it (why should he bother -- unless to help his career in Hollywood, but
apparently he has not bothered) -- but look at Ed Asner -- also speaking about the 9-11 standdown (I know that Asner is talking
"false-flag", I haven't heard him yet) -- but I ask you Leslie -- is "crypto-Jew" any less of an unfair term than calling me a
"hater" just because I look in the backgrounds of Perle, Wolfowitz, Kissinger etc. and find common elements of Zionists, Neocons,
CFR, Rockefellers, Rothschilds (in Perle's case)? Certainly it is reasonable to look at their backgrounds -- certainly these ties
are relevant -- or af least very very very suspicious.
When necessary and accurate distinctions are not made and a message goes out which obviously has some emotion, even anger over
the events associated with 9/11/01 (emotion which is otherwise understandable) it is an ugly thing to read, its racist, its
UN-AMERICAN and I personally do not think it helps anyone to understand these events or how we can constructively respond to the
overall situation.
You are right -- and the worst part is that it alienates intelligent and fair-minded people like yourself, especially since
you are Jewish and Jews are needed in raising the cry against the perpetrators -- if only to overcome the strong negatives of the
"Jew haters" like me -- or like I have been written off as being.
If you want to be taken seriously and treated with respect for your research and comments, you should know that is not going
to be the response when you basically write everything bad that happens in this world is one kind of flavor of the month “Jewish
conspiracy” by one name or another.
But 9-11 was a conspiracy of one kind and it did involve men who are confirmed Zionists, it did involve Mossad (see my reasons
for saying this), and it did involve the neo-cons -- as represented by the leadership at the Pentagon -- but of course including
Cheney and (cipher) Bush (the former of which is a Zionist -- the latter merely a sociopathic useful idiot).
If you make the sufficient and accurate distinctions and make a sincere effort to report only what you have verified to be
factual you will not hear any complaints about it. If you don’t have proof and only have a theory then say that, and when your
making broad accusations about the actions, motives and future plans of groups or categories of people chances are your going to
have to account for that uncertainty in your statement, otherwise its an accusation without sufficient proof and it will again cause
people to distrust your motives and good-will.
My proof is the Pentagon attack evidence which implicates the Pentagon leadership -- Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Kissinger (in
the Wolfowitz group at the Pentagon) and the ties of those men, the interests that put them there. http://bedoper.com/eastman
We are solving a case where the government (which ordinarily would investigate the crime) is itself the guilty party -- and
we must work back to find all the people/motives/methods behind the crime.
That being said, I admit to guilt in not making the distinction that when I say that the Pentagon leadership is almost all
Jewish and that the Pentagon leadership are implicated in the false-flag attack ont he Pentagon -- that I am not saying that ALL
JEWS WERE IN ON THE PLOT. (I would think that intelligent people would understand that without my saying it.) But it is important
that they are Jewish, because that leads us to investigate their network and affiliations -- the powers that brought them their,
their goals, the way they carried off this complex and far-reaching operation.
Leslie
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.
.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Hammond
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 2:12 PM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] Re: Fw: Jew Baiting
Scott, PLEASE! Note that the distinction between Zionism and Judaism is pointed out. One is NOT the other.
Kevin
Scott Peden <scotpeden@cruzithero.com> wrote:
Sorry, in the deluge of all the reasons I hear to go to war, I only saw a couple of e-mails from a few certain
people claiming that the Jewish Lobby and Israel wanted the US to go to war, they never responded or were able to share where their
source of information was from, so all I had was their personal hearsay, that they got it from someone they trusted, as hearsay and
that they themselves were as trustworthy as the person who gave them the hearsay, so there was no need for me to question anything
they passed along. That is, they couldn’t show me any independent data to show that Israel and the Jewish Lobby screamed for the US
to go to war, much less any comments for this, in print. So I have just taken that as Jew Bashing, happens all the time and a great
many ludicrous things get dumped on those of Jewish faith that maybe the Israel government may have wanted or tried to do. Even
though I haven’t been the slightest fan of the Israeli government since the attack on the USS Liberty, that hasn’t colored my
feelings for individuals of Jewish faith.
When there are hard facts, I gladly accept them, links where I can do my own research, not stuff like the gOlem sends out
where all references go back to other stuff he wrote.
So, if you have any hard facts, references I can read myself, that show that the Jewish Lobby and the Israeli government
actually pushed for the US to go to war with countries that had no connection with the phantom 911 terrorists (like the 7 Saudi’s…
that are still alive, last seen in Saudi Arabia itself) please share them. I make up my own mind. If this was a court of law and I
was a juror, I definitely couldn’t give the death penalty on what information I have seen.
-
A van full of C-4 placed in THREE WYTC towers, to bring them down as
controlled demolition.
I don't understand that.
You are basing trace amounts of explosives, lets say C-4 since it is compact and easy to transport. A van load of it wouldn’
t have been enough to take down all three of the WTC towers. Maybe one. No way the building could have been rigged over night.
Traditional demolition experts figured weeks in a rush job, more likely months.
So, How it was used, was what was found in their van of a composition that could have made steel turn molten and remain in a
liquid form for days later?
To turn this ‘suspect’ evidence into some scientific fact, you’d have to know if what they had, could have caused the
results we saw and fit in with the data we have gathered.
As far as Faux News, I have no idea if they were one of the three stations I watched most that morning, from about 8 minutes
after the first plane hit, I watched live newscasts, but Faux News, they are professional revisionist story tellers, their news is
to get their advertisers money, not to tell the truth, in my personal opinion, they are trying to take the national Enquirer’s
business away. Their credibility ain’t worth the airwaves they broadcast over.
They are my local station, I know first hand what they report and what they rewrite. They turn peace marches into riots,
when no such thing ever happened.
What they showed on the 6 PM news (Pacific time) didn’t even compare with what I saw that morning between 8 AM and noon my
time. Might have just reported on something in a book of Fiction and called it truth. All they got right was that a great many
people died and that a great many people were in shock.
I have heard from someone that survived the destruction of their work
place (One of the Towers) about construction work that had gone on there for the three
previous months, but please, share your data, and give your theories,
hopefully, separating the proven hard facts from speculation.
I don't understand that either
I have been told, by someone that worked in the WTC towers for years, that there was construction going on for several
months before 9/11 and no one knew what it was, much of it was after hours.
I use to be a building demolition junkie, I’ve seen hundreds of film clips on this, I seen more than a few in person.
Fire didn’t take down the WTC towers, explosives as in a demolition did.
I have friends that are pilots, they referred me to several buildings that jet liners had hit and then I researched those
thoroughly. I researched to see how many steel structure buildings had fallen from airplane hits and the resulting fires. ZERO. I
looked to see how many steel structured buildings I could find that had fallen due to fires, maybe there was more ‘interesting
footage’ like the three WTC towers. ZERO, no other steel structure building has ever fallen from a fire even one induced by crashing
a jet liner into it.
Yet I have seen a great many buildings demolished and what I saw that morning, I was sure was a demolition job. After my
research, I couldn’t only imagine how far off I was thinking of how blood thirsty those who pulled this off were.
I and my X wife read everything we could on the WTC towers after our daughter started work there, about 1998, we both were
independently aware that in the original articles of impeachment for Clinton one of the articles was that a private plane had made
it into NYC airspace, 12.5 minutes or something like that, and that was the only instance of the 10 minute response time having been
violated in 12 years, before that it was a 12 minute response time, until 9/11/01 when it was closer to 1 hour and 43 minutes.
Unfortunately, for my curiosity, to maintain her security clearance, my daughter can’t talk about anything other than her
emotions that day. If you have ever worked a federal government job, if you’ve ever been a civilian whose company did contracts for
the Government, you’ll understand her position and why I never pushed her for any other details.
We know Cheney ordered the Colonel at Norad to stand down. We know that with an inter office memo that Bush transferred the
power that congress had given to the president and the President only, to his Vice President, Dick Cheney. We now know that Cheney
was in charge of Norad that morning. Of course no one needed to get GW to safety, it was an inside job. That is data, those are
things that can be found again and again in internet searches, facts that can be verified, many articles written about them plus
Cheney direction Norad is in the 911 Commission report. They fucking aren’t afraid of those that do research, they control all the
information superhighway except the internet and who knows if we have days or years left there.
I happened to be one of the few people who saw the live interview of the Colonel, I heard it was under national security
just like the half dozen videos of what ever hit the pentagon. Yup, so my word is now hearsay. But the 911 commission report telling
about Cheney ordering the Norad controllers to stand down, not once, but three times, that data is there for those who dig.
I haven’t researched the nitty gritty details that so many others have, I have researched what I saw and heard in 4 hours
that morning watching 2 different TV’s and all I can find is that it is a darker more sinister picture than I thought that morning.
Se that light at the end of the tunnel over there?
That is the door to the slaughter house.
Follow the sheepeople, follow stuff that you can’t verify as truth yourself and that is where you are headed.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of scol202
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 4:26 PM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [911TruthAction] Re: Fw: Jew Baiting
Can you share your data to prove that the main beneficiary of 9/11 is
Israel?
Iraq and Iran are/were the two biggest threats to the state of
Israel's existence. The Jewish lobby and the Israeli government
screamed loudest for the war
I'm looking at Halliburton, root and Brown, I'm looking at The
Carlyle group, I am looking at the US Military Industrial Complex, I
am looking at the World Trade organization, I am looking at the World
health Organization.
Yes, American criminals benefited too. Americans also helped with
9/11 they deserved some payback, don't you think ?
Now, some citizens of Israel might be in one of these groups, but
when you say Mossad, you are telling me that Israel attacked the USA,
and 5 men with a vans that had trace amounts of explosives is
suspect but….
It's white hot suspect, absolutely correct, couldn't be much hotter.
Israeli spies selling paintings were found to have addresses close to
the hijackers, this was reported on Fox news.
A van full of C-4 placed in THREE WYTC towers, to bring them down as
controlled demolition.
I don't understand that.
I have heard from someone that survived the destruction of their work
place about construction work that had gone on there for the three
previous months, but please, share your data, and give your theories,
hopefully, separating the proven hard facts from speculation.
I don't understand that either
Oh yes, I saw the Colonel in charge of Norad for that are,
interviewed just after the first tower was hit, I heard him say that
his superior ordered him to ground, not fuel or arm any of his planes
unless given further orders.
Really, I didn't hear that.
Also, several years later the data came out that Cheney's secure
undisclosed place was the control room of Norad, as his control
amounted to continually telling the operators there to let the
aircraft through, to issue to warnings to the apparent targets and
especially to not let any of our armed aircraft into the air that
might interfere.
Yes I understood that.
I am dying to see your data showing that Cheney is Mossad, I want to
be present at the execution.
Cheney isn't even an israeli citizen, he's actually American. he is a
neocon and a member of the PNAC, both predominantly Jewish in
character.
Scott
Eric
--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Peden" <scotpeden@...>
wrote:
>
> Can you share your data to prove that the main beneficiary of 9/11
is
> Israel?
>
> I'm looking at Halliburton, root and Brown, I'm looking at The
Carlyle
> group, I am looking at the US Military Industrial Complex, I am
looking at
> the World Trade organization, I am looking at the World health
Organization.
>
> Now, some citizens of Israel might be in one of these groups, but
when you
> say Mossad, you are telling me that Israel attacked the USA, and 5
men with
> a vans that had trace amounts of explosives is suspect but…. A van
full of
> C-4 placed in THREE WYTC towers, to bring them down as controlled
> demolition.
>
> I have heard from someone that survived the destruction of their
work place
> about construction work that had gone on there for the three
previous
> months, but please, share your data, and give your theories,
hopefully,
> separating the proven hard facts from speculation.
>
> Oh yes, I saw the Colonel in charge of Norad for that are,
interviewed just
> after the first tower was hit, I heard him say that his superior
ordered him
> to ground, not fuel or arm any of his planes unless given further
orders.
>
> Also, several years later the data came out that Cheney's secure
undisclosed
> place was the control room of Norad, as his control amounted to
continually
> telling the operators there to let the aircraft through, to issue to
> warnings to the apparent targets and especially to not let any of
our armed
> aircraft into the air that might interfere.
>
> I am dying to see your data showing that Cheney is Mossad, I want
to be
> present at the execution.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of scol202
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 3:39 PM
> To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [911TruthAction] Re: Fw: Jew Baiting
>
> It does matter if five Mossad agents were caught red handed
> celebrating the collapse of the towers with traces of explosives in
> their van. They failed several lie detector tests and the boss of
the
> company fled to Israel. The fact that an Israeli company was warned
> before the attacks matters too.
>
> The main beneficiary of the Iraq war was Israel and the only
> beneficiary of the racist war on terror is Israel. It matters.
>
>
>
> --- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, "Leslie Schwartz"
> <lhs_emf@> wrote:
> >
> > For anyone who actually cares about the truth to this continuing
> misinformation being promoted here again by Eastman, (Eastman:
> > essentially "my sampling - few Jews killed at the WTC 9/11/01")
> check out the following.
> >
> > Here is a list of the names of those who died in the WTC. As a
Jew,
> I know what names are likely Jewish and which are not. I am not
> > going to go thru all of them one by one and tell you which are
> which. If you have been around a bit you will know on your own.
> >
> > Highlight the names to see the full name, very roughly at least
1/3
> (conservatively) are Jewish.
> >
> > http://www.9-11heroes.us/victims-world-trade-center.php
> >
> > Here is another discussion of this issue, with more links and an
> analysis of the misinformation Eastman continues to spew. The
> > estimate here is between 400 - 500 people of Jewish decent died in
> the WTC towers on 9/11/01. There are a series of articles
> > debunking these lies via this link.
> >
> > http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=331277
> >
> > Moreover this issue, the tragedy which 9/11 is and represents does
> not have a dam thing to do with who is Jewish and who is not or
> > how the events occurred or why they occurred again has nothing to
> do with Jews or Jewishness or Israel, or American Jews, or French
> > Jews, or German Jews, etc. As I told you before its about money
and
> power. AGAIN, if you really want to have the background history
> > to understand this event read John Loftus, read Webster Tarpley.
> Educate yourself, don't be lazy, don't indulge in your prejudices.
> > Learn that lesson and it will take you a long way in life. That is
> the most important lesson anyone can take from this discussion.
> >
> > Dick, if you really cared about the truth you would investigate
the
> truth about it and stop the lies. Are you admitting now below to
> > laziness' rather than hatred? If that is your excuse, then ask
> yourself if that is the standard you really want to live by and use
> > as a guide for your efforts in this or any or important study when
> you communicate with others about the important issues they
> > should be aware of. You could not prove your assertion on this
> issue but yet you repeated it again. What conclusion are we to draw
> > from that I wonder?
> >
> > Your statements have been shameful, stupid and most of all wrong.
> You ought to know that Jewish people like myself love this country
> > as much as you do and we fight and die for it and have done so
> throughout its history, and we devote ourselves to this country as
> > much as you obviously think you do.
> >
> > But there is one big difference between all of us (who are
rational
> and concerned) and you, as one of a group of haters who have
> > been writing in this caliber of trash to this message board. We
> don't call people names based on race or religion, we don't make up
> > stupid theories about history based on simpleton ideas and
> misinformation. We have learned the hard way not to keep hate in
our
> > hearts and we have learned just how thoughtless and dangerous it
is
> to go about life that way. We have seen the results and we don't
> > want to see them again, no matter who the victim might be next
> time. We take the time to learn and to understand and to be as
> > accurate and honest with ourselves and others as we can be and if
> we do not know the truth we research it honestly and keep our
> > mouths shut until we do know the truth, rather than go about
> repeatedly making baseless statements which prove our ignorance to
> > others.
