There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. The impact of illegal aliens on America
From: "John Perna" savefreedom2005@yahoo.com
2. All About NSA's and AT&T's Big Brother Machine, the Narus 6400
From: "JP Liggett" JP@JPLiggett.com
3. Re: The impact of illegal aliens on America
From: "NoRedCoats@aol.com" NoRedCoats@aol.com
4. Osama Connected to 9/11? Not According to the F.B.I. - tvnl news
From: "reggie501" reggie501@optonline.net
5. The world of Dov Zakheim: Nefesh Elokis -- have you got it?
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
6. "the Lobby" named but unimpeded-- forces overwhelming bi-partisan su
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
7. this is a for sure winner
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
8. A Day in the Life: 4/28/6
From: "President, USA Exile Govt." prez@usa-exile.org
9. Internet shut-down in two to four days during flu pandemic: Booz All
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
10. EMERGENCY POST!! DEAD OR ALIVE...WHERE'S DICK CHENEY?!
From: "DOUGLAS CLARK" bushsept11mastermind@yahoo.com
11. Pan Am flight 103 ...
From: "stoelting1981" fiat@sofnet.com
12. "Lashon Hara" -- calling a man "Anti-Semite"
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
13. US planned war in Afghanistan long before September 11
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
14. [Fwd: More on WTC South Tower]
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
15. Re: Pentagon
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
16. Is this it , the end of Dean ROger Ray of Edmonton Alberta Canada
From: "copernicus122223" copernicus122223@yahoo.com
17. RUSH
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
18. [Fwd: Flight 77]
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
19. They were arresting and hand cuffing congress people
From: "MarshaMcClelland" mofmars3@sbcglobal.net
20. Pentagon implements Global Military Policing-Second 9/11 to provide
From: "Richard Pierce" phobicflyonthewall@yahoo.com
21. WHAT HAPPEN?
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
22. Re: 9/11 - THE HISTROY CHANNEL
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
23. Retired Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizo
From: "Richard Pierce" phobicflyonthewall@yahoo.com
24. Retired Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizo
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
25. Retired Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizo
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 1
From: "John Perna" savefreedom2005@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:39am(PDT)
Subject: The impact of illegal aliens on America
The impact of illegal aliens on America
According to the Los Angeles Times,
1. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
2. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.
3. Over 66% of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
4. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.
5. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.
6. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
7. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
8. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking.
9. In L.A.County 5.1 million people speak English. 3.9 million speak Spanish (10.2 million people in L.A.County).
(29% of inmates in federal prisons reportedly are illegal aliens.)
---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 2
From: "JP Liggett" JP@JPLiggett.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:39am(PDT)
Subject: All About NSA's and AT&T's Big Brother Machine, the Narus 6400
All About NSA's and AT&T's Big Brother Machine, the Narus 6400
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/4/8/14724/28476
The latest generation is called NarusInsight, capable of monitoring 10
billion bits of data per second.
It monitors 10 billion bits per second at level four and 2500 million bits
per second at level seven. For reference, the 256K DSL line I am using
equals .25 million bits per second. So one NarusInsight machine can look at
about 39,000 DSL lines at once in great detail. That is a pretty .......
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 3
From: "NoRedCoats@aol.com" NoRedCoats@aol.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:30am(PDT)
Subject: Re: The impact of illegal aliens on America
Would you mind giving the date of this Los Angeles Times article about
Illegal Aliens and what sources were used?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 4
From: "reggie501" reggie501@optonline.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:19am(PDT)
Subject: Osama Connected to 9/11? Not According to the F.B.I. - tvnl news
9/11 News : http://www.tvnewslies.org/news/#911
· Osama Connected to 9/11? Not According to the F.B.I. - As of today,
4/28/06, the F.B.I. website listing for Osama notes that it was last
updated in November, 2001, after the events of September 11th 2001.
While the site notes several crimes for which Osama is suspected, the
site makes no mention of the events of September 11th.
· The questions that "United 93" can't answer - But while Greengrass
tackled everything known about the flight -- which the government
believes was crashed on purpose by its four al-Qaeda hijackers because
of the uprising by passenger who'd learned of the crashes at the World
Trade Center -- there were things the movie could not address.
· Juror in terror trial disavows verdict - One of 12 jurors who
convicted a 23-year-old Lodi man Tuesday on charges that he trained
for holy war disavowed the verdict late Thursday, alleging that she
was bullied into a guilty finding amid a pattern of misconduct by
fellow panelists.
· When Hollywood Makes History - But the movie, which opens nationwide
today, is a dramatic re-creation that includes scenes and images that
go far beyond what is known about the attacks.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 5
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:59am(PDT)
Subject: The world of Dov Zakheim: Nefesh Elokis -- have you got it?
http://www.geocities.com/mewatch99/soul.html
The Jewish Soul and the Gentile Soul!
by Nashid
Let me ask you a question. You have mentioned you are an orthodox
Jew. There are things in your religion I see as racist as expressed
by members of your religion.
All of the following things are taken from Jewish sources. How much
of this stuff do you agree with? And do you condemn Jews who hold
these views?
According to orthodox Jews, as I understand it, Jews have a soul
Gentiles do not have. This is the G-dly soul, the Nefesh Elokis.
Gentiles have the same souls that all living creatures including Jews
have, but not the G-dly soul.
An orthodox Jew is thus being totally honest when he tells a Gentile
that Jews and Gentiles have the same soul. It's the soul of the dog
or the cat they share in common. But the Jew has the extra soul which
distinguishes him from the dog, the cat or the Gentile.
That may be why Israel is so stuck on Jewish bloodlines to determine
who is and who is not a Jew. It doesn't seem to matter whether you
practice the religion. You are born with the G-dly Nefesh Elokis soul
if you are a Jew. This is not something you can shed. No matter how
righteous a Gentile is, he can never get the G-dly soul, and no
matter how foul a Jew is, he can never lose his G-dly soul.
The reason the killer Sheinbein was not delivered to U.S. authorities
for trial seems to be because Gentiles, according to the Talmud, are
not fit to judge Jews.
Gentiles or heathen, according to the Talmud, are also incapable of
charity in the same way we regard dogs as being incapable of charity.
Gentiles act on this lower animal self-interest level. For Jews it's
always charity, for Gentiles it's always a sin offering.
Jews often tell us being the Chosen gives them more responsibilities.
Of course it does. Humans have more responsibilities than dogs. Ah,
but don't we love our dogs? And shouldn't dogs be grateful to their
masters?
Everything below is taken from Jewish sources. The links are given. I
particularly like the carpenter analogy, in which G-d is compared to
a carpenter. Jews are the carpenter's children. Gentiles are the
chairs and furniture the carpenter makes. Then comes the unbelievable
statement asking who is to say which is more important, the children
or the furniture. This is obviously so the Rabbi can tell his Gentile
friends we all have our place in G-d's kingdom, and G-d does not
regard the Jew superior to the Gentile. Right, and the carpenter
gives the chair he made the same value as his children.
__________________________________
Do Gentiles Have Souls? -- The Rabbis Say Yes, But. . .
Ask Moses
Do Gentiles Have Souls
Question
Richie19: Do gentiles have souls?
Rabbi Jacobson: Sure--everything does.
Richie19: So what happens when they die? Where does the soul go?
Rabbi Jacobson: 1.) They are judged; 2.) Wherever G-d decides.
Richie19: So what is the difference between them and us?
Rabbi Jacobson: There is a different soul in every created being.
Richie19: So do Jews have an extra soul or just a different kind?
Rabbi Jacobson: Additional, according to Kabbalah.
Richie19: what is the name of this extra soul?
Rabbi Jacobson: The Nefesh Elokis.
___
______________________________
Kabbalistic Philosophy From the book "Demystifying the Mystical, 1996
Chassidus explains that there are three souls: (1) Nefesh ha'bihamis,
the animal soul, also called Nefesh ha'chiunis, the vital soul or
natural soul; (2) Nefesh ha'sichlis, the human rational soul; and (3)
Nefesh ha'elokis, the G-dly soul. The third aspect of the soul is
unique to Jews; Gentiles have both an animal soul and a human
rational soul.
The part of the Jew that wants to be G-dly and Jewish, the Nefesh
ha'elokis, is pre set and "forced" to act in a Jewish way.
The Nefesh elokis or G-dly soul is the true Jewish essence, the
Pintele Yid, and it is directly connected to G-d, a part of G-d.
Since it is G-dly, it is not limited, it transcends the ordinary
material world. From the perspective of the rational and animal soul,
indulgence in worldly pleasures could be justified. But the divine
soul tells us there is something beyond, a true G-dly spirituality.
It says, if something in this world does not manifest G-d, it is not
for you, a Jew, because it is contrary to your real essence.
To understand this in a deeper way we need to ask ourselves several
questions. What is the significance of the Nefesh elokis being
a "Chelek eloka mimal mamesh", an actual part of G-d? Also, do
righteous gentiles posses a Nefesh elokis? If not, why not? Just
because they aren't born to a Jewish mother or have had a proper
Jewish conversion, shouldn't exclude them from attaining the same
union as Jews have. Also, what is the highest spiritual level a
gentile can reach?
Chassidus explains that the Nefesh elokis is actually part and parcel
of G-d. It manifests itself by the very fact that a Jew cannot and
will not be able to forsake his or her Jewishness. Regardless of
circumstances, every Jew posses a G-dly soul, even though temporarily
the Jew might drift into strange non G-dly pastures.
Based on this ideology, we will be able to understand the
spirituality of a gentile. A gentile is not a Jew. The very fact that
a gentile is born to a non Jewish mother establishes this fact. This
in no way denotes a inferiority rather a different role in fulfilling
his mission in life. Therefore even a very righteous gentile doesn't
have a Jewish soul known as a G-dly soul, a Neshomo.