> >
> > Dick, take the time when you write and think about these topic to
> make distinctions that are truly meaningful and accurate and
> > constructive. When you do that we will all be grateful for your
> efforts.
> >
> > Leslie
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Dick Eastman
> > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 8:48 PM
> > To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [911TruthAction] Fw: Jew Baiting
> >
> >
> > From: Leslie Schwartz
> > To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 3:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] Jew Baiting
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Its not about Israel not even a little bit about Israel for
those
> with the power to make things happen, Mossad just knew it was
> > going to happen and was on hand to see it go down. They have
wanted
> the US to get involved in policing the middle east for a long
> > time, but that is not why the event happened.
> >
> >
> >
> > Leslie Schwartz, yes I am Jewish and if don't like it you know
> what you can do about it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Lets see Eastman prove just one if his hate based contentions,
as
> you said below, prove to us Eastman that no one of Jewish
> > ethnicity or decent was killed in the 9/11/01 attack. If you can
> prove that point Eastman then shut up and talk about what you can
> > prove.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Leslie,
> >
> >
> >
> > I am not in a position to prove that no one of Jewish ethnicity
> or decent was killed in 9/11/01 attack. The sampling of names I
> > have seen (e.g. the long series on WTC deaths biographies that
thre
> New York Times ran) showed very few Jewish names in my
> > ampling -- not the high ratio of Jewish names I would expect for
> New York City and the hub of finance and world trade. I do take
> > the word of several sources on the internet that only two Israelis
> died. But no proof that there were no Jews killed at WTC -- only
> > indications that there were too few than one would expect.
> >
> >
> >
> > Some of the greatest people in the world have been Jewish -- I
> have known great acts of mercy and generosity by Jews -- paying
> > for an operation for my brother, simply because he wanted to. My
> favorite college professor -- my model of a good man -- is Jewish
> > (Dr. Richard Glassman at LFC)
> >
> >
> >
> > I often say "Jews" when the just discrimination would narrow
that
> to Mossad, or Zionists, or Neo-cons, or Likudniks -- or even
> > more justly I should have narrowed it to this or that
individual --
> >
> >
> >
> > so I am in the wrong -- but I am also mindful that I force Jews
> to ask themselves -- "is he right about me?" "am I allowing
> > myself to be a part of or to go along with what Eastman is
pointing
> out (Neo-con Zionist guilt for 9-11)
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is a letter that will interest you:
> >
> >
> >
> > =================
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello, Al.
> >
> > Do you think 9-11 was an inside job?
> >
> > If so, do you think Zionist's in the White House, Pentagon,
Israel
> > had anything to do with it?
> >
> > Do you think their Zionism was a large part of their motivation?
> >
> > I answer "yes" to all three questions and I have what I think
> > is ample proof of each point.
> >
> > I never claimed to be sane or to know what sanity is -- but I
> > understand evidence and can reach the logical implications
> > that follow from sufficiently complete evidence.
> >
> > Any time you want to discuss the message and what it is
> > based on, rather than the messenger -- I will be happy to
> > walk you through what I have found.
> >
> > Here is a sample:
> >
> > http://bedoper.com/eastman
> >
> > I trust you are still the great investigator you were when we
> corresponded so long ago.
> >
> > Maybe in better -- saner -- times we will compare notes again.
I
> could only gain.
> >
> > Warm regards,
> >
> > Dick Eastman
> > Yakima, Washinton
> >
> > P.S. as for the impotence of internet posting -- I am taken in
> by chaos theory
> > and that one-quintillion-to-one shot that I just may be the
> little butterfly who
> > could. flap flap flap flap flap flap flap flap flap ... --DE
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <aelewis@>
> > To: <foo@>; <anti-capitalism@yahoogroups.com>
> > Cc: <Conspiracy-Theory@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 1:48 PM
> > Subject: [A-C] Re: Joni Ferris nails self-important Jew hater
> Dick Eastman
> >
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Yes, Joni, it does seem that Dick has become a rabid Jew-hater
> > over the past several years. It was not always so. I have
observed
> > his posts over many months on anti-capitalism, as well as long
ago
> > (5 years ago) on other lists. It seems that the stress of his
life
> > (which has been considerable), combined with a latent inner
> > scapegoat-ism and perhaps xenophobia (characteristic of
> > right-wingers), has precipitated a psychic degeneration into
> > Paranoid Personality Disorder (see below) with a special
> > Jew-hating spin.
> >
> > (Note that I say "Jew-hating" rather than "anti-semitic". The
> > bigtime anti-semitism in the world today is amongst the
Zionists,
> > the "Christian" Zionists, and other muslim-haters. Jew-hating
is a
> > special, narrow type of anti-semitism which ought to be
> > distinguished from its parent.)
> >
> > It seems that Dick, like G L Rockwell (founder of the American
> > Nazi Party), has yielded to "the ageless impulse of men and
women
> > eaten by the disease of hatred to find a political expression or
> > rationalization for their malady":
> >
> > . http://www.salon.com/books/review/1999/07/19/simonelli/ ---
> > . "[Rockwell] drank too much, battled depression, was left by
> > . several wives, became estranged from his family and spun
> further
> > . and further out of control; you'll wince at the passages in
> which
> > . his goodhearted brother and William F. Buckley, whom Rockwell
> > . hounded, try to get him help. In the succinct summation from
a
> > . 1967 volume that that Simonelli cites, Rockwell gave in
to 'the
> > . ageless impulse of men and women eaten by the disease of
> hatred to
> > . find a political expression or rationalization for their
> malady.'"
> >
> > I've watched this degeneration in several other people. Some of
> > them were quite acute thinkers and great writers, until their
> > deterioration set in. In some cases it is hard to account for
it.
> > Though in Dick's case it is not so hard; he has been quite open
> > about the extreme stresses of his personal life. That, combined
as
> > I say with a latent tendency, has added up to his current
> > relentless stream of semi-demented anti-Jewish ravings and
> > screechings. The anti-capitalism yahoo list has become a
cesspool,
> > unfortunately -- and largely on his account. What we have here
is
> > the anti-capitalism of Goebbels and Himmler, sputtering barely
> > coherently about Jewish bankers' conspiracies. (And yes, Jewish
> > bankers ARE an important aspect of this mess; just that their
> > badness does not inhere in their Jewishness.)
> >
> > There was something in me, years ago (circa 2001), that flashed
a
> > warning sign, and I removed Dick from my email list and
generally
> > cut off communication. Somehow I sensed what was to come. And it
> > came! Oh, brother, did it come.
> >
> > The paranoia was evident in years past. For example, if a
message
> > of his was held up for a few hours, or just did not get through,
> > he would immediately conclude that it was because "they" were
out
> > to get him, and were denying him access to the chat boards or
> > whatever. Of course, it IS possible that "they" (the
> > establishment) might shut down people who are saying things that
> > they do not like. Indeed it has actually happened, and I expect
> > that it will happen increasingly. But for someone with insight,
it
> > is very unlikely that "they" would so selectively target a
single
> > individual -- an individual with NO power, purchase or
credibility
> > in the circles where it counts. In other words, you'd have to
be a
> > tad nuts, or at least seriously lacking in insight, to think
that
> > "they" would go out of their way to shut you down when you are
> > (pardon me) a pipsqueak ranter from Lower Bumfuck, Nebraska,
> > posting on a list with 323 pipsqueak members like you and me.
Yes,
> > "they" exist -- and they don't give a good God Damn about
> > Yahoo-group yahoos like us. Sorry.
> >
> > In charity, I will grant that the capitalist system generally
does
> > tend to make people crazy. The stress, combined with the toxic
> > diet and outright environmental toxins, combined with the sense
of
> > powerlessness (based on the REALITY of powerlessness), combined
> > with some personal bad breaks, can drive people nuts. Not hard
to
> > understand.
> >
> > And, perhaps Dick's personal degeneration was in some measure
> > fueled by the actual (inexcusable) behavior of radical Zionists,
> > Likudniks and the like, who persistently refuse to take
> > responsibility, and who deny their (very real and not just
> > incidental) role in the current mess. Witness the brouhaha just
> > the last week or two over the Mearsheimer/Walt piece. The Israel
> > lobby not only does not want to take any responsibility, it
wants
> > to deny its own existence! THAT can drive people nuts, too.
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > PS: Note that Paranoid Personality Disorder (below) is NOT
> > paranoid psychosis, with loss of contact with reality.
Personality
> > disorders are characterized by a somewhat tenuous grasp of
reality
> > (shall we say: "creative" personal representations of it!) --
not
> > with a loss of contact with it. It is more of a personal
> > mind-style than a "disease"; see Hofstader's fine article:
> > The Paranoid Style in American Politics
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anti-capitalism/message/18977
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
--
> >
> > http://mentalhelp.net/disorders/sx37.htm
> >
> > Paranoid Personality Disorder
> >
> > A pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others such that
their
> > motives are interpreted as malevolent, beginning by early
> > adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by
> > four (or more) of the following:
> >
> > 1. suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are
exploiting,
> > harming, or deceiving him or her
> >
> > 2. is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or
> > trustworthiness of friends or associates
> >
> > 3. is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear
> > that the information will be used maliciously against him or her
> >
> > 4. reads hidden demeaning or threatening meanings into benign
> > remarks or events
> >
> > 5. persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults,
> > injuries, or slights
> >
> > 6. perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that
> > are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to
> > counterattack
> >
> > 7. has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding
> > fidelity of spouse or sexual partner
> >
> > -----------------
> >
> > Criteria summarized from: American Psychiatric Association.
> > (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders,
> > fourth edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric
Association.
> >
> > -------------------------
> >
> > "From the standpoint of any sane person, the present problem of
> > capitalist concentration is not only a question of law, but of
> > criminal law, not to mention criminal lunacy." -- G K Chesterton
> >
> > "You will know you have spoken the truth when you are angrily
> > denounced; and you will know you have spoken both truly and
> > well when you are visited by the police." -- J B R Yant
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ----------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > a.. Visit your group "911TruthAction" on the web.
> >
> > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > 911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
> of Service.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> ----------
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> * Visit your group " 911TruthAction
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction> " on the web.
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> 911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
> _____
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries for just 2¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
a.. Visit your group "911TruthAction" on the web.
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
911TruthAction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:05:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com>
Subject: Israeli Connection to 9/11 (top part with links)
---------------------------------
This article triggered a major denial-of-service hacker attack on my web site. It was copied and posted on a British web site (with permission) and it too was hit with a denial-of-service hacker attack. This is the chain of facts that the government and its allies in the creation of a new world war don't want you to read.
---------------------------------
9/11 - WHAT DID THE GOVERNMENT KNOW AND WHEN DID IT KNOW IT?
The task was simple, deny the evidence, cover-up the embarrassing arrest of two Israelis with an explosives-tainted truck, and give the media a reason to return to the mantra of "all terror is caused by Muslims". But what started as a simply attempt to spin the news away from the Israelis arrested in Washington State has backfired on the Bush administration in a big way. In conducting the classic "limited hangout" of admitting to foreknowledge of the attacks of 9-11 in order to reassert the link to Osama bin Laden, Bush has handed opponents of his administration and opponents of World War the most damning proof yet that the reality of 9-11 is not what the US Government and media have been telling the American people it is. The arrested Israelis posed a problem. History records in the Lavon Affair that Israelis willingly use bombs and lay false trails to Arabs for political gain. And it wasn't too long ago that JDL Chairman Irv Rubin was arrested for plotting
to blow up a US Congressman who refused to toe the Israel party line. Then there were the two Mossad agents arrested inside the Mexican Congress with guns and explosives shortly after 9-11. As the battered World Trade Towers collapsed, the very first suspects arrested, caught cheering as the towers fell, were Israelis, later identified as Mossad agents. The arrested spies worked for Urban Moving Systems, whose Israeli owner promptly fled the nation.
Still other espionage suspects posed as art students trying to get into federal buildings, while others held cover jobs in mall kiosks selling "Zoom Copters", kiosks that sat empty when their entire staffs were thrown into jail on suspicion of espionage. All told, the Israeli spy ring, which had been partly uncovered prior to 9-11, was the largest spy ring ever uncovered in the United States.
In California, the ADL was also convicted of running a massive spy operation on American citizens. Coupled with the spies themselves was the discovery of a massive phone tapping operation carried out by Comverse Infosys (yet another Israeli company) contracted to place phone tapping equipment on the US phone system to aid US law enforcement authorities. However, those same authorities began to suspect that Israelis were using that very same system to listen in on the phone calls of Americans when high profile drug investigations into Ecstasy rings (run by the Israeli organized crime) were derailed using information only obtainable from police phone calls. In the Kenneth Starr report, it is reported that Bill Clinton was aware that an unnamed foreign power had made recordings of his phone sex sessions with Monica Lewinsky. In the end, three Israeli companies with deep penetration of the American communications infrastructure were implicated in the phone and
internet tapping scandal. One of these companies, Odigo, had an office near the World Trade Towers, and received a two hour advance warning of the impending attack. Two hours means the warning was sent before the planes that eventually crashed into the World Trade Towers had even left the ground on their final flights! Someone knew of the plan, someone who decided they needed to warn Israelis working for a company linked to Israel's spying operation.
Taken together, there is probable cause to investigate just what connection the Israeli spying operation had with 9-11. Such an investigation should have happened, but instead, something very odd took place in the investigation! According to a government official quoted in Carl Cameron's story on the spy ring, the US Government classified the evidence that links the arrested Israeli spies to 9-11. Rather than treat the arrested spies as Jonathan Pollard had been treated, the US Government hurried to get the arrested Israelis out of the country as quickly as possible, in one case releasing and deporting one Israeli even though he failed his polygraph examination! Pollard had been just one spy. Here was the largest spy ring ever uncovered in the United States and the United States itself was trying to cover it all up! The media went along by downplaying the Rubin story, ignoring the Mexican incident and actually spiking Carl Cameron's four part story on the spy ring.
As quiet as the media was about the evidence pointing towards Israeli involvement in 9-11, the media was quite the opposite when it came to claims of proof linking ex CIA agent Osama bin Laden with the crimes. The reason was obvious. Long before the attacks on the World Trade Towers the United States had been planning for a war in Afghanistan to create a climate more favorable for American oil companies. John Marcesca, as part of a UNOCAL working group on the Afghanistan pipeline project, had gone before Congress and stressed the necessity of replacing the Afghanistan government before a pipeline from the Caspian sea to the gulf of India could be built. The Bush White House admits that a plan to attack Afghanistan existed BEFORE 9-11. Following 9-11, the US did replace the government of Afghanistan, and the pipeline is under construction. One member of the UNOCAL working group, Hamid Karzai, is the President of the new government in Afghanistan. Another UNOCAL group
member, Zalmay Khalilzad, is the US special envoy to Afghanistan. A cozy relationship to be sure!
But there was a problem with the "Osama did it" story. As much evidence as existed suggesting Israeli involvement in 9-11 (certainly enough to justify being classified by the US Government), there was none at all to support the official story.
The 19 names of suspected hijackers released by the FBI don't point to Afghanistan. They come from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates; all across the middle east without a focus in any one region. Indeed, even as the FBI was admitting that its list of 19 names was based solely on identifications thought to have been forged, Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Prince Saudi Al-Faisal insisted that an investigation in Saudi Arabia showed that the 5 Saudi men were not aboard the four jet liners that crashed in New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania on September 11. "It was proved that five of the names included in the FBI list had nothing to do with what happened," Al-Faisal told the Arabic Press in Washington after meeting with U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House. A sixth identified hijacker is also reported to still be alive in Tunisia, while a 7th named man died two years ago!
The 19 names of suspected hijackers released by the FBI don't even appear on the passenger lists of the hijacked planes.
CNN reported that the men who hijacked those aircraft were using phony IDs, using the names of Arabs. A total of 7 of the men named by the FBI as suspected 9-11 hijackers are still alive! And the FBI Admits it has no actual evidence linking the 19 Arab suspects to 9-11
In another development, the BBC reported that the transcript of a phone call made by Flight Attendant Madeline Amy Sweeney to Boston air traffic controls shows that the flight attendant gave the seat numbers occupied by the hijackers, seat numbers which were NOT the seats of the men the FBI claimed were responsible for the hijacking!
FBI Chief Robert Mueller admitted on September 20 and on September 27 that the FBI has no way to prove the true identities of the hijackers. Yet in the haste to move forward on the already planned war in Afghanistan, our government and the FBI (which does not have the best record for honesty in investigations to begin with, having been caught rigging lab tests, manufacturing testimony in the Vincent Foster affair, and illegally withholding/destroying evidence in the Oklahoma Bombing case) are not taking too close a look at evidence that points away from the designated suspect, the people living over the oil fields.
Yet another problem lies with the described actions of the hijackers themselves. We are being told on the one hand that these men were such fanatical devotees of their faith that they willingly crashed the jets they were flying into buildings. Yet on the other hand, we are being told that these same men spent the night before their planned visit to Allah drinking in strip bars, committing not just one, but two mortal sins which would keep them out of Paradise no matter what else they did. Truly devout Muslims would spend the day before a suicide attack fasting and praying. Not only does the drinking in strip bars not fit the profile of a fanatically religious Muslim willing to die for his cause, but the witness reports of the men in the bars are of men going out of their way to be noticed and remembered, while waving around phony identifications.
Because of the facts of the phony identifications, we don't really know who was on those planes. What we do know is that the men on those planes went to a great deal of trouble to steal the identities of Muslims, and to make sure those identities were seen and remembered, then to leave a plethora of planted clues around, such as crop dusting manuals, and letters in checked baggage (why does a terrorist about to die need to check baggage?) that "somehow" didn't get on the final, fatal, flight. This abundance of dubious evidence pointing to Arabs is the pattern previously established in the Lavon Affair.
More than an absence of proof linking 9-11 to Osama, the proof exists of a deliberate attempt to frame Arabs for terror attacks in the United States. The claimed proofs have all been dismissed as deliberate mistranslations bordering on frauds and in one case a (poorly) faked video tape. The Anthrax letters, written to look like they were from Arab Muslims are actually from a non-Arab source. This proves the existence of a deliberate plot to frame Arabs.
And yet the US Government is not interested in looking at any evidence that does not support the desired outcome.
The public is well aware of the facts that suggest deception on the part of the US Government. Documents declassified in 1994 prove beyond a doubt that Roosevelt not only knew Pearl Harbor would be attacked but that he encouraged and allowed it to happen to get the United States into a war they did not want. The public is well aware that the present government is as eager to get the US into a major war for the oil wealth of central Asia and the Middle East as Roosevelt was to get the nation he ruled into the war against the Axis. The public is well aware of "Operation NORTHWOODS", a previous plan by the US (spiked by JFK) to stage fake terror attacks to ignite a war against Cuba. The public is well aware that government throughout history have used fake terror against their own people as a tool of domestic policy.
In such a climate the arrests of two Israelis in a truck that tested positive for explosives was sure to attract notice. The FBI moved quickly to quash the story, as protective of these Israelis as of the spy ring itself. Despite the fact that the story had taken almost a week to make the news, it was only after the story broke that the FBI rushed in to conduct their own tests and claim that the bomb dog, and the test sued by the local authorities were all wrong, there were no explosive traces, everyone had been fooled by residue from a cigarette lighter. Given the FBI's documented frauds in the Vince Foster, OK City, and TWA 800 cases (not to mention the despicable history of COINTELPRO, including the Black Panther Coloring Book, the smearing of actress Jean Seberg, the spying on celebrities, etc. ), it should come as no surprise that the companies that make the tests used to detect TNT and RDX report that neither tobacco nor butane will false-positive the tests they
manufacture. So again the US Government was lying to protect Israelis, the public was aware of this lie, and this set the stage for the current debacle.
No sooner had the FBI given the official "pooh pooh" to the arrested Israelis and explosives-tainted truck than a distraction appeared. In order to remind the public that it is Arabs they are supposed to suspect for 9-11 and nobody else, the White House, knowing that another simple declaration of Osama's guilt would gain no more traction, decided to create a "confession" of knowing in advance that the correct villain was behind 9-11 ahead of time, hoping that the public would find this "confession" more believable.
There certainly was cause to suspect government foreknowledge. Setting aside Odigo's warning, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown had received a warning not to fly on 9-11, and Ashcroft had changed from commercial to much more expensive charter planes in July 2001.
But Bush's attempt to steer public suspicion away from Israel and back onto the designated fall guys has backfired. The admission that there had been advance warning flies in the face of Ari Fleischer's statement that there had been no warning at all just after the attacks In addition, the claim that there was advance warning contradicts Bush's claim, repeated twice, to have initially thought the first plane hitting the tower was an accident caused by a bad pilot, a statement that in hindsight appears to have been a (poorly acted) attempt to sell the idea that 9-11 was a Pearl Harbor style surprise attack, even though it clearly was not.
The public, already aware it is being lied-to, is angry at the idea that government knew the 9-11 attacks were coming and like Roosevelt, may have allowed them to happen to further a pro-war agenda. Bush and his cronies, realizing they have hung themselves, are back peddling furiously, claiming now that while the warnings were sufficient to finger Osama bin Laden as the 9-11 villain, that the warnings were simply far too general in all other aspects to prevent the attacks. Yet Ari Fleischer's briefing after the attack claimed to have detailed and specific information regarding the targets. Dick Morris, in a Fox TV Interview, revealed that Bush had detailed records of financial transactions by all Muslims groups in the US dating back to 1993, used to justify seizure of their funds. Again, someone is lying!
Even worse, in trying to use this "limited hangout" to shift suspicion away from Israel and back to Osama, Bush has, probably without realizing it, sent a message round the world that the United States is weak, and that even with advance warning the US Government was totally outclassed by a small group of terrorists.
Bush and company are struggling to reaffirm the official story, that the US was caught by surprise, just as it was at Pearl Harbor, and the same Air Force that was able to intercept Payne Stewert's plane just couldn't seem to get off the ground while four hijacked planes wandered out to Ohio before heading back to hit their targets on the East Coast, and all the work if a tiny group of Arab fanatics.
And if you believe that, I have a watch to sell you.
---------------------------------
"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information." -- US official quoted in Carl Cameron's Fox News report on the Israeli spy ring. "By way of deception, thou shalt do war" -- Motto of the Mossad
---------------------------------
The "199" Document
This is the document that shows the FBI investigation into Abdullah bin Laden was closed down on September 11, 1996. The number prefix, "199" denotes a "National Security" case.
The question has gone beyond, "What did the government know in advance about 9-11", to, "How did the government set it up?" Investigators were pulled off, pilots were deliberately disarmed, air defenses left on the ground until too late, and evidence pointing to non-Arab perpetrators classified and kept from the people!
Click for full size page
---------------------------------
See also: Why was Bush allowed to visit Booker Elementary on 9/11?
---------------------------------
What Really Happened
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
www.fightthenwo.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 01:18:52 -0000
From: "scol202" <yahooboxx@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Hersh vs. Bush: Who Would You Believe? -- Behind the Campaign to Attack Iran
I wouldn't believe either of them, Hersh is a very obvious US
establisment insider. I'm not smart enough to know what the role is
but he is a conduit for someone.
--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@...>
wrote:
>
> From: Sean McBride
>
>
> April 14, 2006 4:34 PM
> Subject: [political-research] The Israel Lobby is the Prime Mover
Behind the Campaign to Attack Iran
>
>
> [When the Israel lobby denies what is obvious to everyone, it
reduces itself to absurdity and inspires contempt. The Lobby is
pushing the Bush administration to expand a war that could be
enormously damaging for the United States. Given its track record on
Iraq, the Lobby is almost certainly getting Iran entirely wrong. If
everything goes wrong in both Iraq and Iran simultaneously, the Lobby
is inviting a monumental backlash in American domestic politics, one
from which it will never recover.]
>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/zeese04142006.html
>
> April 14, 2006
>
> Attacking Iran
>
> Hersh vs. Bush: Who Would You Believe?
>
> By KEVIN ZEESE
>
> Seymour Hersh's extensive article describing plans to attack Iran,
including the use of tactical nuclear weapons, has forced President
Bush to respond. Two days after Hersh's article appeared, President
Bush came forward to deny any intent to attack Iran--calling such
claims 'wild speculation.'
>
> Hersh begins his article in the New Yorker explaining the real
purpose of attack on Iran: "There is a growing conviction among
members of the United States military, and in the international
community, that President Bush's ultimate goal in the nuclear
confrontation with Iran is regime change."
>
> In response, President Bush said allegations that he plans to use
force to halt Iran's nuclear program are "wild speculation." He went
on to say that his focus is on diplomacy: "I know here in Washington
prevention means force. It doesn't mean force necessarily. In this
case it means diplomacy." When Donald Rumsfeld, the embattled
Secretary of State, was asked about planning for Iran he was evasive
saying "The last thing I'm going to do is to start telling you or
anyone else in the press or the world at what point we refresh a plan
or don't refresh a plan and why."
>
> Hersh seemed to expect this response writing before Bush spoke:
>
> "The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in
order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased
clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a
possible major air attack. Current and former American military and
intelligence officials said that Air Force planning groups are
drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have
been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to
establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups."
>
> And when asked about Bush's comments, Hersh told Amy Goodman on
Democracy Now: "It's simply a fact that the planning has gone beyond
the contingency stage, and it's gone into what they call the
operational stage, sort of an increment higher. And it's very serious
planning, of course. And it's all being directed at the wish of the
President of the United States. And I can understand why they don't
want to talk about it, but that's just the reality."
>
>
>
> Pressure is Mounting to Attack Iran--a Long-Term Target of the Bush
Administration
>
> Adding credibility to Hersh's claims is that removing those in
power in Iran has been supported by many neo-cons since before Bush
took office. It is consistent with the re-making of the Middle East,
called for by the Project for a New American Century, as part of
ensuring U.S. military and economic dominance of the world.
>
> In addition, a paper published by an Israeli think tank, the
Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in 1996
entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,"
written for Benjamin Netanyahu, set out a plan for Israel to "shape
its strategic environment," beginning with the removal of Saddam
Hussein and restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. With Iraq
transformed, they describe a strategic axis of Iraq, Jordan and
Turkey that would weaken and "roll back" Syria and divide the Shia'a
in Iraq with those in Iran and Syria.
>
> The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), another
hard-line advocacy group, has advocated "regime change" by any means
necessary in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian
Authority. JINSA's board of advisers has included many Bush
administration leaders: Dick Cheney, John Bolton, Richard Perle,
James Woolsey and Douglas Feith. JINSA now sees Iran as THE security
threat saying in an April 12 JINSA Report entitled "Iran, Iran, Iran
and Iran:"
>
> "Whatever we do in Iraq and whatever Iraqi politicians do;
whatever we do to Hamas; however hard we look for Bin Laden or al-
Zawahiri; whoever runs our port terminals; whatever the price of
gasoline; however we secure our borders; whoever leaked Valerie
Plame's name - under the shadow of a nuclear-capable Iran, American
and allied options are reduced."
>
> Iran, they say, is "the whole list of national security priorities."
>
> The current pressure to attack Iran is building. The hard right
Israeli lobby in the United States is advocating attacking Iran to
stop the development of nuclear weapons. A full page advertisement in
The New York Times on April 4 on page A-15 sponsored by the American
Jewish Committee urged an attack on Iran drawing a map with Iran in
the center showing how far it is from various countries in Asia,
Europe and African asking: "Can anyone within range of Iran's
missiles feel safe?"
>
> Just as the pro-Israel lobby beat the war drums for the invasion of
Iraq, they are doing the same for Iran. AIPAC, the powerful pro-
Israeli lobby has a special page on Iran's escalating threat. The
concern of many has been heightened by reported comments by Iran's
President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad challenging the reality of the
Holocaust and that Israel must be "wiped off the map."
>
> The recent announcement by Ahmadinejad that Iran has enriched
uranium in a 164-centrifuge network to 3.5% has heightened the
conflict further. Ahmadinejad says Iran must now be treated as a
nuclear country and that it plans to continue to develop nuclear
power. This is far from the level of enrichment needed for a nuclear
weapon--requiring at least 80% enrichment and thousands of
centrifuges. Iran says it plans to go ahead and construct a 3,000
centrifuge network at the Natanz facility within a year and
eventually expand to 54,000 centrifuges. Developing enriched uranium
for nuclear power is legal under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty
but the UN Security Council has given Iran until April 28 to suspend
uranium enrichment.
>
> Further, much to the chagrin of the Bush administration, the Iraq
invasion has strengthened Iran. Noted Middle East commentator, Juan
Cole, has described Iran as the real victor in the Iraq War. Iran has
been able to establish warm relations with the government in Iraq. To
have a member of the axis of evil strengthened as result of U.S.
policy is an unintended consequence the U.S cannot let stand.
>
> Problems mounting in Iraq are a two-edged sword. On one side the
U.S. military is stretched thin and exhausted and opening another
front in the Middle East--with a country four times the size of Iraq--
would seem to be physically impossible. And, an air campaign would be
a challenge with an estimated 400 sites that would need to be
targeted. In addition, there are concerns about an alliance between
the Shia community in Iraq and Shia dominated Iran making the
difficult Iraq situation even more challenging. Then, there are the
unpredictable economic impacts--oil prices, already high could jump
higher and the reaction of Wall Street and the markets could also be
>
> But, the other edge of the Iraq-quagmire sword increases the chance
of an attack on Iran. Certainly, the administration would prefer to
have discussion of war strategy instead of the fighting in Iraq. And
video of precision air attacks bombing alleged nuclear facilities in
Iran will be preferred to civilian deaths in Iraq. As former national
security adviser Norman Birnbaum recently said "I fear what the
French term a fuite en avance, a flight in advance, and an attack on
Iran."
>
>
> Is Diplomacy Possible? Is it Really Being Pursued?
>
> Pursuing diplomacy is complicated by President Bush's rhetoric.
Four years ago Iran was labeled by President Bush as part of
the "axis of evil." Since then the United States has surrounded the
country with troops in Afghanistan on its western border, Iraq on its
eastern border and the Persian Gulf in the south. And, the rhetoric
is escalating.
>
> Since the Iranian Revolution the US has had no formal diplomatic
ties with Iran. According to a report in the New York Times, in the
lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War, Iran reportedly made an overture to
U.S. officials to begin what former U.S. policymaker Flynt Leverett,
a former national security adviser, State Department and CIA official
says there was 'a diplomatic process intended to resolve on a
comprehensive basis all the bilateral differences between the United
States and Iran.' The United States did not take up the offer.
Leverett says that Bush "is, on this issue, very, very resistant to
the idea of doing a deal, even a deal that would solve the nuclear
problem." So, is the administration serious about diplomacy?