A righteous gentile's soul comes from klipat Noga. This means that he
possesses a level of spirituality that expresses some form of G-d.
This is the basic idea that G-d is good, and that his desire of human
kind is to make the world a better place, a place in which all of
society has the proper tools including modern technology, to
accomplish this task. When a gentile assists in this mission, he
attains and expresses his soul and is called a righteous gentile. The
reward being, as Maimondies says, he will receive a portion in the
world to come. However a gentile doesn't have a Nefesh elokis and
doesn't have the same responsibilities as a Jew does. Therefore a
gentile isn't able to connect to that level of G-d which we call
essence. An example of this would be, a father has a child and that
same father is a carpenter. Is there a difference between his child
and his chairs and tables that he makes? Sure, however does he see
this difference as a better and worse situation or is it simply that
they are two entirely different roles that the father has, both just
as important and equal to him. However there is a very real
difference, and it doesn't make one good and one bad. The same is
true for a Jew and a gentile.
In the same vein, we can explain the difference between the soul of a
Jew and the soul of a gentile. A gentile is limited to his or her
mission. That's the way G-d created him or her. Therefore the level
of spirituality for a gentile is limited to perfecting himself and
the world around him. Yet a gentile cannot transform himself to
become limitless, he is a creation of G-d just as all other
creations. Therefore there is a defined application to his ability.
This is called in Chassidus, Givul, limited. However a Jew is not a
creation of G-d, rather a "part" of G-d, therefore a Jew is able to
go beyond the worldly defined experiences. The reason is, a Jew is
not a creation of G-d rather a Jew is G-dliness as he expresses
himself in creation through a Neshomo. This concept is called in
Chassidus, elokus shenase nivre.
Rabbi Chaim Dalfin
________________________________
From the Soncino Edition Babylonian Talmud on CD: Baba Bathra 10b
Rabban Johanan b. Zakkai said to his disciples: My sons, what is the
meaning of the verse, Righteousness exalteth a nation, but the
kindness of the peoples is sin? R. Eliezer answered and
said: `Righteousness exalteth a nation:' this refers to Israel of
whom it is written, Who is like thy people Israel one nation in the
earth? But `the kindness of the peoples is sin': all the charity and
kindness done by the heathen is counted to them as sin, because they
only do it to magnify themselves, as it says, That they may offer
sacrifices of sweet savour unto the God of heaven, and pray for the
life of the king and of his sons. But is not an act of this kind
charity in the full sense of the word, seeing that it has been
taught: `If a man says, - I give this sela for charity in order that
my sons may live and that I may be found worthy of the future world,
he may all the same be a righteous man in the full sense of the
word'? - There is no contradiction; in the one case we speak of an
Israelite, in the other of a heathen.14
R.Joshuah answered and said: `Righteousness exalteth a nation,: this
refers to Israel of whom it is written, Who is like thy people
Israel, one nation on the earth? `The kindness of peoples is sin':
all the charity and kindness that the heathen do is counted sin to
them, because they only do it in order that their dominion may be
prolonged, as it says, Wherefore O king, let my counsel be acceptable
to thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thy iniquities
by showing mercy to the poor, if there may be a lengthening of thy
tranquility. Rabban Gamaliel answered saying: `Righteousness exalteth
a nation': this refers to Israel of whom it is written, Who is like
thy people Israel etc. `And the kindness of the peoples is sin:' all
the charity and kindness that the heathen do is counted as sin to
them, because they only do it to display haughtiness, and whoever
displays haughtiness is cast into Gehinnom, as it says, The proud and
haughty man, scorner is his name, he worketh in the wrath [`ebrah] of
pride, and `wrath' connotes Gehinnom, as it is written, A day of
wrath is that day. Said Rabban Gamaliel: We have still to hear the
opinion of the Modiite. R. Eliezer the Modiite says: `Righteousness
exalteth a nation': this refers to Israel of whom it is written, Who
is like thy people Israel,
one nation in the earth. `The kindness of the peoples is sin': all
the charity and kindness of the heathen is counted to them as sin,
since they do it only to reproach us, as it says, The Lord hath
brought it and done according as he spake, because ye have sinned
against the Lord and have not obeyed his voice, therefore this thing
is come upon you. R. Nehuniah b. ha-Kanah answered
saying: `Righteousness exalteth a nation, and there is kindness for
Israel and a sin-offering for the peoples.' Said R. Johanan b. Zakkai
to his disciples: `The answer of R. Nehuniah b. ha-Kanah is superior
to my answer and to yours, because he assigns charity and kindness to
Israel and sin to the heathen.' This seems to show that he also gave
an answer; what was it? - As it has been taught: R. Johanan b. Zakkai
said to them: Just as the sin-offering makes atonement for Israel, so
charity makes atonement for the heathen.
(14) Because the Israelite, whatever he may say, really gives the
charity for its own sake.(Interesting footnote. The Israelite always
gives charity for its own sake, no matter what he may say, and the
heathen is incapable of charity.)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 6
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:20am(PDT)
Subject: "the Lobby" named but unimpeded-- forces overwhelming bi-partisan su
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8914
April 28, 2006
Steppingstone to War
House passes 'Iran Freedom Support Act'
by Justin Raimondo
It is "a steppingstone to war," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, during the debate over the so-called Iran Freedom Support Act, and if this vote is any measure of the degree of congressional opposition to the looming prospect of war with Tehran, then we have a lot to worry about.
Only 21 members of the House stood up against the overwhelming bipartisan wave of support for the bill, which would impose economic sanctions on the Iranians - and openly proclaims the goal of effecting "regime change." Rep. Ron Paul, a Texas Republican, said the bill reminds him of a 1998 congressional resolution - the Iraq Liberation Act - that paved the way for the Iraqi debacle. Yet most of the "antiwar" contingent in the House of Representatives caved and voted in favor, including Democrats John Conyers, Maxine Waters, Jack Murtha, Bernie Sanders, Barbara Lee, and Lynn Woolsey.
The bill was opposed by the Bush administration, which officially holds that diplomacy is the way to go on the Iranian nukes issue. Thus it was supported by many Democrats, including the voluble Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), a co-author of the bill along with Florida Republican Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Passage is a major goal of AIPAC, Israel's premier lobbying organization in the U.S., which for the past two years has featured the alleged Iranian threat to America as its convention theme: this year's conclave featured a multimedia exhibit supposedly dramatizing how Iran is "pursuing nuclear weapons and how it can be stopped." As Middle East expert Trita Parsi, of the John Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies, put it: "I don't see any other major groups behind this legislation that have had any impact on it."
The Israelis have made no secret of their efforts to get Uncle Sam to launch an attack. If you guys don't, a number of Israeli officials have implied, then we will. This last, however, is an empty threat, as the Israelis don't have the military capacity to wipe out Iran's widely dispersed nuclear research facilities in a single blow, and, in any case, are more than likely to wait until the last possible moment before they take the unusual step of fighting their own war. After all, why should they, when the U.S. is perfectly willing to sacrifice American troops and treasure on the altar of Israel's alleged national security interests?
Iran represents a threat to nothing and no one but Israel, and everybody knows it. It is likewise universally acknowledged that the one Middle Eastern power we definitely know to be in possession of a substantial nuclear stockpile is Israel. The Iranians, then, could be seen as engaging in a defensive policy of deterrence: after all, Israel has never even acknowledged its nukes, let alone declared a policy of "no first strike." Unlike the Israelis, the Iranians are signatories of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. But of course we aren't allowed to mention that, because depicting the government of Israel as a gang of duplicitous scheming aggressors intent on holding a nuclear sword of Damocles over the entire Middle East would be "anti-Semitic," according to the latest definition of anti-Semitism, albeit all too true.
The timing on this vote is significant on two counts. Coming as it did at a time when the debate about Israel's inordinate influence over U.S. foreign policy is getting heated, this vote demonstrates that, as John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt point out in "The Israel Lobby":
"AIPAC, which is a de facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on the U.S. Congress. Open debate about U.S. policy towards Israel does not occur there, even though that policy has important consequences for the entire world."
The sheer power of what Mearsheimer and Walt call "the Lobby" is further demonstrated by the general public revulsion against the consequences of our very similar policy in Iraq. The unpopularity of our military presence in the Middle East has not deterred politicians from jumping on the war-with-Tehran bandwagon. Even as (some) Democratic lawmakers decry the occupation of Iraq and call for a timetable for U.S. troop withdrawal, they join in the war whoops of the neoconservatives who are pushing to ignite a new war with Tehran. So much for the Democratic Party as a vehicle for antiwar sentiment.
While the Iran Freedom Support Act contains language explicitly disavowing the charge that it represents a blank check for war with Iran, that is precisely what it does. It sets the stage for isolating Iran economically and paves the way for the creation of an Iranian version of Ahmed Chalabi and his "heroes in error." We will, once again, pay for the privilege of being lied to. As that old Peter, Paul, and Mary song goes: "When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?"
In the Senate, the primary proponents of this bill are likely to be Hillary Clinton and the rabidly neocon wing of the Republican Party. Hillary came out for sanctions long ago, and, in a fiery speech to AIPAC, stopped just short of calling for war with Iran if the mullahs did not cease and desist. Go here for an entirely plausible "future history" account of "the tragedy that followed Hillary Clinton's bombing of Iran in 2009." The matter-of-fact opening of Timothy Garton Ash's near-future scenario is frighteningly plausible:
"May 7, 2009, will surely go down in history alongside September 11, 2001. '5/7,' as it inevitably became known, saw massive suicide bombings in Tel Aviv, London, and New York, as well as simultaneous attacks on the remaining Western troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Total casualties were estimated at around 10,000 dead and many more wounded. The attacks, which included the explosion of a so-called dirty bomb in London, were orchestrated by a Tehran-based organization for 'martyrdom-seeking operations' established in 2004. '5/7' was the Islamic Republic of Iran's response to the bombing of its nuclear facilities, which President Hillary Clinton had ordered in March 2009."