>
> Leverett's view is consistent with one stated by Javad Zarif, the
Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, in a NY Times op-ed on
April 6. Zarif made the point that "A solution to the situation is
possible and eminently within reach." And, he emphasized that Iran
has complied with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, indeed, would
like to see it strengthened and enhanced. Further, "Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, has issued a decree
against the development, production, stockpiling and use of nuclear
weapons."
>
> Further, he points out that Iran wants "stability" and "never
initiated the use of force or resorted to the threat of force against
a fellow member of the United Nations. Although chemical weapons have
been used on us, we have never used them in retaliation - as United
Nations reports have made clear. We have not invaded another country
in 250 years." The article also highlights how Iran has gone above
and beyond the inspection requirements of the UN. Zarif concludes
saying: "Finding solutions requires political will and a readiness to
engage in serious negotiations. Iran is ready."
>
> Not only is the President's rhetoric and record a problem for
diplomacy, but so is modern U.S. history with Iran. In 1953, the
Eisenhower administration engaged in public rhetorical attacks on
Iran when they nationalized the oil industry, seizing a British oil
company. The CIA overthrew the democratic government of Mohammed
Mossadegh working with Great Britain and installed the Shah of Iran.
>
> The most recent Democratic Secretary of State, Madeline Albright,
excused the U.S. overthrow of Mossadegh saying in 2000 that: "The
Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for
strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's
political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians
continue to resent this intervention by America."
>
> Just as Albright excused the overthrow by a Republican president,
there is essential silence by the Democrats in response to the Bush
administration's talk of bombing Iran. While some Democrats have
opposed the use of nuclear weapons, they have not opposed the idea of
attacking Iran with non-nuclear weapons. Senator Hilary Clinton has
said that a nuclear-armed Iran would be "unacceptable." Rep. Nancy
Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House describes Iran as "the
greatest threat to Israel's right to exist." Senator John Kerry, told
Meet the Press on April 10, that he favored keeping the option of air
strikes against Iran on the table. The strongest opposition to
attacking Iran has come from Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) who notes there is
little resistance in Congress and it appears we have not learned
anything from three years in Iraq.
>
> Hersh reports on a Member of the House of Representatives
describing meetings where carefully selected Members have been
briefed on Iran, he writes: "'There's no pressure from Congress' not
to take military action, the House member added. 'The only political
pressure is from the guys who want to do it.' Speaking of President
Bush, the House member said, 'The most worrisome thing is that this
guy has a messianic vision.'"
>
> If diplomacy means gaining international support then the Bush
administration has problems. There is opposition to an attack on Iran
around the world. The U.S. may only have Israel as a serious ally in
a military attack. The Washington Post reports that the Russians and
Chinese won't even go along with economic sanctions. And in the
recent security council resolution Russia and China edited out the
threat of sanctions if Iran did not stop its enrichment of uranium.
Further, Saudi Arabia has asked Russia to use its position on the
Security Council to prevent a U.S. military attack on Iran. Even
Great Britain is unlikely to participate in an Iran attack.
>
> The consensus seems to be that while many would prefer Iran not to
have a nuclear weapon, Iran is certainly not an immediate threat to
the U.S. or surrounding countries. U.S. intelligence agencies and
Hans Blix, chief UN weapons inspector have reported that Iran having
a bomb is five to ten years away. As author Mike Whitney point
out, "IAEA chief Mohammed Elbaradei has repeatedly stated that his
team of inspectors, who've had the opportunity to "go anywhere and
see anything," has found nothing to corroborate the assertions of the
US or Israel."
>
> Further, would Iran use a nuclear weapon offensively? Iran does not
have any modern history of attacking other countries. Certainly, with
Israel having 250 nuclear bombs and the U.S. with its large arsenal,
would leave Iran to recognize that the use of the bomb would result
in the destruction of Iran. A nuclear response would be something
that Israel and the U.S. could easily justify and the world would
accept.
>
>
> Hersh is Not Alone Reporting on Iran Attack Planning, Including
Nuclear Weapons
>
> Sy Hersh is not the only one reporting on military plans being
developed. According to Philip Giraldi, writing in the American
Conservative, last year Vice President Cheney ordered the Strategic
Command to develop plans to attack Iran if there is another 9-11 type
attack on the United States. These plans include a large-scale air
assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear
weapons.
>
> Giraldi points out that within Iran there are more than 450 major
strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-
program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are
deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons,
hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not
conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism
directed against the United States. Giraldi reports that several
senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are appalled at
the implications of what they are doing--that Iran is being set up
for an unprovoked nuclear attack--but no one is prepared to damage
his career by posing any objections.
>
> Further, the Washington Post also wrote that intense planning was
underway including the nuclear option in an article published on
April 9. The Post reports that while U.S. officials continue to
pursue the diplomatic course they privately are increasingly
skeptical that it will succeed. And, that last month the White
House's new National Security Strategy labeled Iran the most serious
challenge to the United States posed by any country. They described
two levels of air attack--a quick and limited strike against nuclear-
related facilities and a more ambitious campaign of bombing and
cruise missiles leveling targets well beyond nuclear facilities. The
White House is also considering 'nuclear penetrator munitions' to
take out buried labs.
>
> Hersh describes specific plans using tactical nuclear weapons
stating:
>
> "One of the military's initial option plans, as presented to the
White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a
bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against
underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran's main centrifuge
plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz,
which is no longer under I.A.E.A. safeguards, reportedly has
underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and
laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet
beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough
enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year. (Iran has
acknowledged that it initially kept the existence of its enrichment
program hidden from I.A.E.A. inspectors, but claims that none of its
current activity is barred by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.) The
elimination of Natanz would be a major setback for Iran's nuclear
ambitions, but the conventional weapons in the American arsenal could
not insure the destruction of facilities under seventy-five feet of
earth and rock, especially if they are reinforced with concrete."
>
> Hersh describes the nuclear option as creating "serious misgivings
inside the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff," with "some officers
have talked about resigning. Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of
Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans
for Iran-without success . . ." Further "some senior officers and
officials were considering resigning over the issue" and "the Joint
Chiefs had agreed to give President Bush a formal recommendation
stating that they are strongly opposed to considering the nuclear
option for Iran."
>
> Hersh also comments that the Defense Science board, chaired by
William Schneider, Jr., an Under-Secretary of State in the Reagan
Administration, which has urged the development of tactical nuclear
weapons. Schneider served on an ad-hoc panel on nuclear forces
sponsored by the National Institute for Public Policy, a conservative
think tank in January 2001. Hersh states: "The panel's report
recommended treating tactical nuclear weapons as an essential part of
the U.S. arsenal and noted their suitability 'for those occasions
when the certain and prompt destruction of high priority targets is
essential and beyond the promise of conventional weapons.' Several
signers of the report are now prominent members of the Bush
Administration, including Stephen Hadley, the national-security
adviser; Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence; and Robert Joseph, the Under-Secretary of State for
Arms Control and International Security."
>
> While seeking to stop Iran, the Bush Administration has made
upgrading US nuclear weapons a key goal. The Los Angles Times
reported on April 6 that "The administration . . . wants the
capability to turn out 125 new nuclear bombs per year by 2022, as the
Pentagon retires older bombs that it claims will no longer be
reliable or safe." The last nuclear bomb was built in 1989 but the
Bush plan also "calls for a modern complex to design a new nuclear
bomb and have it ready in less than four years, allowing the nation
to respond to changing military requirements."
>
> Thus, the Bush administration is moving to upgrade U.S. nuclear
weapons, develop tactical nuclear weapons and even use nuclear
weapons against Iran--in an effort to stop Iran from developing a
nuclear weapon. The irony (or is it irany) of this hypocrisy will not
be lost on the world and it is likely to further weaken U.S.
alliances around the world.
>
>
> Who to Trust Hersh or Bush?
>
> So, back to the original question--who to believe the commander in
chief or the investigative reporter. Sy Hersh is a Pulitzer Prize
winning reporter who gained international fame for exposing the My
Lai massacre in Vietnam and more recently the Abu Ghraib prison
scandal.
>
> President Bush has most recently been tied to the leak of a CIA
agents name in retaliation of her husband's report criticizing claims
related to nuclear weapons in Iraq. He has been widely criticized for
exaggerating the threat of Iraq regarding weapons of mass
destruction. And he has claimed that the United States does not
torture people it detains, when photographs and other evidence
indicate that it does.
>
> Right now the U.S. public is divided on attacking Iran. The Los
Angeles Times reports that 48% would support an attack if Iran
continued to develop nuclear weapons, while 40% opposed. In January a
Times/Bloomberg poll found 57% support so support is dropping. But,
there is loss of trust in Bush, with 54% saying they do not expect
him to make the right decision. Bloomberg reports that only 37% of
Americans believe Bush when he claims progress is being made on Iraq.
And, according to a Washington Post poll, 55% of Americans do not
find Bush to be "honest and trustworthy." So, Bush has a lot to
overcome to convince the public to believe him on Iraq.
>
> Hersh obviously struck a cord deep enough that the president felt
he had to respond. Hopefully, shining the light on the plans to go to
war will result in a more informed electorate and opposition in
Congress that stops the expansion of the war in the Middle East.
>
> Join CounterPunch, Democracy Rising, Gold Star Families for Peace,
CODE PINK, Progressive Democrats of America, Democrats.com, Traprock
Peace Center, Global Exchange, Velvet Revolution, Truthout, OpEdNews,
Backbone Campaign, Consumers For Peace, Campus Antiwar Network, and
The Young Turks in signing a petition to Bush and Cheney opposing the
launching of a war of aggression against Iran. The petition, with all
the signatures and comments you add, will be delivered to the White
House by Cindy Sheehan and many other
activists.http://www.dontattackiran.org
>
> Help build a voting bloc to prevent future wars of aggression--sign
the voters pledge at www.VotersForPeace.US.
>
> Kevin Zeese is director of Democracy Rising (DemocracyRising.US)
and a candidate for U.S. Senate (see ZeeseForSeate.org)
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 01:29:44 -0000
From: "scol202" <yahooboxx@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Iran Showdown Tests Power of "Israel Lobby"
Iran Showdown Tests Power of "Israel Lobby"
http://www.alternet.org/story/34935/
By Jim Lobe, IPS News. Posted April 14, 2006.
The Israel Lobby seems to be the only major organised force actively
pushing the confrontation with Iran toward crisis. Tools
One month after the publication by two of the most influential
international relations scholars in the United States of a highly
controversial essay on the so-called "Israel Lobby," their thesis
that the lobby exercises "unmatched power" in Washington is being
tested by rapidly rising tensions with Iran.
Far more visibly than any other domestic constituency, the Israel
Lobby, defined by Profs. John Mearsheimer of the University of
Chicago and Stephen Walt, academic dean of Harvard's Kennedy School
of Government, as "the loose coalition of individuals and
organisations who actively work to shape U.S. foreign policy in a pro-
Israel direction", has pushed the government -- both Congress and the
George W. Bush administration -- toward confrontation with Tehran.
Leading the charge has been a familiar group of neo-conservatives,
such as former Defence Policy Board (DPB) chairman Richard Perle and
former Central Intelligence Agency director James Woolsey, who
championed the war in Iraq but who have increasingly focused their
energies over the past year on building support for "regime change"
and, if necessary, military action against Iran if it does not
abandon its nuclear programme.
(On Tuesday, Iran announced that it had successfully enriched
uranium, which can be used for both nuclear weapons and nuclear power
reactors, in defiance of a U.N. Security Council resolution ordering
an end to all enrichment activities by Apr. 28).
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the premier
Israel lobby group whose annual convention last year featured a
giant, multi-media exhibit on how Iran is "pursuing nuclear weapons
and how it can be stopped", has also been pushing hard on Capitol
Hill for legislation to promote regime change. Despite White House
objections, the group has sought tough sanctions against foreign
companies with investments in Iran.
"This bill has been pushed almost entirely by AIPAC," noted Trita
Parsi, a Middle East expert at Johns Hopkins School for Advanced
International Studies (SAIS) here. "I don't see any other major
groups behind this legislation that have had any impact on it."
Similarly, the American Jewish Committee (AJC), whose leadership is
considered slightly less hawkish than AIPAC, has taken out full-page
ads in influential U.S. newspapers since last week entitled "A
Nuclear Iran Threatens All" depicting radiating circles on an Iran-
centred map to show where its missiles could strike.
"Suppose Iran one day gives nuclear devices to terrorists," the ad
reads. "Could anyone anywhere feel safe?"
In their 81-page essay, entitled "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign
Policy" and condensed in a shorter essay published last month in the
London Review of Books, Mearsheimer and Walt, pillars of
the "realist" school of international relations, argue that
Washington's Middle East policy is too closely tied to Israel to
serve its own national interests in the region, particularly in the
so-called "war on terror".
They believe that the power of the Israel Lobby -- derived, among
other things, from its ability to marshal financial support for
Democratic as well as Republican politicians, its grassroots
organisational prowess, and its ability to stigmatise critics
as "anti-Semitic" (a tactic already deployed against the authors) --
is largely responsible.
"No lobby has managed to divert U.S. foreign policy as far from what
the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while
simultaneously convincing Americans that U.S. and Israeli interests
are essentially the same," the authors argued, noting that the lobby,
while predominantly Jewish, also includes prominent Christian
evangelicals and non-Jewish neo-conservatives, such as Woolsey and
former Education Secretary William Bennett.
In the administration's decision to invade Iraq, pressure from Israel
and the lobby played a "critical" -- although not exclusive -- role,
according to the paper, which cited pre-war public prodding by
Israeli leaders and by leaders of many major Jewish organisations as
evidence, although it notes that most U.S. Jews were sceptical and
have since turned strongly against the war.
Neo-conservatives closely associated with the right-wing views of
Israel's Likud party - both in and outside the administration --
played a particularly important role in gaining support for "regime
change" in Iraq stretching back to the mid-1990s, according to the
paper.
But even during the run-up to the Iraq war, Israeli leaders, notably
then-Defence Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer and Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon, depicted Iran as the greater threat, a theme that was picked
up by the Lobby, led by the neo-conservatives, immediately after
Baghdad's fall.
"The liberation of Iraq was the first great battle for the future of
the Middle East... But the next great battle -- not, we hope a
military one -- will be for Iran," wrote the Weekly Standard's neo-
conservative editor, William Kristol, in early May 2003.
Shortly thereafter, neo-conservatives and other hawks led by Vice
Pres. Dick Cheney succeeded in cutting off ongoing U.S.-Iranian talks
on Afghanistan and Iran and killing an offer by Tehran to engage in a
broader negotiation on all outstanding differences.
What makes the growing confrontation with Iran so remarkable is that
the Israel Lobby appears to be the only major organised force here
that is actively pushing it toward crisis.
Mainstream analysts, including arms control hawks who favour strong
pressure on Iran over its nuclear programme, have spoken out against
military action as far too risky and almost certainly counter-
productive. Even analysts at the right-wing Heritage Foundation have
voiced doubts. "It just doesn't make any sense from a geopolitical
standpoint," said Heritage's James Carifano, noting Iran's capacity
to retaliate against the U.S. in Iraq.
The Iranian exile community, which has generally favoured more
pressure on Tehran, similarly appears divided about the consequences
of a military attack, with some leaders fearing that it would
strengthen the regime, Walt told IPS. He added that "it's hard for me
to believe that (U.S.) oil companies would be in favour of a military
option (because they) don't like violence or events that create
political risk or uncertainty."
While insisting that military action against Iran's nuclear programme
should only be a last resort, the Israel Lobby, on the other hand,
appears united in the conviction that an attack will indeed be
necessary if diplomatic efforts, economic pressure, and covert action
fail.