Seymour Hersh and others seem to think the Bush administration will beat President Hillary to it, and that military operations involving both the Americans and the Israelis have already commenced. The Iran Freedom Support Act would merely drag these covert activities up into the sunlight, although their roots would stay submerged in the murky underworld of shadowy exile groups and Pentagon subcontractors. Passage of the Act would give rise to a whole new sector of the democracy-export business. Iranian exile groups - including monarchists, Marxists, and a motley collection of alleged "democrats" - would vie for funds and the American imprimatur. A new gold rush for the democracy exporters would commence, shifting the scene of the action from Iraq to Iran, even as the War Party sets its sights on the latter.
Let no one say they were against this war with Iran, when it comes, if they didn't vote with the heroic 21 naysayers. These sanctions against Iran are but a prelude to war, just as sanctions were the first step in the long run-up to the invasion of Iraq. However, we may not enjoy such a lengthy interval between cause and effect this time around. Events are proceeding at an ever accelerating pace, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice now saying the time for talking is over and the time for action has begun - not military action (at least not yet), but action by the Security Council of the United Nations, whose "credibility is at stake." I wonder if that same standard applies to the many UN resolutions that Israel continues to defy. Hasn't the UN already lost all credibility when such brazen defiance has gone unnoticed by the Security Council?
Let no one say they weren't warned. Using Iraq as a "model" for the methodology of the War Party, we can see, when it comes to Iran, that all the elements are falling neatly into place. Once again, we have the specter of WMD and their possible existence or nonexistence: a mirage projected by the credulous Western "mainstream" media, one that is sure to dissipate only after we're waist-deep in an Iranian quagmire. Another familiar phenomenon: dubious exile groups, along the lines of the infamous Iraqi National Congress, only this time even wackier, wilder, and woolier.
The Bush administration is going too slow for the Lobby's taste, and the House vote is a good indication of their displeasure. In spite of widespread antiwar sentiment and a general disgust with the notion of meddling in the affairs of other nations, the War Party has effectively seized control not only of major policymaking bodies of the U.S. government, but also both major political parties. Mearsheimer and Walt describe the campaign by Israel's amen corner to rush us into another war:
"The Bush administration has responded to the Lobby's pressure by working overtime to shut down Iran's nuclear program. But Washington has had little success, and Iran seems determined to get a nuclear arsenal. As a result, the Lobby has intensified its pressure on the U.S. government, using all of the strategies in its playbook."
One new strategy is to be prepared to abandon the Republicans if a sufficiently warlike Democrat - such as Hillary Clinton - wins the nod for a White House run. As for this White House, while it may have developed plans for an attack on Iran, the current administration seems eager to draw out the diplomatic dance as long as possible, even in the face of what Mearsheimer and Walt depict as a Katrina-like storm of propaganda and political pressure:
"Op-eds and articles now warn of imminent dangers from a nuclear Iran, caution against any appeasement of a 'terrorist' regime, and hint darkly of preventive action should diplomacy fail. The Lobby is also pushing Congress to approve the Iran Freedom Support Act, which would expand existing sanctions on Iran. Israeli officials also warn they may take preemptive action should Iran continue down the nuclear road, hints partly intended to keep Washington focused on this issue."
The Lobby is on the march, and war is in the wind. The cries of the banshee pundits and the sonorous resolutions coming out of Israeli-occupied Capitol Hill, are portents of the coming storm. Mearsheimer and Walt, two distinguished professors from two of our nation's most prestigious universities, have been vilified by the Amen Corner and have had their thesis twisted and willfully misunderstood by ultra-Zionists and anti-Semites alike. They have admirably refused to get down in the gutter with such dishonest, agenda-driven scribblers, and instead have let their work speak for itself as a predictor and critic of U.S. policy in the Middle East:
"One might argue that Israel and the Lobby have not had much influence on U.S. policy toward Iran, because the United States has its own reasons to keep Iran from going nuclear. This is partly true, but Iran's nuclear ambitions do not pose an existential threat to the United States. If Washington could live with a nuclear Soviet Union, a nuclear China, or even a nuclear North Korea, then it can live with a nuclear Iran. And that is why the Lobby must keep constant pressure on U.S. politicians to confront Tehran. Iran and the United States would hardly be allies if the Lobby did not exist, but U.S. policy would be more temperate and preventive war would not be a serious option."
As for this essay's predictive value: in light of the knowledge that it was commissioned by The Atlantic magazine and written sometime last year, the section on the Iran nuke issue seems prescient, an ample demonstration of the paper's thesis - that the Israel lobby has hijacked American foreign policy, especially when it comes to the Middle East.
Mearsheimer and Walt's critique of U.S. policy, as distorted by neoconservative fealty to Israel, is more than borne out by the Iran nuke brouhaha. Iranian missiles trained on Tel Aviv, or even London, do not a threat to the U.S. make. It is doubtful they represent a plausible threat even to the targeted cities, as the threat of massive retaliation in kind would successfully deter such a heinous act, just as it deterred Stalin and his successors for half a century.
It is both alarming and baffling that we have any number of lobbies operating out of Washington on behalf of dozens of foreign countries: not only Israel, but all sorts of overseas potentates and unsavory dictators of one sort or another have their bought-and-paid-for Amen Corners in the form of at least one pricey public relations firm. But I have yet to hear of a foreign policy lobby that operates on behalf of Americans - that looks out for exclusively American interests. Why isn't there a countering force arrayed against all these foreign agents and their domestic allies who push for the narrow interests of the "homeland" - usually at Uncle Sam's expense? Who will lobby Congress to start putting America first?
.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 7
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:21am(PDT)
Subject: this is a for sure winner
-
From: KERLEY983@aol.com
Here is a scenario.....
Not written by me; written by a zillion folks who are scared out of
their asses over what is shaking down in the NewKKKnightedSates, right
here and now:
Here is a scenario.....
November '06 will be a big hit for the neocon controlled Republican
party ... and '08 can replace them completely except for the Supreme
Court. They are never going to allow this to happen. Agreed?
So, sometime in the next 2 years, maybe before this November, Bush
needs to take over the government as a puppet for them. He already has
the means ... Congress has given him the authority to declare Martial
Law and deploy Federal troops to `maintain order' in the USA without
the need to consult them. Why? Why do you think that the deployment
is needed?
He also has the authority to deploy a nuke anywhere he pleases as CIC.
So, how about this for a possibility ... we have two possibilities to
give him the `justification' to shut down the government while under
Martial Law and `maintain order' with his troops ... he allows a US
nuke to be `stolen' and detonated in, say, Baltimore or another
`expendable' city and blames it on the `terrorists' ...
... or he just declares a nuclear strike on Iran and follows up the same
way when the people of the USA rise up in protest.
Then, he stops transportation of gasoline and oil in the USA, closes
down all roads, keeps us in our homes and arrests all the people who
rise up as `looters' and `anarchists' or `terrorists'. This way, the
US citizens who will resist are all locked up without charges, trial or
representation; same as the laws the `terrorists' are now under in
Gitmo.
Prisons are opened around the country with very little `compliance' to
humane conditions ... say in Arizona or Utah, out in the desert where you
couldn't get out on foot if you wanted to.
The laws for this already exist.
We try to drive out of the cities or out of the country; we get caught,
or killed, or disappear.
He shuts down the TV cable radio and press and we get `emergency
broadcasts' of the state of the emergency ... all produced for our
listening pleasure by Karl Rove. We are isolated, one city or state
from the next, left without electric and in the dark in terms of news
and the `troublemakers' are arrested.
The first winter comes, he sends us heating fuel and we are grateful.
We agree to the National ID cards, the new controls, and we get spoon
fed information custom made for us. It is good that we have people
looking out for our children and parents!
Meanwhile, maybe Iran gets nuked or invaded, along with any other
countries he wants to devistate and colonize, no elections are held and
the neocons control with no one to answer to.
Bye Bye Land of the Free.
You can fill in the blanks, but there is the outline.
Pack up the kids, pack up the family, and kiss your a** goodbye!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.0/325 - Release Date: 4/26/2006
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 8
From: "President, USA Exile Govt." prez@usa-exile.org
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:26am(PDT)
Subject: A Day in the Life: 4/28/6
GOVERNMENT OF THE USA IN EXILE
Free Americans Reaching
Out to Amerika's Huddled Masses Yearning to Breathe Free
Via <prez@usa-exile.org>
April 28, 2006
U.N. Forced to Cut Food Aid to
Sudan
Donor nations gave only 32 percent
of food program's funding needs
NOTE: This is a scandal so outrageous that it challenges our usual
notions of human nature! -- kl, pp
Friday, April 28, 2006 Posted: 1231 GMT (2031 HKT)
Image Omitted: U.S. Rep. Mike Doyle of Pittsburgh, center, addresses
a rally with post cards for President Bush to plead for aid for Darfur.
• UNICEF sounds alarm for Darfur's children
• First sanctions for Darfur participants OK'd
• NÃ…TO to keep training Darfur peacekeepers
GENEVA, Switzerland (Reuters) -- The United Nations said on Friday it
would cut food rations for more than 6 million people in Sudan, half of
them in Darfur, because of a severe lack of funds.
Many donor countries appear to have tired of the long-term conflict in
Darfur, despite signs that malnutrition is again on the rise among
people living in squalid camps, the United Nations' World Food Program
(WFP) said.
WFP said it was halving food aid from the minimum daily requirement of
2,100 calories to 1,050 calories as of May.
"This is one of the hardest decisions I have ever made. Haven't the
people of Darfur suffered enough? Aren't we adding insult to injury?"
WFP Executive Director James Morris said.
"This is a measure we should simply never have to take," said Morris,
who heads the world's largest food aid agency, feeding 90 million
people worldwide.
The Rome-based agency had only received $238 million, or 32 percent, of
its annual appeal of $746 million for Sudan. Africa's largest country
is emerging from civil war in the south as talks continue on a peace
deal to end a conflict in Darfur.
Spokeswoman Christiane Berthiaume told a news briefing: "It is
scandalous, but we have no choice."
Fighting erupted in Darfur in 2003 when mostly non-Arab tribes took up
arms over land and water resources, accusing the government of neglect.
Khartoum is accused of arming mainly Arab militia who began a murder,
rape, and looting campaign that killed tens of thousands and uprooted
more than 2 million -- a catastrophe that has been labeled a genocide
targeting the Africans of Darfur by the global community.
"There is probably some donor fatigue. The conflict has been going on a
long time. And there is no solution in sight," Berthiaume said.
The United States was the largest donor at $188 million, it said, while
Italy was the only major European country to contribute so far ($1.2
million).
"WFP is particularly concerned about the effect of reduced rations in
Darfur, where rampant insecurity continues to cause enormous
suffering," WFP said in a statement.
The U.N. Children's Fund (UNICEF) has already reported increased
malnutrition rates in the region this year.
The WFP said the cuts would allow limited food stocks to last longer
into the annual "hunger season", from July to September, when needs are
greatest ahead of the harvest.
The WFP estimates that 2,100 calories a day is the minimum daily
requirement needed to stay in good health.
Copyright 2006 Reuters.
========================================================================
=================================================================
----------
Intelligence indications and warnings abound
as Bush administration finalizes
military attack on Iran
By Wayne Madsen
April 28, 2006
WayneMadsenReport.com
January 2, 2006 -- Intelligence indications and warnings abound as Bush
administration finalizes military attack on Iran.
Intelligence and military sources in the United States and abroad are
reporting on various factors that indicate a U.S. military hit on
Iranian nuclear and military installations, that may involve tactical
nuclear weapons, is in the final stages of preparation. Likely targets
for saturation bombing are the Bushehr nuclear power plant (where
Russian and other foreign national technicians are present), a uranium
mining site in Saghand near the city of Yazd, the uranium enrichment
facility in Natanz, a heavy water plant and radioisotope facility in
Arak, the Ardekan Nuclear Fuel Unit, the Uranium Conversion Facility
and Nuclear Technology Center in Isfahan, the Tehran Nuclear Research
Center, the Tehran Molybdenum, Iodine and Xenon Radioisotope Production
Facility, the Tehran Jabr Ibn Hayan Multipurpose Laboratories, the
Kalaye Electric Company in the Tehran suburbs, a reportedly dismantled
uranium enrichment plant in Lashkar Abad, and the Radioactive Waste
Storage Units in Karaj and Anarak.
Other first targets would be Shahab-I, II, and III missile launch
sites, air bases (including the large Mehrabad air base/international
airport near Tehran), naval installations on the Persian Gulf and
Caspian Sea, command, control, communications and intelligence
facilities. Secondary targets would include civilian airports, radio
and TV installations, telecommunications centers, government buildings,
conventional power plants, highways and bridges, and rail lines. Oil
installations and commercial port facilities would likely be relatively
untouched by U.S. forces in order to preserve them for U.S. oil and
business interests.
There has been a rapid increase in training and readiness at a number
of U.S. military installations involved with the planned primarily
aerial attack. These include a Pentagon order to Fort Rucker, Alabama,
to be prepared to handle an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 trainees,
including civilian contractors, who will be deployed for Iranian combat
operations. Rucker is home to the US Army's aviation training command,
including the helicopter training school.
In addition, there has been an increase in readiness at nearby Hurlburt
Field in Florida, the home of the U.S. Air Force Special Operations
Command. The U.S. attack on Iran will primarily involve aviation (Navy,
Air Force, Navy-Marine Corps) and special operations assets.
There has also been a noticeable increase in activity at Marine Corps
Air Ground Combat Center at Twentynine Palms, California, a primary
live fire training activity located in a desert and mountainous
environment similar to target areas in Iran.
From European intelligence agencies comes word that the United States
has told its NATO allies to be prepared for a military strike on
Iranian nuclear development and military installations.
On November 17, 2005, Russian President Vladimir Putin spent seven
hours in secret discussions with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan during the the opening ceremonies in Samsun, Turkey for the
Russian-Turkish underwater Blue Stream natural gas pipeline,
festivities also attended by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.
According to sources knowledgeable about the meeting, Erdogan promised
Putin, who has become a close friend, that Turkey would not support the
use of its bases by the United States in a military attack on Iran.
That brought a series of high level visits to Turkey by Bush
administration officials, including CIA chief Porter Goss, FBI Director
Robert Mueller, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
Although Erdogan listened to Goss's and Rice's pleas for Turkish
logistical, political, and intelligence help for an attack on Iran and
Turkish Army Chief Yasar Buyukanit heard much the same from Pentagon
officials during his recent trip to Washington, the word is that Putin
now has enough clout in Ankara to scuttle any use of Turkey by the U.S.
for an attack on Iran. [Mueller delivered Ankara intelligence "proof"
of Iranian backing for Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) guerrillas in
Turkey. Intelligence agencies and business intelligence units around
the world are now discounting any intelligence coming from the Bush
administration as neocon propaganda invented by think tanks and
discredited intelligence agencies in Washington, Tel Aviv-Herzliya, and
Jerusalem].
A U.S. Attack on Iran: The Perfect Storm for wider nuclear conflict
U.S. political and military officials have also approached Bahrain,
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, Oman, and Azerbaijan seeking their
support for a U.S. attack on Iran. Ina replay of the phony pre-war
intelligence on Iraq, Washington is trying to convince various
countries that a link exists between Iran and "Al Qaeda."
Polish intelligence sources report that Poland's Defense Minister Radek
Sikorski assured Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of Poland's support
for any U.S. strike against Iran. Sikorski is a former American
Enterprise Institute colleague of such neo-cons as Richard Perle,
Michael Ledeen, and Lynne Cheney, the so-called "Second Lady" of the
United States. Sikorski and Polish Foreign Minister Stefan Meller
assured Rumsfeld and Rice, respectively, that Poland would stand by the
United States during the split in NATO that will occur as a result of
the American strike. Polish intelligence sources, who are unhappy with
the arrangement of the new right-wing government in Warsaw with the
Bush administration, leaked the information about the recent U.S.
demarche to NATO in Brussels about preparation for the attack.
Similar intelligence "leaks" about the U.S. attack plans were also
leaked to the German magazine Der Spiegel.
European intelligence sources also report that the recent decision by
Putin and Russia's state-owned Gazprom natural gas company to cut
supplied of natural gas to Ukraine was a clear warning by Putin to
nations like Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Czech Republic, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Croatia, Moldova, France, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Bosnia,
Serbia, and Germany that it would do the same if they support the U.S.
attack on Iran. Gazprom natural gas is supplied, via pipelines in
Ukraine, from Russia and Turkmenistan to countries in Eastern and
Western Europe. The Bush administration charged Russia with using gas
supplies as a "political tool."
Putin has additional leverage on Western Europe since former German
Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder accepted an appointment to the board of a
joint Russian-German North European Gas Pipeline Consortium that is
controlled by Gazprom. The pipeline will bring Russian gas to
Scandinavia, Germany, Netherlands, and Britain, giving Putin additional
leverage over Washington in Europe.
Southeast Asian intelligence sources report that Burma's (Myanmar's)
recent abrupt decision to move its capital from Rangoon (Yangon) to
remote Pyinmana, 200 miles to the north, is a result of Chinese
intelligence warnings to its Burmese allies about the effects of
radiation resulting from a U.S. conventional or tactical nuclear attack
on Iranian nuclear facilities. There is concern that a series of
attacks on Iranian nuclear installations will create a Chernobyl-like
radioactive cloud that would be caught up in monsoon weather in the
Indian Ocean.
Low-lying Rangoon lies in the path of monsoon rains that would continue
to carry radioactive fallout from Iran over South and Southeast Asia
between May and October. Coastal Indian Ocean cities like Rangoon,
Dhaka, Calcutta, Mumbai, Chennai, and Colombo would be affected by the
radioactive fallout more than higher elevation cities since humidity
intensifies the effects of the fallout. Thousands of government workers
were given only two days' notice to pack up and leave Rangoon for the
higher (and dryer) mountainous Pyinmana.
In neighboring West Bengal, the leftist government and its national
leftist allies around the country are planning massive demonstrations
during Bush's upcoming trip to India. They are protesting the war in
Iraq as well as the threats against Iran.
Reports from Yemen indicate that western oil companies are concerned
about U.S. intentions in Iran since the southern Arabian country
catches the edge of the monsoon rains that could contain radioactive
fallout from an attack, endangering their workers in the country.
The Bush administration aborted last minute plans to attack Iranian
nuclear and political installations prior to the 2004 presidential
election. On October 9, Rumsfeld met with defense minister colleagues
on the now decommissioned USS John F. Kennedy in the Persian Gulf to
seek support for the attack. That meeting has been confirmed by the
Danish Defense Minister who was in attendance, however, the topic of
the meeting was not discussed. According to U.S. naval personnel on
board the Kennedy, a special "war room" was set up to coordinate the
attack. Britain, Australia, Italy, Netherlands, and Japan did not
attend the meeting because of their opposition to the attack plans.
Intelligence and military officials around the world are also bracing
for the results of a U.S. attack on Iran. This includes the distinct
possibility of a major Shia retaliatory attack in Iraq, the Eastern
Province of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates,
Lebanon, and Afghanistan against U.S. military, diplomatic, and
economic targets in the region. Radioactive fallout from a conventional
or tactical nuclear attack on Iran will result in major problems with
Pakistan, India, China, Russia, Japan, and other downwind countries in
Asia and the Pacific Rim, possibly including the fall of the Pervez
Musharraf government in Pakistan and replacement by a radical Islamist
regime having possession of nuclear weapons. That would provoke a
military response from nuclear power India.