"(Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) sees the West as wimps and
thinks we will eventually cave in," Patrick Clawson, deputy director
of research of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a think
tank established by AIPAC, told New Yorker investigative reporter
Seymour Hersh. "We have to be ready to deal with Iran if the crisis
escalates."
Hersh summarised Clawson's bottom line as "Iran had no choice other
than to accede to America's demands or face a military attack."
That was much the same message delivered by Perle himself and
rapturously received by the attendees at AIPAC's 2006 convention here
last month. The convention, at which the keynoter, none other than
the administration's ultimate hawk, Vice Pres. Cheney,
vowed "meaningful consequences" if Iran did not freeze its nuclear
programme, drew several hundred Democratic and Republican lawmakers
in what could only be described as a show of raw political power.
"I don't think there's another group in the country that has two
successive conferences in which the centerpiece was beating the drums
for war in Iran," noted one senior official with another major pro-
Israel organisation, who asked not to be identified. "They are the
main force behind this."
All rights reserved, IPS—Inter Press Service (2006)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:18:05 -0700
From: APFN <apfn@apfn.org>
Subject: Bush sits apparently shielded from accountability
[This message is not in displayable format]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 19:54:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Naveed <flanker12k@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Hersh vs. Bush: Who Would You Believe? -- Behind the Campaign to Attack Iran
yes he is......he's connected to i think the international policy institute.....
committee of 300 by john coleman talks bout it.....
scol202 <yahooboxx@ntlworld.com> wrote:
I wouldn't believe either of them, Hersh is a very obvious US
establisment insider. I'm not smart enough to know what the role is
but he is a conduit for someone.
--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@...>
wrote:
>
> From: Sean McBride
>
>
> April 14, 2006 4:34 PM
> Subject: [political-research] The Israel Lobby is the Prime Mover
Behind the Campaign to Attack Iran
>
>
> [When the Israel lobby denies what is obvious to everyone, it
reduces itself to absurdity and inspires contempt. The Lobby is
pushing the Bush administration to expand a war that could be
enormously damaging for the United States. Given its track record on
Iraq, the Lobby is almost certainly getting Iran entirely wrong. If
everything goes wrong in both Iraq and Iran simultaneously, the Lobby
is inviting a monumental backlash in American domestic politics, one
from which it will never recover.]
>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/zeese04142006.html
>
> April 14, 2006
>
> Attacking Iran
>
> Hersh vs. Bush: Who Would You Believe?
>
> By KEVIN ZEESE
>
> Seymour Hersh's extensive article describing plans to attack Iran,
including the use of tactical nuclear weapons, has forced President
Bush to respond. Two days after Hersh's article appeared, President
Bush came forward to deny any intent to attack Iran--calling such
claims 'wild speculation.'
>
> Hersh begins his article in the New Yorker explaining the real
purpose of attack on Iran: "There is a growing conviction among
members of the United States military, and in the international
community, that President Bush's ultimate goal in the nuclear
confrontation with Iran is regime change."
>
> In response, President Bush said allegations that he plans to use
force to halt Iran's nuclear program are "wild speculation." He went
on to say that his focus is on diplomacy: "I know here in Washington
prevention means force. It doesn't mean force necessarily. In this
case it means diplomacy." When Donald Rumsfeld, the embattled
Secretary of State, was asked about planning for Iran he was evasive
saying "The last thing I'm going to do is to start telling you or
anyone else in the press or the world at what point we refresh a plan
or don't refresh a plan and why."
>
> Hersh seemed to expect this response writing before Bush spoke:
>
> "The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in
order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased
clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a
possible major air attack. Current and former American military and
intelligence officials said that Air Force planning groups are
drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have
been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to
establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups."
>
> And when asked about Bush's comments, Hersh told Amy Goodman on
Democracy Now: "It's simply a fact that the planning has gone beyond
the contingency stage, and it's gone into what they call the
operational stage, sort of an increment higher. And it's very serious
planning, of course. And it's all being directed at the wish of the
President of the United States. And I can understand why they don't
want to talk about it, but that's just the reality."
>
>
>
> Pressure is Mounting to Attack Iran--a Long-Term Target of the Bush
Administration
>
> Adding credibility to Hersh's claims is that removing those in
power in Iran has been supported by many neo-cons since before Bush
took office. It is consistent with the re-making of the Middle East,
called for by the Project for a New American Century, as part of
ensuring U.S. military and economic dominance of the world.
>
> In addition, a paper published by an Israeli think tank, the
Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in 1996
entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,"
written for Benjamin Netanyahu, set out a plan for Israel to "shape
its strategic environment," beginning with the removal of Saddam
Hussein and restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq. With Iraq
transformed, they describe a strategic axis of Iraq, Jordan and
Turkey that would weaken and "roll back" Syria and divide the Shia'a
in Iraq with those in Iran and Syria.
>
> The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), another
hard-line advocacy group, has advocated "regime change" by any means
necessary in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian
Authority. JINSA's board of advisers has included many Bush
administration leaders: Dick Cheney, John Bolton, Richard Perle,
James Woolsey and Douglas Feith. JINSA now sees Iran as THE security
threat saying in an April 12 JINSA Report entitled "Iran, Iran, Iran
and Iran:"
>
> "Whatever we do in Iraq and whatever Iraqi politicians do;
whatever we do to Hamas; however hard we look for Bin Laden or al-
Zawahiri; whoever runs our port terminals; whatever the price of
gasoline; however we secure our borders; whoever leaked Valerie
Plame's name - under the shadow of a nuclear-capable Iran, American
and allied options are reduced."
>
> Iran, they say, is "the whole list of national security priorities."
>
> The current pressure to attack Iran is building. The hard right
Israeli lobby in the United States is advocating attacking Iran to
stop the development of nuclear weapons. A full page advertisement in
The New York Times on April 4 on page A-15 sponsored by the American
Jewish Committee urged an attack on Iran drawing a map with Iran in
the center showing how far it is from various countries in Asia,
Europe and African asking: "Can anyone within range of Iran's
missiles feel safe?"
>
> Just as the pro-Israel lobby beat the war drums for the invasion of
Iraq, they are doing the same for Iran. AIPAC, the powerful pro-
Israeli lobby has a special page on Iran's escalating threat. The
concern of many has been heightened by reported comments by Iran's
President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad challenging the reality of the
Holocaust and that Israel must be "wiped off the map."
>
> The recent announcement by Ahmadinejad that Iran has enriched
uranium in a 164-centrifuge network to 3.5% has heightened the
conflict further. Ahmadinejad says Iran must now be treated as a
nuclear country and that it plans to continue to develop nuclear
power. This is far from the level of enrichment needed for a nuclear
weapon--requiring at least 80% enrichment and thousands of
centrifuges. Iran says it plans to go ahead and construct a 3,000
centrifuge network at the Natanz facility within a year and
eventually expand to 54,000 centrifuges. Developing enriched uranium
for nuclear power is legal under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty
but the UN Security Council has given Iran until April 28 to suspend
uranium enrichment.
>
> Further, much to the chagrin of the Bush administration, the Iraq
invasion has strengthened Iran. Noted Middle East commentator, Juan
Cole, has described Iran as the real victor in the Iraq War. Iran has
been able to establish warm relations with the government in Iraq. To
have a member of the axis of evil strengthened as result of U.S.
policy is an unintended consequence the U.S cannot let stand.
>
> Problems mounting in Iraq are a two-edged sword. On one side the
U.S. military is stretched thin and exhausted and opening another
front in the Middle East--with a country four times the size of Iraq--
would seem to be physically impossible. And, an air campaign would be
a challenge with an estimated 400 sites that would need to be
targeted. In addition, there are concerns about an alliance between
the Shia community in Iraq and Shia dominated Iran making the
difficult Iraq situation even more challenging. Then, there are the
unpredictable economic impacts--oil prices, already high could jump
higher and the reaction of Wall Street and the markets could also be
>
> But, the other edge of the Iraq-quagmire sword increases the chance
of an attack on Iran. Certainly, the administration would prefer to
have discussion of war strategy instead of the fighting in Iraq. And
video of precision air attacks bombing alleged nuclear facilities in
Iran will be preferred to civilian deaths in Iraq. As former national
security adviser Norman Birnbaum recently said "I fear what the
French term a fuite en avance, a flight in advance, and an attack on
Iran."
>
>
> Is Diplomacy Possible? Is it Really Being Pursued?
>
> Pursuing diplomacy is complicated by President Bush's rhetoric.
Four years ago Iran was labeled by President Bush as part of
the "axis of evil." Since then the United States has surrounded the
country with troops in Afghanistan on its western border, Iraq on its
eastern border and the Persian Gulf in the south. And, the rhetoric
is escalating.
>
> Since the Iranian Revolution the US has had no formal diplomatic
ties with Iran. According to a report in the New York Times, in the
lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War, Iran reportedly made an overture to
U.S. officials to begin what former U.S. policymaker Flynt Leverett,
a former national security adviser, State Department and CIA official
says there was 'a diplomatic process intended to resolve on a
comprehensive basis all the bilateral differences between the United
States and Iran.' The United States did not take up the offer.
Leverett says that Bush "is, on this issue, very, very resistant to
the idea of doing a deal, even a deal that would solve the nuclear
problem." So, is the administration serious about diplomacy?
>
> Leverett's view is consistent with one stated by Javad Zarif, the
Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, in a NY Times op-ed on
April 6. Zarif made the point that "A solution to the situation is
possible and eminently within reach." And, he emphasized that Iran
has complied with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, indeed, would
like to see it strengthened and enhanced. Further, "Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, has issued a decree
against the development, production, stockpiling and use of nuclear
weapons."
>
> Further, he points out that Iran wants "stability" and "never
initiated the use of force or resorted to the threat of force against
a fellow member of the United Nations. Although chemical weapons have
been used on us, we have never used them in retaliation - as United
Nations reports have made clear. We have not invaded another country
in 250 years." The article also highlights how Iran has gone above
and beyond the inspection requirements of the UN. Zarif concludes
saying: "Finding solutions requires political will and a readiness to
engage in serious negotiations. Iran is ready."
>
> Not only is the President's rhetoric and record a problem for
diplomacy, but so is modern U.S. history with Iran. In 1953, the
Eisenhower administration engaged in public rhetorical attacks on
Iran when they nationalized the oil industry, seizing a British oil
company. The CIA overthrew the democratic government of Mohammed
Mossadegh working with Great Britain and installed the Shah of Iran.
>
> The most recent Democratic Secretary of State, Madeline Albright,
excused the U.S. overthrow of Mossadegh saying in 2000 that: "The
Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for
strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's
political development and it is easy to see now why many Iranians
continue to resent this intervention by America."
>
> Just as Albright excused the overthrow by a Republican president,
there is essential silence by the Democrats in response to the Bush
administration's talk of bombing Iran. While some Democrats have
opposed the use of nuclear weapons, they have not opposed the idea of
attacking Iran with non-nuclear weapons. Senator Hilary Clinton has
said that a nuclear-armed Iran would be "unacceptable." Rep. Nancy
Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House describes Iran as "the
greatest threat to Israel's right to exist." Senator John Kerry, told
Meet the Press on April 10, that he favored keeping the option of air
strikes against Iran on the table. The strongest opposition to
attacking Iran has come from Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) who notes there is
little resistance in Congress and it appears we have not learned
anything from three years in Iraq.
>
> Hersh reports on a Member of the House of Representatives
describing meetings where carefully selected Members have been
briefed on Iran, he writes: "'There's no pressure from Congress' not
to take military action, the House member added. 'The only political
pressure is from the guys who want to do it.' Speaking of President
Bush, the House member said, 'The most worrisome thing is that this
guy has a messianic vision.'"
>
> If diplomacy means gaining international support then the Bush
administration has problems. There is opposition to an attack on Iran
around the world. The U.S. may only have Israel as a serious ally in
a military attack. The Washington Post reports that the Russians and
Chinese won't even go along with economic sanctions. And in the
recent security council resolution Russia and China edited out the
threat of sanctions if Iran did not stop its enrichment of uranium.
Further, Saudi Arabia has asked Russia to use its position on the
Security Council to prevent a U.S. military attack on Iran. Even
Great Britain is unlikely to participate in an Iran attack.
>
> The consensus seems to be that while many would prefer Iran not to
have a nuclear weapon, Iran is certainly not an immediate threat to
the U.S. or surrounding countries. U.S. intelligence agencies and
Hans Blix, chief UN weapons inspector have reported that Iran having
a bomb is five to ten years away. As author Mike Whitney point
out, "IAEA chief Mohammed Elbaradei has repeatedly stated that his
team of inspectors, who've had the opportunity to "go anywhere and
see anything," has found nothing to corroborate the assertions of the
US or Israel."
>
> Further, would Iran use a nuclear weapon offensively? Iran does not
have any modern history of attacking other countries. Certainly, with
Israel having 250 nuclear bombs and the U.S. with its large arsenal,
would leave Iran to recognize that the use of the bomb would result
in the destruction of Iran. A nuclear response would be something
that Israel and the U.S. could easily justify and the world would
accept.
>
>
> Hersh is Not Alone Reporting on Iran Attack Planning, Including
Nuclear Weapons
>
> Sy Hersh is not the only one reporting on military plans being
developed. According to Philip Giraldi, writing in the American
Conservative, last year Vice President Cheney ordered the Strategic
Command to develop plans to attack Iran if there is another 9-11 type
attack on the United States. These plans include a large-scale air
assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear
weapons.
>
> Giraldi points out that within Iran there are more than 450 major
strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-
program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are
deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons,
hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not
conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism
directed against the United States. Giraldi reports that several
senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are appalled at
the implications of what they are doing--that Iran is being set up
for an unprovoked nuclear attack--but no one is prepared to damage
his career by posing any objections.
>
> Further, the Washington Post also wrote that intense planning was
underway including the nuclear option in an article published on
April 9. The Post reports that while U.S. officials continue to
pursue the diplomatic course they privately are increasingly
skeptical that it will succeed. And, that last month the White
House's new National Security Strategy labeled Iran the most serious
challenge to the United States posed by any country. They described
two levels of air attack--a quick and limited strike against nuclear-
related facilities and a more ambitious campaign of bombing and
cruise missiles leveling targets well beyond nuclear facilities. The
White House is also considering 'nuclear penetrator munitions' to
take out buried labs.
>
> Hersh describes specific plans using tactical nuclear weapons
stating:
>
> "One of the military's initial option plans, as presented to the
White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a
bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against
underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran's main centrifuge
plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz,
which is no longer under I.A.E.A. safeguards, reportedly has
underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and
laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet
beneath the surface. That number of centrifuges could provide enough
enriched uranium for about twenty nuclear warheads a year. (Iran has
acknowledged that it initially kept the existence of its enrichment
program hidden from I.A.E.A. inspectors, but claims that none of its
current activity is barred by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.) The
elimination of Natanz would be a major setback for Iran's nuclear
ambitions, but the conventional weapons in the American arsenal could
not insure the destruction of facilities under seventy-five feet of
earth and rock, especially if they are reinforced with concrete."
>
> Hersh describes the nuclear option as creating "serious misgivings
inside the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff," with "some officers
have talked about resigning. Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of
Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans
for Iran-without success . . ." Further "some senior officers and
officials were considering resigning over the issue" and "the Joint
Chiefs had agreed to give President Bush a formal recommendation
stating that they are strongly opposed to considering the nuclear
option for Iran."