In a counter-attack, Iran would immediately launch its Shahab I and II
missiles at the U.S. Green Zone in Baghdad, the Al Udeid airbase in
Qatar, the US Navy base in Bahrain, Camp Doha base in Kuwait, Al Seeb
airbase in Oman, Baghdad International Airport, the U.S. base in
Kandahar, Afghanistan. Iran would also launch its long-range Shahab III
missiles on the Israeli cities of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Beersheba, Eilat,
and the Israeli nuclear complex at Dimona. Iranian missiles would also
be launched at US naval ships in the Persian Gulf and oil installations
in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.
The virtual end of NATO as a viable defense organization may also
result from an attack that will drive a final wedge between Washington
and Europe. And China may elect to respond financially and militarily
against the United States since Iran is China's second largest source
of imported Middle East oil after Saudi Arabia and plans to use an
Iranian terminal for the export of natural gas from Turkmenistan.
[China now imports 60 percent of its oil needs, and Iran represents 17
percent of those imports].
Russia recently participated in, through the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization (SCO), a three-way military exercise (code named "Indira
2005") between Russia, China, and India to prepare for any new U.S.
power projections in Asia, including an attack on Iran, a prospective
SCO member. Last August, Russia and China held their first-ever joint
land-sea-air military exercises.
Iran also held a large military exercise in early December in Bandar
Abbas on the Gulf. An Iranian C-130 carrying Iranian journalists from
Mehrabad airport to Bandar to cover the exercise crashed into a Tehran
apartment building on December 6, killing at least 116 people,
including 68 journalists.
Within the U.S. military and across the globe, there is heightened
tension about the intentions of the neocon Bush administration and its
allies in Israel.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at
www.globalresearch.ca grants permission to cross-post original Global
Research articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on
community internet sites, as long as the text & title are not modified.
The source must be acknowledged and an active URL hyperlink address to
the original CRG article must be indicated. The author's copyright note
must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print
or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to
use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must
request permission from the copyright owner.
To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion at Global
Research's News and Discussion Forum
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Wayne Madsen, WayneMadsenReport.com, 2006
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?
context=viewArticle&code=MAD20060428&articleId=2341
========================================================================
================================================
From: Henri the Celt <henrithecelt@gci.net>
Date: April 26, 2006 2:06:10 PM EST
To: AAAHenri <henrithecelt@gci.net>
Subject: S.O.S!!! SAVE THE INTERNET!!!
Click the "act now" box just below!
250,000 petition signatures for the Markey Amendment
April 26th, 2006 by Matt
250,000 people. In less than a week. Americans like their internet.
The SavetheInternet.com Coalition today announced that in less than a
week it had collected more than 250,000 signatures calling on the House
Energy & Commerce Committee to protect Internet freedom by passing the
“Markey Amendment” today. Groups on the right and left have worked
together, and both sides of the political blogosphere have galvanized
behind this political issue — with nearly 500 blogs linking to
www.SavetheInternet.com within days.Major telecom companies like AT&T
and Verizon are spending millions of dollars to get Congress to change
the rules to let them discriminate on the Internet — forcing Web sites
to pay “protection money” to ensure their sites will work properly.
“Internet freedom is under attack today by telecom companies who are
spending millions lobbying Congress to gut Network Neutrality, the
First Amendment of the Internet,” said Timothy Karr, campaign director
of Free Press. “Net Neutrality ensures that the public can view the
smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by
preventing companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field for only
the highest-paying sites and services.”
“The bill before us permits private taxation of the Internet,” said
Michigan Rep. John Dingell this week.
Citizens Sign on to Co-Sponsor the Markey Amendment
April 26th, 2006 by tkarr
Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California has opened the halls of Congress to you
and me — but we must act today. She’s asked citizens to co-sponsor Rep.
Ed Markey’s net neutrality amendment. All you need do is visit Pelosi’s
site and sign below the “Save the Internet” statement. Here’s a
snippet:
We, the undersigned, oppose the lack of Network Neutrality protections
in the the COPE Act, sponsored by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX). We strongly
urge passage of the Network Neutrality amendment sponsored by Rep. Ed
Markey (D-MA), along with Representatives Rick Boucher (D-VA), Anna
Eshoo (D-CA), and Jay Inslee (D-WA).
Whereas, the free and open nature of the Internet has fostered
unprecedented innovation and economic growth;
Whereas, a fundamental part of the Internet’s nature is the fact that
no one owns it and it is open to all comers;
Whereas, the Barton Bill would block the FCC from restoring meaningful
protections for Internet consumers and entrepreneurs, and from
prohibiting the imposition of bottleneck taxes and other discriminatory
actions on the part of broadband network operators, such as AT&T and
Verizon;
Whereas, the imposition of additional fees for Internet content
providers would unduly burden web-based small businesses, start-ups, as
well as communications for non-commercial users, religious speech,
civic involvement, and exercising our First Amendment freedoms;
Whereas, the Markey amendment will effectively thwart attempts by
broadband behemoths to block, impair, or degrade a consumer’s ability
to access any lawful Internet content, application, or service; will
protect my right to attach any device for use with a broadband
connection,; will ensure that phone and cable companies cannot favor
themselves or affiliated parties to the detriment of other broadband
competitors, innovators, and independent entrepreneurs; and it will
prohibit the broadband Internet providers from charging extra fees and
warping the web in a multi-tiered network of bandwidth haves and
have-nots.
Therefore, I join as a citizen co-sponsor of the Markey Amendment to
save the Internet as we know it.
We couldn’t have said it better ourselves. . . Sign on as soon as you
can.
Markey Amendment Introduced
April 25th, 2006 by Matt
Here’s video of Ed Markey’s pro-net neutrality amendment presented in
Committee (the text of the amendment is here, in PDF format). Markey is
very aggressive about protecting internet freedom. Here’s the first
paragraph from his opening statement:
Tomorrow, I will be offering a “Network Neutrality” amendment,
cosponsored by Mr. Boucher, Ms. Eshoo, and Mr. Inslee, to preserve the
Internet and its open, non-discriminatory nature. Since the
Subcommittee vote, dozens of web blogs have started talking about this
issue. A broad coalition has launched web campaigns, such as
www.savetheinternet.com, and www.dontmesswiththenet.com. These
coalitions are diverse and growing hourly. They include leading
Internet companies such as Ebay, Yahoo, Amazon, as well as
entrepreneurs, small businesses, consumer groups, Common Cause, Gun
Owners of America, the National Religious Broadcasters, moveon.org, the
ACLU, and thousands of concerned citizens. I welcome the support of the
Internet community in our legislative efforts.
The reason for the heightened interest is that tens of millions of
Americans and hundreds of thousands of American businesses use and rely
upon the Internet every day. In addition to its vital economic role,
the Internet is also an unparalleled vehicle for open communications by
non-commercial users, for religious speech, for civic involvement, and
our First Amendment freedoms.
Yet the Internet is at endangered because of the misguided provisions
of the bill before us, which put at grave risk the Internet as an
engine of innovation, job creation, and economic growth. The bill
permits the imposition of new fees, or “broadband bottleneck taxes” for
Internet sites to access high-bandwidth consumers. This will stifle
openness, endanger our global competitiveness, and warp the web into a
tiered Internet of bandwidth haves and have-nots. It is the
introduction of creeping Internet protectionism into the free and open
World Wide Web.
Tomorrow’s network neutrality debate will present members with a
choice. It is a choice between favoring the broadband designs of a
small handful of very large companies or safeguarding the dreams of
thousands of inventors, entrepreneurs, and small businesses. Tomorrow
we will either vote to preserve the Internet as we know it, or instead,
vote to fundamentally and detrimentally alter it.
I’d of course be remiss if I didn’t mention that Alyssa Milano blogged
about the issue today.
The Fight for Internet Freedom Picks Up More Steam
April 25th, 2006 by Matt
We now have over 75 coalition partners, everyone from the Parents
Television Council to the Texas Internet Service Provider’s Association
to Consumer Action, and the blogosphere is on fire. We launched
yesterday, and net neutrality is just blowing up.
Comic book collectors, video gamers, librarians, hip hop sites, music
fans, more video gamers, designers, small business owners, and
nonprofits have heard of the issue and are very angry at the telecom
cartel’s move.
And now the tech companies have chimed in with Don’t Mess with the Net.
8 Comments »
Net Neutrality Issue Exploding
April 25th, 2006 by Matt
The public is waking up and taking this issue seriously. I’m reading
posts at Firewheeldesign to Manatheater to Josh Marshall to James
Hudnall to Ralph Maughan’s Wildlife Reports. And it’s making a
difference on Capitol Hill, according to National Journal.
The triple whammy of renewed opposition to the current bill is likely
to complicate the drive by House Energy and Commerce Committee Joe
Barton, R-Texas, to win approval. His legislation is highly favored by
Bell telephone companies seeking to quickly enter the pay-television
market on a nationwide basis. It is scheduled for a Wednesday committee
vote.
Americans like their internet freedom. Congress is finding that out.
McCurry and the Telco Spinmeisters
April 24th, 2006 by MarkCooper
The hiring of former Clinton Administration spinmeister Mike McCurry by
a front-group funded by the Baby Bells is a text book example of telco
manipulation of public opinion. McCurry effort to help companies like
AT&T and Verizon put toll booths on the Internet underscores the inside
the beltway, best-that-money-can-buy PR campaign they have embarked on
to convince policymakers and the public that telephone companies should
dictate which data flows over the Internet to the consumer.
McCurry is dishonestly spinning this brazen telco grab at Net control
as a “Hands off the Internet” campaign.
The history of the Internet is clear and it contradicts this claim. The
basic approach to the Internet requiring the unimpeded flow of data was
dictated and funded by the Department of Defense in the 1960s to create
an open communications system, a policy enforced by the National
Academy of Science when it took over. The telephone companies, over
whose lines the data flowed, were not allowed to engage in any sort of
discrimination or manipulation of access to the Internet because it was
the policy of the Communications Act, as implemented by the Federal
Communications Commission in the Computer Inquiries (first launched in
1968) to keep the network neutral.
The cable and telephone companies want to abandon this fundamental
principle for their high-speed Internet, broadband networks. They want
to be allowed to discriminate against service providers and to charge
the consumer for access to the network and the content, service, and
applications providers for access to the consumer. They want to make
exclusive deals with some services for a fast lane, while others are
kept off that network. If they are allowed to discriminate they will
charge lower rates or give priority in routing or speed to their own
services or their allies, while they punish their competitors.
McCurry’s will join a stable of lobbyists and front groups dedicated to
obfuscating this history and turning the facts on their head. In fact,
this is the second time around for “Hands off The Internet.” In the
late 1990s it was a front group located in a law firms with close ties
to AT&T (then a cable company) and its General Council, Jim Ciccone, a
Department of Justice official in the first Bush administration and the
Executive Director the Bush Presidential library.
The cable operators managed to avoid the obligation of operating a
neutral network in the late 1990s and the U.S. has been slipping in the
race for broadband Internet adoption ever since. Cable operators charge
between five and ten times as much for broadband access megabit basis
as consumers are charged in the leading broadband countries like Japan
and Korea in Asia, and most of the advanced European nations. The
telephone companies charge even more. Because this “cozy duopoly” has
been deregulated by the FCC, not Congress, there is no pressure to
lower prices.
Worse still, with the network operators acting as gatekeepers for the
first time in the history of the Internet, innovators will be driven
away from the Internet space. In short, they want to turn the Internet
into a version of cable service, where the network operator, not the
consumer, decides what services succeed. They will have a strong
incentive to stifle competition and control innovation. The vibrant,
Internet economy will be strangled.
That is why Congress should act to ensure the public has
nondiscriminatory access to the communications network. This is a
principle that has applied to every transportation and communications
network ever deployed in America – roads, canals, steamships,
railroads, telegraph, telephone, and airports. In the information age,
it is more important than ever.
Mark Cooper
Director of Research
Consumer Federation of America
markcooper@aol.com
(301) 384-2204
Gun owners, librarians unite against Bells…
April 24th, 2006 by Matt
From Telephony online:
A diverse and perhaps unlikely group of political activists and
associations assembled today to voice opposition to a U.S. House bill
that it says would impede InterNet innovation by undermining network
neutrality.The “SavetheInterNet.com Coalition” includes InterNet
pioneer and Google executive Vint Cerf, Gun Owners of America,
political action group Moveon.org, Craigslist founder Craig Newmark,
Consumer Federation of America, American Library Association and
others.
The group pointed to its own diversity–uniting such disparate interests
as Gun Owners of America and Afro-Netizen.com, an online African
American community group–as evidence of the righteousness of its cause
as well as the range of stakeholders in Net neutrality.
“Whenever you see people on the far left and the far right getting
together [to oppose the same bill],” said Craig Fields, director of
InterNet operations for conservative gun advocacy group Gun Owners of
America, it’s a good indication that, “what Congress is getting ready
to do is un-American.”
“If the major telecoms think they can taint or characterize opposition
to what is a power grab on their part as liberal or an anti-free market
approach, they’re mistaken,” he said.
Gun Owners of America on Internet Freedom
April 24th, 2006 by Matt
Larry Pratt wrote this letter to Congress:
Dear Representative,
As Congress considers major legislation affecting the nation’s
telecommunications structure, particular attention must be paid towards
maintaining the Internet as a medium accessible to all, so that the
free market might continue to determine which goods, services and ideas
prosper.
For many years, those few companies whose hardware comprises the
“skeleton” of the Internet have had to operate under the concept of
Network Neutrality. That is, when selling their services, they had to
treat all customers the same… all purchasers of a particular amount of
bandwidth paid the same and were given the same level of service.
The result has been a vibrant and competitive marketplace, full of
innovation and a definite positive force in our nation’s economy.
Moreover, unfettered access to the Internet has given rise to an
explosion in grassroots activism all across the political spectrum.
Every blogger is a potential Patrick Henry, and every grassroots
association has the means to disseminate its point of view.
It would be a shame if a handful of major telecoms were free to pick
and choose which individuals and associations were the recipients of
quality service – and which were left out in the cold. Without even
ascribing a political motive to their actions, greed alone will skew
the Internet marketplace if companies can deny superior quality of
service to those who choose to use the products of competitors.
In the case of grassroots outside groups like GOA, equal access to the
hardware, software, and bandwidth that comprise the Internet is
essential to a free marketplace of ideas. Indeed, that is what we have
had all along, and the result has been every bit as significant as the
development of the printing press.
That marketplace has thrived even though we are essentially dealing
with a government-supported oligopoly here. As long as government is
setting the ground rules, those rules must include forced neutrality in
order to ensure that the market will determine which goods and services
prosper. It is not enough that the FCC be empowered to set “policies”
as such policies would be subject to the whims of future
administrations. Rather, the concept of Network Neutrality must be
codified as black-letter law.
GOA urges you to insist upon Network Neutrality when revamping the
nation’s telecommunications infrastructure.
Sincerely,
Larry Pratt
Executive Director
Bloggers Hail Coalition Call for Net Freedom
April 22nd, 2006 by tkarr
The blogoshere has lit up with news of the launch of the
SavetheInternet.com Coalition. Here’s a sampling of the more than 135
postings that mention or link to the campaign:
Nero’s Fiddle:
When you can get Glenn Reynolds and MoveOn.org to unite in common
cause, you figure it’s got to be a slam-dunk issue. And this one is.
With almost no noise in the media, the government is mulling ceding
control of the Internet to the major ISPs, allowing them to selectively
throttle bandwidth or block sites and services as they see fit.
David Weinberger at Joho the Blog:
Remember when democracy had something to do with all people being
equal? With ensuring that our institutions don’t get too powerful? Net
neutrality has made the Internet a great equalizer, not just for
Americans but for voices around the world.
Boztopia:
I hope you take the time to read through this and contact the people
who represent you. It doesn’t matter what your politics are, what you
use the Web for, or what you think about regulation. This is about
ensuring the Web continues to remain free . . .
BlueMeme
The owners of the pipes make it sound as if supply is tight, and price
discrimination is the answer. But (a) there is still plenty of unused
bandwidth out there (which is why prices are falling) and (b) the very
idea of price discrimination in an environment where both buyers
(that’s us) and sellers are both paying to hook up to the Web is, well
insane.
Kiersten Marek at Kmareka.com:
This is a cause that we little websites need to be on board with: net
neutrality. Without it, the big-money players on the internet could
easily squeeze out access to little websites like this one.
Clif Taylor at Cuddlefish:
Without net neutrality, decisions now made collectively by millions of
users will be made in corporate boardrooms. The choice we face now is
whether people can choose the content and services they want, or
whether the broadband barons will choose for them.
Jeff Jarvis at BuzzMachine:
The age of business models built on scarcity and on keeping your
customers from doing what they want to do is over.
Bobby Foley:
“This is a call for support from Internet users of every demographic.
This will affect everyone, and right now the issue is a quiet one being
discussed in Washington . . .
I Hate Peas:
This is a huge issue, and without public outcry, I am truly worried
that Congress will give in to big business over the public good. . .
Find the members of the Save The Internet coalition here. There’s some
folks I really respect on it, and some folks I generally have no use
for, but hey, this is something we can all agree on. . .
The Internet Has Lots of Friends
April 22nd, 2006 by Matt
Earlier today I set up a page on MySpace for Save the Internet. There
are now 400 friends on the MySpace profile, including the well-regarded
IPTV broadcast Ask A Ninja. The Internet is very well-liked.
In related news, Alex Curtis’s video on net neutrality has been seen
over 8000 times.
I’ve never seen a pickup like this on a cause, and we haven’t even
officially announced. Congress is assuming that people don’t really
care about telecom regulations. This is not true, we very much do care
about the internet.
I hadn’t thought of it this way, but already this campaign is showing
how the telcos vision of a gated community is far inferior in quality,
creativity, and speed of a free and open internet. For instance, no one
told Alex to make the video; we didn’t collaborate on it, and he didn’t
run it by anyone over here to see if it was good. He just made it, put
it on YouTube, blogged it on the Public Knowledge site, and other
people liked it and blogged it. No one forced anyone to watch the
video, or send it to friends. It wasn’t astroturfed with millions of
dollars of telecom money.
A free and open internet is just something people care about, precisely
because it allows them to choose their own path, watch what they want,
and learn what they want.
========================================================================
================================================================
From: s culver <sc@lmi.net>
Date: April 27, 2006 12:00:20 AM EST
Subject: fwd: House Ignores Public, Sells Out the Internet
[to call congress: switchboard toll-free 888 355-3588 ]
"...we expected that loss. What we did not expected was the narrow
margin.
By way of comparison, the subcommittee vote was 23-8, which means we
should
have gotten blown out of the water. We did not. All four targeted Dems
by
McJoan on Daily Kos flipped to our side, and many of the Congressmen
both
for and against this campaign mentioned the blogs and angry
constituents...." http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/
--------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:30:09 -0600
From: "GlobalCirclenet" <webmaster@globalcircle.net>
Subject: House Ignores Public, Sells Out the Internet
Wednesday, April 26, 2006, SavetheInternet.com Coalition
Growing
Right-Left Coalition Gains Momentum,
Looks to Senate to Save
Internet Freedom from Telecom Cartel
WASHINGTON -- Today the House Energy and Commerce
Committee struck a blow to Internet freedom by voting
down a proposal to protect Network Neutrality from
attacks by companies like AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast.