>
> Hersh also comments that the Defense Science board, chaired by
William Schneider, Jr., an Under-Secretary of State in the Reagan
Administration, which has urged the development of tactical nuclear
weapons. Schneider served on an ad-hoc panel on nuclear forces
sponsored by the National Institute for Public Policy, a conservative
think tank in January 2001. Hersh states: "The panel's report
recommended treating tactical nuclear weapons as an essential part of
the U.S. arsenal and noted their suitability 'for those occasions
when the certain and prompt destruction of high priority targets is
essential and beyond the promise of conventional weapons.' Several
signers of the report are now prominent members of the Bush
Administration, including Stephen Hadley, the national-security
adviser; Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence; and Robert Joseph, the Under-Secretary of State for
Arms Control and International Security."
>
> While seeking to stop Iran, the Bush Administration has made
upgrading US nuclear weapons a key goal. The Los Angles Times
reported on April 6 that "The administration . . . wants the
capability to turn out 125 new nuclear bombs per year by 2022, as the
Pentagon retires older bombs that it claims will no longer be
reliable or safe." The last nuclear bomb was built in 1989 but the
Bush plan also "calls for a modern complex to design a new nuclear
bomb and have it ready in less than four years, allowing the nation
to respond to changing military requirements."
>
> Thus, the Bush administration is moving to upgrade U.S. nuclear
weapons, develop tactical nuclear weapons and even use nuclear
weapons against Iran--in an effort to stop Iran from developing a
nuclear weapon. The irony (or is it irany) of this hypocrisy will not
be lost on the world and it is likely to further weaken U.S.
alliances around the world.
>
>
> Who to Trust Hersh or Bush?
>
> So, back to the original question--who to believe the commander in
chief or the investigative reporter. Sy Hersh is a Pulitzer Prize
winning reporter who gained international fame for exposing the My
Lai massacre in Vietnam and more recently the Abu Ghraib prison
scandal.
>
> President Bush has most recently been tied to the leak of a CIA
agents name in retaliation of her husband's report criticizing claims
related to nuclear weapons in Iraq. He has been widely criticized for
exaggerating the threat of Iraq regarding weapons of mass
destruction. And he has claimed that the United States does not
torture people it detains, when photographs and other evidence
indicate that it does.
>
> Right now the U.S. public is divided on attacking Iran. The Los
Angeles Times reports that 48% would support an attack if Iran
continued to develop nuclear weapons, while 40% opposed. In January a
Times/Bloomberg poll found 57% support so support is dropping. But,
there is loss of trust in Bush, with 54% saying they do not expect
him to make the right decision. Bloomberg reports that only 37% of
Americans believe Bush when he claims progress is being made on Iraq.
And, according to a Washington Post poll, 55% of Americans do not
find Bush to be "honest and trustworthy." So, Bush has a lot to
overcome to convince the public to believe him on Iraq.
>
> Hersh obviously struck a cord deep enough that the president felt
he had to respond. Hopefully, shining the light on the plans to go to
war will result in a more informed electorate and opposition in
Congress that stops the expansion of the war in the Middle East.
>
> Join CounterPunch, Democracy Rising, Gold Star Families for Peace,
CODE PINK, Progressive Democrats of America, Democrats.com, Traprock
Peace Center, Global Exchange, Velvet Revolution, Truthout, OpEdNews,
Backbone Campaign, Consumers For Peace, Campus Antiwar Network, and
The Young Turks in signing a petition to Bush and Cheney opposing the
launching of a war of aggression against Iran. The petition, with all
the signatures and comments you add, will be delivered to the White
House by Cindy Sheehan and many other
activists.http://www.dontattackiran.org
>
> Help build a voting bloc to prevent future wars of aggression--sign
the voters pledge at www.VotersForPeace.US.
>
> Kevin Zeese is director of Democracy Rising (DemocracyRising.US)
and a candidate for U.S. Senate (see ZeeseForSeate.org)
>
---------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------
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
www.fightthenwo.org
---------------------------------
Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries for just 2¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 23:47:29 -0400
From: ranger116@webtv.net
Subject: What Censored emails ??
What Censored emails ??
I send out emails on a regular basis that are only one missing word away
from sending the secret service to my door and they seem to show up on
all the yahoo lists ?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 21:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Confused
NO! NO! AND NO! Please go to www.911research.com
kenny318east3 <kenny318east3@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Moussauwi" is on currently on trial for his alleged involvement in the 9-11 plot.
Do you think that "Moussauwi" was involved in pre-positioning explosive charges ?
---------------------------------
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
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:14:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kevin Hammond <sir_oglaigh@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Sakin] Generals Dissent
Actually, The bushies know VERY WELL What they are doing. They are serving the Illuminati/New World Order! And doing it very well. These are NOT mistakes that they are making. They are doing EXACTLY what they are told to do by satanic masters.
Edward Pickersgill <edward@mytown.ca> wrote:
Larry Sakin
Generals Dissent
14 April 2006
It’s just plain old horse sense. When your nation is at war, the last people you want to piss off are the generals who are prosecuting that war for you. Yet, in a stunning display of puerile obstinacy, President Bush has decided again to support his friend Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld despite the countless number of military generals and other senior officers calling for Rumsfeld’s resignation.
All this week, military leaders who’ve served in Iraq have been criticizing Rumsfeld’s inept and dictatorial direction of the war, saying he cast aside the judgment of the people doing the fighting over his own views about battle. Major General John Swannick, Jr., Major General John Riggs, and Major General John Batiste have joined the scores of men they commanded during their tours in Iraq in calling for Rumsfeld resignation. This is quite an unusual move for military officers, who generally keep their opinions about the Defense Department elites to themselves. However, it’s painfully obvious to these men, all of whom have served many years in the military that the Bush Administration has absolutely no idea what its doing.
http://www.mytown.ca/sakin/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My Homepage: http://www.mytown.ca/ourvoices/
and http://www.mytown.ca/edzart/
New: http://www.mytown.ca/elections101/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---------------------------------
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
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:39:33 -0700
From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
Subject: Fw: BIG Media Lie: "Flight 93 Tapes Played in Public" -- NOT!!
From: Thomas R. Ascher
April 14, 2006
BIG Media Lie: "Flight 93 Tapes Played in Public" -- NOT!!
CCW On-Target!
Originally Inspired by Northpoint Tactical Teams (NPT)
Today's Big Media Lie: "Flight 93 tapes played in public" -- NOT!
April 13, 2006 NA (Network America) e-wire
Today and yesterday, April 12 & 13, 2006 - all five Jewish-controlled Big TV networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX) and all the 1400+ Jewish controlled Clear Channel radio stations did what they do every day: coordinate the news, deceive and lie - in unison.
Today's lie was especially egregious: that the air traffic controller tapes from flight 93 on 9-11-01 were played in public for the first time.
TWO BIG LIES HERE
There are two lies here:
a) The tapes were not played in public, they were played in a closed courtroom, the Moussaoui trial, -- a totally secret forum controlled by the same people who perpetrated 9-11. Only approved observers, -- such as former Bush 41 aid Pete Williams of MSNBC, -- are allowed in the courtroom to see what's really happening. This is definitely NOT "in public."
b) The implication is that these tapes are real, as opposed to created by Hollywood type experts since 9-11 to fit the "official cover story." There is not one verifiable piece of evidence which proves this recently unveiled tape - unveiled 4 years+ after the fact - to be real. For instance, the pilot's voice, which would be dangerous to fake because of his family, does not appear on this tape. As for the rest of the noise, the tape is so inaudible that in the court room the gov prosecutor had to subtitle what the voices were allegedly saying for the jury. Much of what is discernible is groups of people yelling in unison - very easy to fake. It is a principle of logic that what is gratuitously asserted can be gratuitously denied. So I, along with many others, deny that this "flight 93" tape is real. -- The burden of proof is on the government-media complex, especially after all the lies that have already been proven about the gov-media "official cover story" for 9-11.
WHY CHALLENGING THE "FLIGHT 93" AUDIOTAPE IS SO IMPORTANT
If you look at the evidence that the Ruling Elite is using to keep the American people under their trance, it is so often unverifiable audio and video "evidence" that can easily be created by known, current audio-video "magic" techniques in use for movies in Hollywood, as well as undoubtedly through techniques that have never been made known to the public as of yet.
WHY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE SO EASILY FOOLED BY THIS "Fake audio" and "fake news" TECHNIQUE
There are two reasons the American people are so easily fooled by unverifiable "news" released in unison by the Big Media.
First, the vast majority of the American people are not aware of the existence of voice-transformation and voice-recombination technology which can tape-record a person's voice, and then rearrange sounds and duplicate sounds as often as needed to make new sentences and even new words. (See below.)
2nd, the vast majority of Americans are not aware that they are being warred against in a most aggressive and frantic manner by the apparently demon-inspired Ruling Elite of Judeo-masonry. Since the people do not realize the Talmudic hatred of this Ruling Elite against Christianity and gentile society (white European society), then they psychologically refuse to believe that such exists, making our country a "sitting duck" for the agenda of this well-entrenched group - as long as the people as a whole remained uninformed and in a state of denial.
A SIGN OF DESPERATION FOR THE BAD GUYS
The release of this unverifiable audiotape is indicative of the growing desperation of the Ruling Elite of Judeo-Masonry to salvage their disproved 9-11 cover story.
It is disproved because the Twin Towers in NYC could have fallen in the way they did ONLY by a controlled demolition (pre-planted explosives), and could not have fallen at the speed of gravity merely because of airplanes crashing and jet fuel. See www.scholarsfor911truth.org --
THE FLIGHT 93 AUDIOTAPES WERE NOT PLAYED IN PUBLIC, BUT IN THE KGB-STYLE CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT OF THE ENDLESS MOUSSAOUI TRIAL IN A CLOSED COURTROOM
When I heard on the morning of April 12, 2006 the MSNBC announcer say that the cockpit tapes of Flight 93 (the plane that was announced to have crashed in Pennsylvania) were played FOR THE FIRST TIME in public - I stopped what I was doing and turned up the little TV I keep near my computer desk.
What I saw instead -- was funny boy MSNBC reporter Pete Williams SUMMARIZING what he SAID he heard in a closed courtroom (star chamber) at the never-ending "trial" of Zacarius Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hi-jacker.
This is what the Jewish-controlled Big TV Networks call "in public." LIARS! Let's hear the alleged tapes themselves - not some kept funny boy's summary of what he SAYS he heard.
MOUSSAOUI TRIAL A GREAT DECEPTION TOOL FOR RULING ELITE
The Moussaoui trial has been very useful to the 9-11 Big Media liars - because they keep reporting on unverifiable things in the near half-a-decade old trial - all of which is designed to give "repeat suggestion" to the casual news watcher and listener - at carefully spaced intervals - that the lying and disproved 9-11 cover story is "true."
Notice that just about all of this "evidence" fed to the public by the Big Networks is NOT verifiable. We must take on TOTAL faith such reports from the likes of Pete Williams of MSNBC, who himself is taking on total faith everything the fedgov is feeding him in the courtroom (that's why he is allowed to be there in the first place!).
What Pete Williams reported on MSNBC is known as HEARSAY - and NOT permissible in court.
Why have a reporter summarize what HE heard - rather than play the recording itself over the airwaves?
WHY IT IS DANGEROUS FOR THE BAD GUYS TO PLAY THEIR AUDIO EVIDENCE IN PUBLIC (OVER RADIO AND TV)
Answer: if they play their concocted Hollywood-produced audio tapes in public - then they have committed to something specific. That means that audio experts and real airline pilots MIGHT be able to pick out something that proves the audiotape was not real.
Remember the fake Hitler diaries from the 1980s? Once they were released, historian David Irving was able to prove that the diaries were phony at the first press conference in front of numerous newspapers and magazines who then printed the evidence that they were phony. The 9-11 Hoaxters are trying desperately to commit to as little as possible in public - since so many things that are known in public have discredited or disproved their lying 9-11 cover story.
THE TODD BEAMER "LET'S ROLL" CALL WAS A FABRICATION
Despite the fact that "Todd Beamer" of flight 93 called a GTE phone center, according to the official cover story, from an in-flight phone and talked to a GTE attendant for 13 minutes - ending the call with the tailor made Hollywood Script line, "Let's roll" --- not a second of this tape has ever been played in public!!!
"In flight" phones work in planes; cell phones did not work in 2001 above a few thousand feet, and still don't work now, except for a few seconds at a time very rarely. Everyone I know, including this writer, who turned on their cell phone and looked at it in the middle of a flight at high altitudes - saw "no service", meaning there was no chance to make a call. This is why most of the "cell phone calls" of 9-11 were definite faked calls. But with in-flight Airfones which you pay for with a credit card, such a call would be possible.
There was definitely a call made by somebody, purportedly from an in-flight Airfone, and that caller talked to a GTE operator in Oakbrook, Illinois, Lisa D. Jefferson, who appeared on TV shortly after 9-11-01, and recently on Larry King, testifying to what she heard on her end of the call.
Now, let's think about this:
* Seems like every time a mother calls the 911 emergency number when her child is drowning ("Help! My child isn't breathing! I don't know CPR!") - the news outlets play it on radio and TV for news ratings.
* Every time I call to pay a bill or to ask a question of a big company, I hear that "This call might be recorded for quality control."
* At the GTE Airfone center that morning, everyone already knew that 2 planes had hit the Twin Towers in NYC. -- And you mean to tell me that when they found out the operator was supposedly talking to someone on "hi-jacked" flight 93 - that no one turned on the recorder? You mean that ALL these calls aren't recorded? (I think they are) And, after each call is recorded, isn't each tape or microchip erased and re-used ONLY if there is no significant call recorded on it?
Answer to the above: This phone call, while undoubtedly recorded, will never be released because it was not the voice of Todd Beamer. It was an actor playing out the script that needed to later be made public in order to feed the public the Hollywood prepared, "Let's roll" line.
As you will recall, President W. Bush tearfully quoted the "Let's Roll" line to jack the nation up into war fever right after 9-11-01.
IF THEY COULD AFFORD TO PLAY THE "TODD BEAMER" TAPE - THEY WOULD HAVE DONE SO! IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE BEST EVIDENCE OF THE OFFICIAL COVER STORY IF PLAYED SHORTLY AFTER 9-11-01 - BUT FOUR YEARS+ LATER, IT HAS NOT BEEN PLAYED!
The GTE Operator, Lisa Jefferson, had no way to know what Todd Beamer's voice sounded like. If it were Todd Beamer's voice on the 13 minute call - we would have heard the call shortly after 9-11. There is only one reason the apologists for the 9-11 cover story did not play the "Todd Beamer" call - it was not his voice. It was an actor pretending to be Todd Beamer.
An Israeli actor would gleefully and whole-heartedly have impersonated Todd Beamer as a service to his leaders - he would look at it as his part in preparing World War III and the Jewish domination of all other peoples as has been dreamed of by modern Zionist Jews for hundreds of years.
VOICE TRANSFORMATION TECHNOLOGY - OLD HAT
The one tape from the 9-11 terror attacks that was made public, supposedly from Stewardess Beverly Ong who was aboard the hi-jacked flight 11 --- was undoubtedly faked through voice-transformation technology. See this article from the Washington Post from Feb. 1,1999:
http://www.public-action.com/911/voice-simulation/index.html
That article proves that the technology has long been available to record a person's voice - and then rearrange the sounds to make that person say things which they never said. The Betty Ong voice presented to the 9-11 commission 3 years+ after the fact -- sounded like she was narrating a soccer game she didn't care about - very dead-pan.