The diverse, bipartisan SavetheInternet.com Coalition
vowed to continue rallying public support for Internet
freedom as the legislation moves to the full House and
Senate. In less than one week, the coalition gathered
more than 250,000 petition signatures, rallied more
than 500 blogs to write about this issue, and flooded
Congress with thousands of phone calls.
The "Markey Amendment" supporting Net Neutrality was
voted down by a vote of 34 to 22. The "Communications
Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act" telecom
law, or COPE Act, passed out of the committee without
any meaningful protection for Net Neutrality. Net
Neutrality means all online activity must be treated
equally, and companies like AT&T must allow Internet
users to view the smallest blog just as easily as the
largest corporate Web site.
"The Commerce Committee is headed in the
opposite direction of where the American public wants
to go," said Columbia Law Professor Timothy Wu, a pro-
market advocate and one of the intellectual architects
of the Net Neutrality principle."Most people favor an
open and neutral Internet and don't want Internet
gatekeepers taxing and tollboothing innovation."
Major telecom companies like AT&T and Verizon are
spending hundreds of millions of dollars to get
Congress to change the rules to let them discriminate
on the Internet -- forcing Web sites to pay "protection
money" to ensure their sites will work properly.
"Predictably, the careerist politicians on the House
Energy and Commerce Committee rolled right over in
their frantic desire to do the telecoms' bidding," said
Craig Fields, director of Internet operations for Gun
Owners of America. "It makes no difference to them
whether the Internet will remain a free and vibrant
marketplace of ideas. As far as they are concerned, if
big business is happy, all is right with America. And
so we look with hope to the Senate, that supposedly
august body, which prides itself on its more
'deliberative' pace and tone. They paint themselves as
conscientious adults -- perhaps, just perhaps, they'll
actually act like such when it is their turn to decide
the future of the Internet."
Groups on the right and left have banded together, and
hundreds of bloggers from across the political spectrum
have galvanized behind this cause, with more than 500
blogs pointing their readers to SavetheInternet.com.
"It's shocking that the House continues to deny
the will of the people on an issue that affects
everyone so directly -- protecting the free and open
Internet," said Eli Pariser, Executive Director of
MoveOn.org Civic Action. "Our bipartisan coalition will
rally the online community like it's never been
rallied before, and together the public will overturn
today's enormous blow to the freedom principle
that's made the Internet great."
"Commerce and free expression on the Internet have
flourished because it's available to everyone on the
same basis," said Glenn Reynolds, of libertarian blog
Instapundit.com. "That's how it should continue to be."
The SavetheInternet.com coalition includes: Gun Owners
of America, MoveOn.org Civic Action, Craig Newmark of
Craigslist, Glenn Reynolds (a.k.a. libertarian blogger
Instapundit), Parents Television Council, United Church
of Christ, the American Library Association, the
Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, Common
Cause, Public Knowledge, and other major public
interest groups. The coalition is spearheaded by Free
Press, a national, nonpartisan group focused on media
reform and Internet policy issues. The rapidly
expanding list of groups supporting Internet freedom is
available at www.SavetheInternet.com.
"The diversity of this coalition underscores the
importance of this issue," said Vint Cerf, one of the
fathers of the Internet and Google's Chief Internet
Evangelist. "When the Internet started, you didn't have
to get permission to start companies. You just got on
the Net and started your idea."
The COPE Act next moves from the committee to a full
House vote. The Senate Commerce Committee is expected
to take up Net Neutrality legislation in the coming
weeks.
"The House vote today ignores a groundswell of popular
support for Internet freedom," said Ben Scott, policy
director of Free Press. "We hope that the full House
will resist the big telecom companies and reject the
bill. But we look to the Senate to restore meaningful
protections for net neutrality and ensure that the
Internet remains open to unlimited economic innovation,
civic involvement and free speech."
For more information, visit http://www.savetheinternet.com/
========================================================================
=================================================================
From: "CLG News" <clg_news@legitgov.org>
Date: April 28, 2006 12:30:28 AM EST
To: "CLG News" <clg_news@legitgov.org>
Subject: Internet shut-down in two to four days during flu pandemic:
Booz Allen
News Updates from Citizens for Legitimate Government
28 April 2006
http://www.legitgov.org/
http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news
Internet shut-down in two to four days during flu pandemic: Booz Allen
Telephone and Internet services could be overwhelmed and shut down in
the early stages of a bird flu pandemic, according to a report released
on Thursday. Businesses need to think of other ways to keep going as
governments close schools and direct people to stay home, management
consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton reported... "Telecommunications
(phone and Internet) will likely be overwhelmed early in a pandemic,
with experts predicting shut-downs in two to four days, meaning that
telecommuting will not be viable and alternative communications need to
be explored," the report read. "Governments will likely direct the
general population to stay in their homes, and minimize social
contact," it added. ['Overwhelmed?' No. The Bush bioterror team is
going to *shut it down.*]
Why is Booz Allen Hamilton sending a speaker to a Bird Flu Summit?
New-Fields 2nd Bird Flu Summit Washington, DC, June 28-29, 2006. By
Lori Price "The purpose of the summit is to prepare the US and the
world to fight [profit from] this potentially infectious disease."
Confirmed speakers: Douglas E. Himberger, vice president and member of
the board of directors at Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., USA; Michael S.
Cochran, Engelhard Company, USA. [Source: e-mail obtained by Citizens
For Legitimate Government, 24 Apr 2006. See also: New Fields to Assist
Companies in Networking for Iraq Opportunities Washington, DC, June 08,
2005. See: Wargaming and Strategic Simulation "Recognized worldwide as
a leader in wargaming and strategic competitive simulations, Booz Allen
Hamilton has created and facilitated wargames for the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, military services, and numerous other government
organizations."]
Bird flu one of many pandemic threats 27 Apr 2006 Birds are not the
only source of viruses that could become the next flu pandemic, say two
Australian virus experts, who argue the 1918 Spanish flu virus came
from mammals, not birds, as recently suggested... In October 2005, a
team led by Dr Jeffrey Taubenberger of the Armed Forces Institute of
Pathology in the US, reported in Nature that the Spanish flu virus,
which killed millions around the world in 1918-1919, was a bird virus
that leapt the species barrier into humans.
http://www.legitgov.org/flu_oddities.html
Address to receive newsletter: http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg
Please write to: signup@legitgov.org for inquiries. lrp/mdr
CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, General Manager. Copyright © 2006,
Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved. CLG Founder
and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.
========================================================================
=================================================================
From: Henri the Celt <henrithecelt@gci.net>
Date: April 28, 2006 4:05:01 AM EST
To: AAAHenri <henrithecelt@gci.net>
Subject: Comment: Oh, Wow! This is a MUST READ!!!
Comment: Oh, Wow! This is a MUST READ!!! Don't miss the video at the
bottom. It will load automatically. Takes about 12 minutes with
dial-up, well worth it!
The Dog Should Have Barked
By Ralph Olmholt (757 pilot retired)
The 9-11 Pentagon silence is thunderous! Witnesses provide identities
of persons and a timeline for the physical evidence of an event - yet
the physical evidence just doesn’t support more than a very few of the
witness claims to the Pentagon event. Too many witness accounts are
severely lacking in physical evidence. Viable corroboration among the
different witness reports is conspicuously absent. No one seems to
notice. For all that was seen, the reports too prominently lack what
should have been heard.
As with all of 9-11, the Pentagon account loudly speaks to a cover-up;
what more can be said for the truth that only God knows. What is
missing speaks more loudly, than that which is present. See the video
demonstration at the bottom of this page of a 757 landing to see why
the sound missing from witness reports is significant. Turn up your
volume and imagine not remembering that. This aircraft is at about 1/3
of the power level and speed of the alleged Pentagon aircraft. Watch it
turn and the end of the runway to get a sense of the size and then
imagine it vanishing two seconds later with no trace.
The pre-collapse photos of the Pentagon are clearly missing any obvious
suggestion of forward-moving damage. That can’t be true if any aircraft
was involved. The ‘official’ fireball and ‘757’ security video taken
from the Pentagon guard shack appears to be a fraud. This is evidenced
by the displaced time-date stamp (a day and a half late) and the fact
that the Pentagon lawn was unburned in later photos of that same lawn.
The grassy area in front of the collapsed section should have been
browned, at a minimum; if not blackened and pitted from the intense
explosion allegedly shown in the video frames. One witness passionately
claimed that he ducked the wing of Flight 77; a few yards from the
Pentagon – disregarding the effect the ‘official’ fireball would have
had on him. He also forgot important details that no one could ever
forget – the sound of the roaring engines and the force, heat and
distinct smell of jet exhaust.
A major weakness in the 757 argument is that the purported aircraft
would have encountered a cushion of air known as “Ground Effect", which
would physically cause an aircraft that size at that speed to remain
above 50 feet, minimum, unless the nose was lowered to such an extreme
as to plow a ditch in the grass leading up to the photographed external
damage. The objects in this area were also undamaged, such as the
electrical cable spools.
Another impossibility comes in the claims of the “struck” light poles.
At a minimum, they would have been violently hurled by the velocity of
an aircraft doing 345 mph, with very prominent associated damage to the
lawn and surrounding objects like vehicles. Instead, they are found
within feet of their original mountings. One pole self-stacked its two
pieces, one upon the other. Still another toppled in the opposite
direction of the purported flight path – falling away from the
Pentagon. Yet another photographically documented light pole ‘gently’
landed in the windshield of a taxi cab, only damaging the glass
windshield but not the hood or the window frame. The driver’s face
wasn’t even cut by flying glass. The closure rate of the cab and light
pole should have been in the magnitude of at least 150 mph. Clearly,
the physical damage in the photos doesn’t even remotely suggest such an
event.