In Cincinnati, Ohio, on the Bill Cunningham Show (WLW 700 AM), they use low level voice-transformation technology EVERY DAY to make fun of local and national celebrities. For instance, WLW has concocted an audioclip by cutting and pasting the recorded voice of a former Mayor which has him saying in his own voice: "My Mother does crack." They have President W. Bush saying things like(paraphrase), "We need to inspire our kids to use drugs." Again, it's President Bush's real voice, but the words are taken from various recordings and re-arranged to make the fabricated tape.
These, and many, many, many more audio clips are manufactured at WLW radio by rearranging words and sounds which the radio station actually has recorded of the real voices of the people whom they are spoofing.
Now - when the goal is world domination, KGB-type regimentation of the American people, and World War III - do you think the Jewish-psy-ops arm might use the advanced techniques this same technology to shore up their disproved 9-11 cover story - in order to deceive as many of the casual news viewers as possible?
Answer: Yes. See the Hollywood-confession movie "Wag the Dog" when they are creating the fake news footage about half way through the movie.
Also, when all else fails, there are undoubtedly non-entertainers - not publicly known -- who can simulate other peoples voices as good as well known comedians such as Rich Little, Frank Gorshin, Phil Hart, and Darryl Hammond. Such unknown mimics would be used to fool the public and even family members on static-filled cell phone calls which are made in the context of a high-strung and emotionally charged crisis. (This is undoubtedly what happened regarding the "cell phone calls" on 9-11, as Professor Dewdney of Western Ontario University has concluded; see "Ghost Riders in the Sky" which can be found using Google search.)
THE "STUN BELT": MSNBC PETE WILLIAMS SLIPS UP BIG TIME - March 28, 2006
The Moussaoui trial is a propaganda fabrication in a total "black box" or closed setting. Everything we hear about it we must take on blind faith from reporters who are trusted mouthpieces of the Ruling Elite.
We have NO IDEA what is happening in the trial. It is being used to brainwash the American people about false details of 9-11.
Moussaoui was probably one of the CIA patsies funded and set up by the
9-11 architects. Moussaoui probably thought he was being funded by pro-Arab forces. But beyond that, little is certain.
One might wonder about all of the reported self-destructive Moussaoui conduct - often he acts as if he's trying to help the Neo-con propaganda machine - saying just what they need at any given time to bolster their cover story.
A big clue might be the "Stun Belt" which, according the MSNBC reporter Peter Williams, Moussaoui is forced to wear during the court hearings. (Stun belt as in stun gun, i.e., Moussaoui could be jolted with who knows how much voltage of electric shock if he doesn't cooperate with what he's ordered to do by his captors.)
In a gigantic slip up, Williams spilled these beans to MSNBC anchor Dan Abrams, and you can watch the incredible video here:
tp://www.total911.info/2006/03/msnbc-video-moussaoui-wore-stun-belt.html
(cut and paste this whole link into your browser to insure you get there)
The key text of the interview is at that link also, but the gist of it is that Williams says Moussaoui wears a stun belt under his orange jump suit. Abrams asks him, with a tone of mild disbelief, if they can shock him during the trial. A this point, Williams starts stuttering, probably realizing he had said too much, but basically confirms that that's what a stun belt is used for.
PHOTOSHOP USED TO MAKE MOUSSAOUI LOOK MORE SINISTER ON TV PHOTO?
On another front, having seen real pictures of Moussaoui provided recently by his family, there is no question in my mind that the picture often shown on TV has been altered by a Photoshop type program. Moussaoui's forehead has been made much larger than it really is in the pictures constantly shown on TV; also notice that the camera will slowly zoom in on the face, making him look even more sinister. Few viewers take notice of these Jewish camera tricks which are routinely used to demonize opponents of the New World Order agenda. In this case, such camera techniques are being used to subconsciously frighten the average viewer.
SUMMARY
In a very useful article written by Russell Pickering about the FLIGHT
93 audiotapes and the Moussaoui trial (distributed by Henri the Celt), various important points are made.
One bombshell was that there is NO EVIDENCE OF ANY CONTACT between Moussaoui and the other "hijackers"!
"The most interesting comment of the Moussaoui trial was... "Under cross-examination by defense attorney Edward B. MacMahon Jr., Fitzgerald [FBI] acknowledged that there was no evidence of any contact between Moussaoui and the hijackers." (Washington Post, March 8, 2006)
Pickering continues: "What? NO EVIDENCE. This trial is a diversion to give the American public the belief that there were hijackers and to further promote Flight 93 as a legend."
Note from Network America: This admission by FBI official Fitzgerald in the Moussaoui trial calls to mind the admission of FBI Director Robert Mueller on April 19, 2002 at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. Mueller said that after 7 months of investigation that there was no evidence to tie the accused Muslim hijackers to the terror attacks of 9-11. We reported this and analyzed this comment in our May 18, 2002 Network America e-wire, which can be found here:
om/lists/networkamerica/read/message.html?mid=904393527&sort=d&start=357
(Cut and paste into your browser)
More from internet writer Pickering:
"With the official story crumbling rapidly and being replaced by truth, the spin doctors are frantic. The first effort to direct the public's attention away from the facts at the WTC and the Pentagon to Flight 93 occurred in January when the A&E channel aired its film Flight 93. The next diversion occurred March 27th when Rumsfeld made his first visit to the Flight 93 crash site in over four years and said, "This is so much more personal. . . . I've already been to the others and have wanted to come here because it's also such an important site. It's important to pay respect to these heroes."
"The entire emphasis of the Moussaoui trial has now become Flight 93. For the first time in over 4 years they suddenly decide to release the alleged tape of the last minutes of Flight 93. Everything else vanished into a hole in a field but apparently that recording survived. Why not play the last minutes of any of the other three flights? Why not the video of the Pentagon? It seems that never before seen footage of an aircraft actually impacting something would be more effective than a scratchy audio tape that was so hard to hear in the courtroom that they had to subtitle it."
And more from Russell Pickering:
"I wonder if the trial will end around April 28th when the new Universal film "United 93" is released? I imagine so, because trial officials were just on TV outside the courthouse saying how accurate it was. The film hasn't even been released and they have already previewed it to promote it during the trial coverage!
"Remember any reconstruction of Flight 93 is purely imagination. It is based on zero physical evidence from the crash site which is only a hole, an alleged cockpit recording that has mysteriously been withheld for over four years, alleged . . . calls which have never been proven . . . and Dick Cheney's underground bunker premonition.
"I guess if I were the bad guys and knew people were starting to learn that buildings don't fall down by themselves and airplanes don't disappear into thin air, then I would direct everybody's attention to an event place of which even photos don't exist, and appeal to America's emotions with a story that makes it feel irreverent to continue to examine facts."
(End of quotations from Russell Pickering)
MSNBC ADDS FAKE AUDIO TO THEIR NIGHT TIME STORY OF THE FLIGHT 93 "AUDIOTAPE"
By the evening of April 12th, MSNBC was playing some mumbled audio behind the narratives about the dialogue reportedly played in court. BUT - they didn't tell the audience that it was just a re-enactment, so most probably assumed it was the real tape! Even while playing this unidentified audio, the announcer would state that the tape was played "in public" in the courtroom!
In the same hour, Nightline talked about the audiotape allegedly played in the Moussoaui trial, but did not add their own unidentified voice simulation background.
In short - to end where we began - there has been no Flight 93 audiotape played in public. A closed courtroom totally controlled by the same criminal element which perpetrated 9-11 - IS NOT PLAYING THE TAPE IN PUBLIC!
In fact, since 9-11-01. there have been HUNDREDS of examples of such pieces of totally unverifiable "non-evidence" reported with GREAT solemnity by the agents of confusion working for the 5 Big TV Networks.
End of this e-wire.
Jim Condit Jr., Director,
Network America Ewire List Director,
Citizens for a Fair Vote Count
Mailing Address: PO Box 11339, Cincinnati, Ohio 45211
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:45:44 -0700
From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
Subject: John Pilger: .Freedom Dies Quickly by John Pilger
Freedom Dies Quickly
By John Pilger
People ask: can this be happening in
Britain? Surely not. A centuries-old democratic
constitution cannot be swept away. Basic human rights
cannot be made abstract. Those who once comforted
themselves that a Labour government would never commit
such an epic crime in Iraq might now abandon a last
delusion, that their freedom is inviolable. If they knew.
The dying of freedom in Britain is not news. The
pirouettes of the Prime Minister and his political twin,
the Chancellor, are news, though of minimal public
interest. Looking back to the 1930s, when social
democracies were distracted and powerful cliques imposed
their totalitarian ways by stealth and silence, the
warning is clear. The Legislative and Regulatory Reform
Bill has already passed its second parliamentary reading
without interest to most Labour MPs and court journalists;
yet it is utterly totalitarian in scope.
It is presented by the government as a simple measure for
streamlining deregulation, or "getting rid of red tape",
yet the only red tape it will actually remove is that of
parliamentary scrutiny of government legislation,
including this remarkable bill. It will mean that the
government can secretly change the Parliament Act, and the
constitution and laws can be struck down by decree from
Downing Street. Blair has demonstrated his taste for
absolute power with his abuse of the royal prerogative,
which he has used to bypass parliament in going to war and
in dismissing landmark high court judgments, such as that
which declared illegal the expulsion of the entire
population of the Chagos Islands, now the site of an
American military base. The new bill marks the end of true
parliamentary democracy; in its effect, it is as
significant as the US Congress last year abandoning the
Bill of Rights.
Those who fail to hear these steps on the road to
dictatorship should look at the government's plans for ID
cards, described in its manifesto as "voluntary". They
will be compulsory and worse. An ID card will be different
from a driving licence or passport. It will be connected
to a database called the NIR (National Identity Register),
where your personal details will be stored. These will
include your fingerprints, a scan of your iris, your
residence status and unlimited other details about your
life. If you fail to keep an appointment to be
photographed and fingerprinted, you can be fined up to
£2,500.
Every place that sells alcohol or cigarettes, every post
office, every pharmacy and every bank will have an NIR
terminal where you can be asked to "prove who you are".
Each time you swipe the card, a record will be made at the
NIR - so, for instance, the government will know every
time you withdraw more than £99 from your bank account.
Restaurants and off-licences will demand that the card be
swiped so that they are indemnified from prosecution.
Private business will have full access to the NIR. If you
apply for a job, your card will have to be swiped. If you
want a London Underground Oyster card, or a supermarket
loyalty card, or a telephone line or a mobile phone or an
internet account, your ID card will have to be swiped.
In other words, there will be a record of your movements,
your phone calls and shopping habits, even the kind of
medication you take. These databases, which can be stored
in a device the size of a hand, will be sold to third
parties without you knowing. The ID card will not be your
property and the Home Secretary will have the right to
revoke or suspend it at any time without explanation. This
would prevent you drawing money from a bank.
ID cards will not stop terrorists, as the Home Secretary,
Charles Clarke, has now admitted; the Madrid bombers all
carried ID. On 26 March, the government moved to silence
parliamentary opposition to the cards, announcing that a
committee would investigate banning the House of Lords
from blocking legislation contained in a party's
manifesto. The Blair clique does not debate. Like the
zealot in Downing Street, its "sincere belief" in its own
veracity is quite enough. When the London School of
Economics published a long study that in effect demolished
the government's case for the cards, Clarke abused it for
feeding a "media scare campaign".
This is the same minister who attended every cabinet
meeting at which Blair's lies over his decision to invade
Iraq were clear.
This government was re-elected with the support of barely
a fifth of those eligible to vote: the second-lowest
proportion since the franchise. Whatever respectability
the famous suits in television studios try to give him,
Blair is demonstrably discredited as a liar and war
criminal.
Like the constitution-hijacking bill now reaching its
final stages, and the criminalising of peaceful protest,
ID cards are designed to control the lives of ordinary
citizens (as well as enrich the new Labour-favoured
companies that will build the computer systems). A small,
determined and profoundly undemocratic group is killing
freedom in Britain, just as it has killed literally in
Iraq. That is the news. "The kaleidoscope has been
shaken," said Blair at the 2001 Labour party conference.
"The pieces are in flux. Soon they will settle again.
Before they do, let us reorder this world around us."
With thanks to Frances Stonor Saunders and Hanna Lease.
John Pilger's new book, Freedom Next Time, will be
published in June by Bantam Press
Visit http://www.gaiandemocracy.net/ to read a synopsis of
"Can Latin America Save the World?"
and extracts from
"Gaian Democracies: Re-defining Globalisation &
People-power"
by Roy Madron and John Jopling. Green Books 2003
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jolly Roger <slicingthroats@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: TO ALL NEW MEMBERS A QUESTION
Here it is -- but the print friendly version is easier on the eyes (click near the bottom of the page) -- I hate the black background.
http://www.wealth4freedom.com/Rothschild.html
JP Liggett <JP@JPLiggett.com> wrote:
please send a link
>I just read the history of the Rothchilds at your site, Kev -- excellent
article.
"There comes a time when every man feels the urge to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------
Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries for just 2¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 23:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jolly Roger <slicingthroats@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Re: Fw: Jew Baiting
I never claimed it was a representative sample of the Jewish population. I was only making the point that it does happen, and for all I know, it may be justified. Maybe they've suffered discrimination in the past. Also -- they are anything but losers.
Leslie Schwartz <lhs_emf@pacbell.net> wrote: v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } Then you know a bunch of losers and your small sample proves nothing about a collection of people united in many aspects that totals into the tens of millions.
---------------------------------
From: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com [mailto:911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jolly Roger
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 8:12 AM
To: 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [911TruthAction] Re: Fw: Jew Baiting
"as if any self respecting individual is going to hide the fact they are Jewish"
I personally know three otherwise self-respecting people who have tried to hide the fact that they are Jewish, and this is out of a total of about 6 or 8 Jews that I know.
Leslie Schwartz <lhs_emf@pacbell.net> wrote:
I have seen a number of messages on this message board NOT making that distinction, and in fact lumping together, Jews, Zionists, Neocons, mossad, Judaism, Israelis, Ashkenazi Jews, the Rothschild’s, the illuminati, the Rockefellers, the Warburg’s, PNAC, the CFR, the etc. and etc., and mentioning specific high profile people who may fall within one or more of those categories. I also recall some hater using the term “crypto-Jews” on this message board as if any self respecting individual is going to hide the fact they are Jewish becomes THAT writer hates Jews. This is delusional and it is offensive.
When necessary and accurate distinctions are not made and a message goes out which obviously has some emotion, even anger over the events associated with 9/11/01 (emotion which is otherwise understandable) it is an ugly thing to read, its racist, its UN-AMERICAN and I personally do not think it helps anyone to understand these events or how we can constructively respond to the overall situation.
If you want to be taken seriously and treated with respect for your research and comments, you should know that is not going to be the response when you basically write everything bad that happens in this world is one kind of flavor of the month “Jewish conspiracy” by one name or another.
If you make the sufficient and accurate distinctions and make a sincere effort to report only what you have verified to be factual you will not hear any complaints about it. If you don’t have proof and only have a theory then say that, and when your making broad accusations about the actions, motives and future plans of groups or categories of people chances are your going to have to account for that uncertainty in your statement, otherwise its an accusation without sufficient proof and it will again cause people to distrust your motives and good-will.
Leslie
.
"There comes a time when every man feels the urge to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats." -- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 23:13:58 -0700
From: "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@nwinfo.net>
Subject: Chicago's use of a flawed computerized voting system operated by a privately held foreign company
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/chicago_ballot_chaos.html
CHICAGO BALLOT CHAOS
NEW COMPUTER VOTE MACHINES MALFUNCTION, UNVERIFIABLE
By Christopher Bollyn
COOK COUNTY, Illinois-Chicago's use of a flawed computerized voting system operated by a privately held foreign company reveals how
meaningless and absurd the "democratic" process in America has become.
Having observed voting systems across Europe, from Serbia, Germany and Estonia to Holland and France, this reporter has noted that the most honest and transparent elections are also the most simple.
The more complicated methods of voting, such as the unverifiable computerized voting systems widely used across the United States, lack the most essential element of democratic elections-transparency.
The $50 million touch-screen and optical-scan voting system provided by Sequoia Voting Systems failed across Chicago and suburban Cook County during the March 21 Illinois primary. However, the leading corporate-controlled newspapers merely lamented the failures of the system without addressing its fundamental flaws or even reporting that the company running the election is foreign-owned.
The "high-tech" computerized voting system was "cumbersome" and "slow," one mainstream Chicago newspaper reported. The machines failed across the county causing "plenty of frustration and confusion for voters," the paper reported. The ballots and votes from more than 400 precincts were still uncounted two days after the election due to machine malfunctions and lost memory cartridges which contain the results.
Reports from other dailies noted that as of noon Wednesday, Chicago was missing memory cartridges from 252 polling stations while Cook County officials "couldn't find" the results from 162 suburban precincts.
Election officials tried to assure the public that although nobody knew where all the ballots and computerized memory cartridges were, they were "most assuredly not lost."
"I don't trust that," U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) said. "This is Chicago. This is Cook County. We created vote fraud, vote scandal and stealing votes. We created that mechanism. It became an art form."
"Ballot chaos" is how another large Chicago newspaper described the situation in which the votes from hundreds of precincts could not be found or counted on Election Night.
"We have accounted for the votes," Langdon Neal, city election chairman told the publication. "What we haven't been able to do is count them."
In one precinct on the Near South Side, for example, the Sequoia optical scanner failed to register anything but Republican ballots. Although "election officials" tried to repair the machine four times, by the end of the day it had failed to register a single Democratic ballot in a precinct in which some 86 percent of the voters are Democrats.
When this reporter went to vote, the touch-screen machine went completely dead as the voter in front of me pressed the button to print. When the poll workers were asked if other voters had had similar problems with the equipment they said it had happened all day and showed me an unplugged machine that had broken down earlier.
When the polls closed at 7 p.m., American Free Press was at the Cook County Clerk's office to see how the votes were tallied.
Citizens in Chicago, as in most American cities, are, however, forbidden from viewing or participating in the any aspect of the vote-counting process.
The so-called counting of the votes is managed by some two dozen employees of Sequoia Voting Systems, a privately held foreign company. These employees, many of whom are not even U.S. citizens, have "full access" to the "back room area," a sealed-off section of the 5th floor of the county clerk's office which is called the "tally area."
In Chicago, the person in charge of the tallying of the votes was a British employee of Sequoia named David Allen from London. Allen, who ran the "Sequoia War Room" in an office next to that of Cook County Clerk David Orr, oversaw the "tally room" team, which included a dozen Venezuelan employees, who operated the hidden computer equipment that counts the votes.
As American Free Press has noted before, there are wire services such as the Associated Press, who could be seen having direct connections leading from their computers to the hidden mainframe computer of the Sequoia tallying system located behind the wall on the 5th floor of the clerk's office.
Senior executives from Sequoia Voting Systems and from its partner company, Smartmatic, such as company president Jack A. Blaine and Roger Alejandro Piñate Martinez, vice president of special operations, also had "full access" to the tally area.
Sequoia, which was previously held by the British-based firm De La Rue PLC, a company, which produces bank notes, travelers checks and cash handling equipment, was merged or combined with Smartmatic in March 2005.
Smartmatic, which has a U.S.-based office in Boca Raton, Fla., is headed by three young Venezuelans along with Blaine, a former vice president with Unisys. A dozen Venezuelans could be seen managing the most sensitive aspects of the recent election in Chicago.
Smartmatic, the parent company of Sequoia Voting Systems, obtained the company for a "ridiculously low amount of money," Charles D. Brady, an analyst with Hibernia Southcoast Capital Inc., said at the time of the merger.
While De La Rue purchased 85 percent of Sequoia in 2002 for $35 million, it reportedly sold the growing global company for only $16 million in 2005. Tracey Graham, then president of Sequoia, said more than 30 organizations had expressed interest in buying her company, yet no names of other bidders were given citing "confidentiality agreements."
The chief officers of Sequoia-Smartmatic are two 32-year old Venezuelans from Caracas, Antonio Mugica and Alfredo Anzola. Anzola also works as a Venezuela-based lawyer brokering international oil deals with the Cleveland law firm of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey.
"With the combination of Sequoia and Smartmatic, both proven innovators with accomplished track records in either the U.S. or abroad, we are creating the first truly global leader in providing voter-verified electronic voting systems," Blaine said in March 2005 when the merger was announced.
There is, however, nothing verifiable about the Sequoia voting system used in Cook County. The voter has no way of knowing if his vote has been counted or how it was counted.
The absolute lack of transparency in U.S. voting systems yields unverifiable election results, which can only be accepted on faith. In Chicago voters are asked to trust the results produced by malfunctioning machines operated by a privately owned foreign company.
Asked about the nature of the foreign company that runs elections in Cook County, Scott Burnham, spokesman for Cook County Clerk Orr simply said, "Ask Sequoia" and hung up the phone. Asked about the ownership of the privately held company, Allen, who supervised the tally, refused to answer and handed the phone to Michelle Shafer, the company's vice president and spokesperson.
Pressed about Allen's citizenship, Shafer finally admitted that the Sequoia employee who oversaw the tally was, indeed, a British citizen who had been assisted by a team of Venezuelans.
Dimas Ulacio, one of the Venezuelan technicians who worked in the tally area spoke with American Free Press. "Who really owns Sequoia?" Ulacio was asked. "Is Sequoia-Smartmatic truly a Venezuelan company or is it a British-owned company masquerading as a Venezuelan company?"
Ulacio laughed but refused to answer.
While a high percentage of the precinct results-about 90 percent-are usually reported within one hour of the polls closing, the Sequoia system failed to produce any results for nearly two hours. Only 44 percent of the precinct results had been reported four hours after the polls closed.
The widespread failures of the Sequoia voting system in the Cook County election, Shafer said, made for a "very typical Election Day in a jurisdiction where they are changing voting technology." Rather than blame the machines, Shafer blamed human error.
(Issue #14, April 5, 2006)
.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 02:24:26 -0400
From: ranger116@webtv.net
Subject: Rumsfeld allowed prison abuse - Had Direct Involvment Rumsfeld allowe
Rumsfeld allowed prison abuse - Had Direct Involvment
Rumsfeld allowed prison abuse - U.S. Security - MSNBC.com
(may have been personally involved ?)
Address:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12319090/
Army report on al-Qaida accuses Rumsfeld of direct involvement in
Guantanamo torcher
Address:http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1754348,00.html
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
U.S. Embassy in Iraq bigger than Vatican City - But we are Not staying
permanently in Iraq ? !
Address:http://news.yahoo.com/photo/060414/481/ny19004141827;_ylt=AvkAbFz3mPAYSmzSylxr0KIUewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3bGk2OHYzBHNlYwN0bXA-
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Sheehan Wants To Spend Easter With Bush
Address:http://www.rense.com/general70/east.htm
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
WP: Iraqis bust huge oil smuggling ring - washingtonpost.com Highlights
- MSNBC.com
(Those Darn Iraqis- You Just Can't Trust Them - Caught Smuggling their
own Oil to Syria !)
Address:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12310253/
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Please join, contribute info, and blast to member lists - we want this
to be huge
Join ConvictBushCheney -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ConvictBushCheney/
We're collecting clear, convincing evidence of
High Crimes, War Crimes and other criminal acts committed by
George
W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney and their administration,
Drawn from investigations by respected experts, mainstream media
reports, and other reliable sources. Post them here at this group, and
we will put the best at the ConvictBushCheney.org website and refer the
evidence to organizations and investigators working on these issues.
Mike Hersh CBC Editor explains this website, "Supports efforts to
investigate, censure, impeach, indict, and convict Bush and Cheney -
including Rep. John Conyers' resolutions: H.Res.635 creating a select
committee to investigate and make recommendations on grounds for
impeachment, H.Res.636 to censure Bush, and H.Res.637 to censure
Cheney." Afterdowningstreet.org - a coalition of over 100 veterans',
peace, and activist groups which urges Congress and the media to
investigate impeachable offenses - hosts ConvictBushCheney.org.
Join / Subscribe by sending an email message to:
ConvictBushCheney-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Mike Hersh
- MikeHersh.com - http://www.mikehersh.com
- Coordinator, Progressive Democrats of
America http://www.pdamerica.org
- Chair, Montgomery County Progressive
Alliance http://www.mc-progressivealliance.com
- Organizer, Democracy for America /
Maryland http://www.democracyforamerica.com
- Become a Sustaining PDA Donor: https://www.pdamerica.org/donate.php
- The After Downing Street Coalition - http://www.afterdowningstreet.org
- Convict Bush and Cheney - http://www.convictbushcheney.org
- The Media Watch Project - http://www.democrats.com/media
- Support Cindy Sheehan - http://www.meetwithcindy.org/
- BushOccupation.com - http://www.bushoccupation.com
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Likely Story (below) -- It won't last long as soon as Washinton get's
involved !
Path to Deportation Can Start With a Traffic Stop - New York Times
Address:http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/14/nyregion/14jails.html?ei=5065&en=d3a1b39a8209be9f&ex=1145678400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Sen. Clinton withdraws hidden millions !
Tom Flocco .com
Address:http://www.tomflocco.com/
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Six Generals call for Rumsfeld to resign.
Tush voices strong support for Rumsfeld - Conflict in Iraq - MSNBC.com
Address:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12313869/
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 08:59:43 -0000
From: "scol202" <yahooboxx@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: John Pilger: .Freedom Dies Quickly by John Pilger
This is what happens when your country is taken over by neocons like
Mandelsson and Murdoch.
--- In 911TruthAction@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Eastman" <olfriend@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Freedom Dies Quickly
> By John Pilger
>
> People ask: can this be happening in
> Britain? Surely not. A centuries-old democratic
> constitution cannot be swept away. Basic human rights
> cannot be made abstract. Those who once comforted
> themselves that a Labour government would never commit
> such an epic crime in Iraq might now abandon a last
> delusion, that their freedom is inviolable. If they knew.
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 11:27:02 -0000
From: "Ozzy bin Oswald" <hisholiness@rome.com>
Subject: Mods: Ban the 'ygcache' message blocker in your Groups
Gawab is used to receive Yahoo messages without spam. The 'ygcache'
blocks the free exchange through Gawab which many spam-plagued Arabs
use.
I'll let the Sultan fill you in while I check my memberships.
-Oz.
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
In the last few days the gawab users facing a big problems who's are
members in yahoo groups. This is caused by a virus named (ygcache) this
virus prevent them from using their gawab mails to receive any mails
from yahoo groups by the following method:
1- The virus sends a mail to the yahoo group to subscribe under name
ygcache-groupname for example:
from: ygcache-GroupName@gawab.com <mailto:ygcache-GroupName@gawab.com>
to: GroupName-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:GroupName-subscribe@yahoogroups.com>
2- If the group moderator (owner) accept this mail to join to the group
the virus will automatically set all the gawab users personal settings
for receiving to (Edit My Membership: NO Email)
3- When the gawab user knows that he can't receive any mails from yahoo
groups he will go to the yahoo groups www.groups.yahoo.com
<http://www.groups.yahoo.com/> site and change his personal settings
for receiving to (Edit My Membership: receive emails Individual emails)
. but the virus will change the gawab user automatically to no email
again.
The Goal: We know that www.gawab.com <http://www.gawab.com/> is a big
arabic site provide a mail with 15 MB using POP3/SMTP protocol which
allow any mail program like outlock due to this advatages this site is
very famous and this affect another sites, so some of the biggest
hackers make a team to hack gawab site but praise god they didn't
succeed yet due to a good firewall on the gawab site but the hackers
never ever give up so they make this virus (ygcache) to prevent gawab
users from using yahoo groups with gawab mails.
The Solution:
It's very easy to kill this virus but it depends on the yahoo groups
owners and moderators to remove any members with this
nameygcache-groupname@gawab.com <mailto:nameygcache-groupname@gawab.com>
from their groups and reject any subscribe using name (ygcache) to avoid
this problems. Thanks
Mahmoud flip flop
m_flip_flop@yahoo.com <mailto:m_flip_flop@yahoo.com>
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 04:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Perna <savefreedom2005@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: What Censored emails ??
TEST THE INTERNET CENSORSHIP FOR YOURSELF.
HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE HAVE DONE SO,
AND HAVE SEEN IT FOR THEMSELVES.
NOT EVERY ANTI-GOVERNMENT MESSAGE IS CENSORED,
BUT SOME ARE.
I SEND TEXT FILES, THAT DO NOT EXPOSE VIOLATIONS OF OUR RIGHTS, BY THE DEPT OF HOME LAND INSECURITY EVERYDAY, WITH NO PROBLEMS.
CERTAIN SPECIFIC POLITICAL MESSAGES WILL NOT GO THROUGH
THE MAIN YAHOO MAIL SERVER,
AS A TEXT FILE, OR ARE DIVERTED TO THE SPAM FOLDER.
Try it for yourself. Use any subject line that you like.
Go to these URLS for the messages,
make a copy,
and try to send it from the main Yahoo Mail Server,
AS A TEXT FILE.
Then check to see if they were delivered,
or sent to the spam folder.
GO TO ANY OF THESE URLS FOR THE MESSAGE:
Try posting them in some groups FROM THE MAIN YAHOO MAIL SERVER
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/2
and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/3
and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/6
and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/8
and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/48
and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/51
and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/52
LOOK AT the window that opens, where you are required to enter a code
What is the
Captcha Project at Carnegie Mellon University ???
Should the government,
in a free nation,
capture communications between free citizens,
who voice opinions about government?
This might seem normal to anyone who has not seen the PATTERN of which messages are ALWAYS captured,
and which messages are NEVER captured.
All of the messages; which are ALWAYS captured are those which exposed inappropriate intrusions by the Department of Home Land Insecurity.
Captcha Project at Carnegie Mellon University
GO AHEAD AND JUMP THROUGH THEIR HOOP.
THEN WATCH THE MESSAGE GO INTO THE SPAM FOLDER
More URLS for a censored message:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/therepublicanclub/message/7431
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911TruthAction/message/23232
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AmericansforMassDeportation/message/5022
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/catapultthepropaganda/message/26832
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contribute/message/194
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ConspiracyBruthasCorner/message/15980
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ed44/message/29768
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Evolving_Thought/message/18806
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FIREBASEVOICE/message/3216
Freedom of speech - Use it or lose it
When they took away the 4th Amendment,
we were quiet,
because we didn't deal drugs.
When they took away the 6th Amendment,
we were quiet,
because we were innocent.
When they took away the 2nd Amendment,
we were quiet,
because we don't own guns.
Now they have taking away the 1st Amendment,
and very soon,
if we continue to be quiet,
we will have no choice,
but to be continue to be quiet.
ranger116@webtv.net wrote: What Censored emails ??
I send out emails on a regular basis that are only one missing word away
from sending the secret service to my door and they seem to show up on
all the yahoo lists ?
---------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