Another witness reported the stench of kerosene, from the aircraft jet
fuel – which actually would have smelled like diesel. What of the
factual evidence? Where are the highly obvious expected descriptions
and statements?
The factual 9-11 Pentagon damage is historic – up to a point. The
reported seismic data says that nothing happened; not in the vicinity
of the official event time of 9:38. Two stopped Pentagon clocks point
to approximately 9:31, as do a variety of other reports and quotes. The
dog didn’t bark on cue. Seismic monitors are sensitive enough to pick
up a sonic boom; yet they didn’t detect anything representing an
aircraft impact at the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11? That’s just not
possible. The chance of discovering the factual 9:31 seismic data today
is highly unlikely. By now it is in the vault of “National Security” at
a minimum.
When you examine the fire rescue reports, the official timing of the
fire trucks is approximately 3- 5 minutes. That timing is too
suspicious to be taken seriously. To think that the Reagan
International Airport fire vehicles could reach the Pentagon in 5
minutes lacks any measure of credibility. Especially in the heavy
morning traffic that was brought to a standstill from the events
occurring at the Pentagon. However, if the factual time of the 9-11
Pentagon event is 9:31; then the arrival times of the responding fire
rescue vehicles becomes radically more realistic.
According to Lee Evey, Manager for the Pentagon Renovation Project:
“All of those materials working together helps reduce damage to the
building and to its occupants. And in fact the building stood for
approximately 35 minutes after impact by the aircraft before collapse
occurred. As a result, that 35 minutes, critical minutes, allowed
people within the building an opportunity to escape. Had we not had
that additional 35 minutes, the total of injury might have been much
higher than it was.”
That statement is typical of the elapsed time descriptions during the
days directly after 9/11, but in stark contrast to the later published
official time of 19 minutes between the impact and the building
collapse. Indicative of a cover-up?
The pictures taken of the heliport building show shrapnel damage. The
burned remains of a nearby construction trailer were photographed where
they fell in front of the Pentagon wall. They were not driven up
against the building by any forward-moving force, let alone an aircraft
traveling at 345 mph. The trailer damage suggests the possibility of
explosives placed inside. When you add the lateral damage down the face
of the building and the unexplained fires in front of the pre-collapse
building it gets more difficult to explain in terms of a 757.
A dramatic picture of the 9-11 Pentagon shows a jetting flame from an
underground utility bunker, presumably a broken gas main. BUT – how do
you explain the underground line being broken, let alone ignited since
even the grass was not scorched or damaged?
The damage to the pre-collapse face of the building has intact
obstructions, rendering an aircraft strike at ground level impossible –
even if you disregard “Ground Effect”. Yet, that is where the primary
damage is located – right at ground level. The orientation of the
construction yard generator unit as shown in photos taken directly
after the event is wrong for the damage claimed. Even the location of
the generator’s fire on 9-11 is in the wrong location relative to an
aircraft strike.
Supposedly, a fiberglass aerodynamic fairing and a fragile control
actuating mechanism gouged a perfectly ‘saw-cut’ channel in the roof of
the generator. Relative to the photographed position of the generator
on 9-11 , the cut was nearly 90 degrees away from the claimed direction
of aircraft travel. If such damage had taken place the aircraft would
have been rotated further to the right – making the official impact
point impossible. Again, the wing couldn’t have been that low –
approximately 12 – 15 feet. Further, the official report has the
aircraft in a left bank, making the generator strike that much more
unlikely. There was also no debris left behind from the aircraft after
these alleged high-speed collisions with very large, heavy objects.
Except for Rumsfeld’s statement in an interview with Parade Magazine
indicating a “missile” hit the Pentagon on 9-11, the physical evidence
otherwise attests to explosives and thermal devices. Then add the
mysterious fire-rescue response. The Pentagon fire was knocked down in
seven minutes; yet the Pentagon continued to burn through the night,
with impunity. No one said a word.
The Pentagon interior images of the un-collapsed portion of the
building show a completely blackened interior with destroyed reinforced
concrete pillars approximately two feet square. The exposed mid-span
rebar doesn’t show impact damage, yet the concrete is destroyed to the
spiral rebar core evidenced by the compressed vertical bending of so
many columns. Lacking any suggestion of an impact, that damage attests
exclusively to an intense and unexplained heat. Seven to ten minutes
isn’t enough for any kind of conventional aircraft fuel to do such
damage. The 9-11 WTC damage is eerily similar. The intact Pentagon
ceilings attest to the heat being short-lived and very localized.
The Pentagon exit hole in the A&E drive is almost perfectly round and
lacks any physical evidence of an object being pushed out through it.
Any experienced military person would take one look at the exit hole
with one word in mind, “det-cord” (“detonation chord;” essentially an
exploding rope). The images of the supposed aircraft debris lack mass,
compression damage or appropriate sooting and burning. They do however
appear to be ‘weathered’ as though taken from an aircraft bone-yard and
conveniently placed for a photo shoot. Students of corrupt political
history are reminded of a similar plan in 1962 called “Operation
Northwoods”. In that plan they elaborate on the planting of aircraft
parts to cover the scene that was actually caused by "radio triggered"
detonations. They also discuss the use of "plastic bombs in carefully
chosen spots".
With an instant lust for 9-11 propaganda images against al Qaeda, the
various videotapes of the Pentagon events were grabbed by FBI agents
and sealed to this day under the disguise of “National Security”. What
is on those tapes that they don't want us to see?
The pre-collapse photographs display undeniable violent damage to the
Pentagon right at the level of the construction trailers. One other
fact to be aware of is that there were no construction personnel on the
location during normal work hours. There is no viable remnants of the
purported 757 or any other type of aircraft. Thus, the damage could
only have been caused by explosives and thermal devices consistently in
evidence at the Pentagon on 9-11. In any case, the evidence all points
far away from the official story of a hijacked Flight 77 striking the
Pentagon.
The ‘offset’ official forensic graphics cleverly mask the geometry of
the purported 757 impact. We’re to believe that the 757 wings “folded”
on impact. Remember, from the photos, that the primary damage to the
Pentagon face is at ground level – impossible, by a 757 – especially in
light of the obstructions; but there it is.
The exterior building damage is sideward, not inward. The widest
possible “impact hole” to the Pentagon is on the order of 15 feet wide.
If one buys into the “folding wing” 757 angle, then there is no path,
nor “reach,” for the aircraft fuselage - or wing - to destroy the
support columns of the collapsed portion. The purported impact area
didn’t collapse - but the non-impacted area DID collapse? Ten minutes
of fire isn’t enough ‘ordinary’ thermal impact - including jet fuel
(not in evidence) - to do such damage. Exterior or interior, there is
no viable suggestion of forward-moving impact damage. 200 Knots, or 500
Knots; the damage just isn’t there.
Disregarding the needed (and impossible) flight path, no measure of
damage accounts for the BASIC diameter of a 757 fuselage – alone – not
to mention wing, engine and tail damage. The widest damage simply
doesn’t allow for a Boeing 757.
In the necessary forensic sequence of events, if one can’t put a 757
through the front of the building – how did those interior aircraft
pieces arrive for the photo shoot? How did the building damage
factually occur? The question is the same at the WTC AND Pennsylvania.
For more information go to Ralph's 9-11 and the Impossible WEBSITE.
Click stop then play to see again
This great video and many more can be found at Flight Level 350.com.
========================================================================
=================================================================
From: "dahbud_mensch" <dahbud_mensch@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:09 am
Subject: People Turn To ExxposeExxon.com As Anger Toward Exxon Grows
People Turn To
ExxposeExxon.com As Anger Toward Exxon Grows
As ExxonMobil Profits,
National Campaign Against Exxon Gains Popularity
For Immediate Release: April 26, 2006
Contact: Shawnee Hoover, 202-546-9707, shoover@exxposeexxon.com
(Washington, DC) With oil giant ExxonMobil poised to announce another
quarter of record profits, thousands of people are turning to the
Exxpose Exxon campaign each day to educate themselves about
ExxonMobil's egregious environmental record and ways to make a
difference.
"The American public is increasingly fed-up with ExxonMobil's profits
and arrogance," says Shawnee Hoover, Campaign Director for Exxpose
Exxon, a national coalition of the nation's leading environmental and
public interest organizations. "Consumers are angry about high gas
prices and high CEO pay-outs, but they get even angrier when they
learn about Exxon's agenda to keep us addicted to oil and rob us of a
sustainable future."
The coalition reports that its website, ExxposeExxon.com, has seen a
300 percent jump in visitors per week on average since ExxonMobil
announced record-breaking 2005 profits of $36.1 billion.
Exxpose Exxon's call for a consumer boycott of Exxon and Mobil gas
stations have been echoed by several other groups in recent weeks,
including the passage of a resolution to boycott ExxonMobil in
Southern Texas.
ExxonMobil is the only major oil company to spend $15 million on
funding global warming skeptics, lobby against national reductions of
global warming pollution, refuse meaningful investment of its record
profits in renewable energies, and vocally oppose U.S. efforts to
become energy independent.
"We have the technologies to transition our economy off oil and help
bring down consumer energy costs," says Tim Greeff of the Natural
Resources Defense Council. "ExxonMobil should invest in these
renewable technologies or at least stop standing in the way of
progress toward energy independence."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exxpose Exxon coalition is made up of some of the nation's largest
environmental and public interest advocacy groups including Defenders
of Wildlife, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, MoveOn.org, Natural
Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, U.S. Public Interest Research
Group, Union of Concerned Scientists and more.
For more information, please visit:
http://www.ExxposeExxon.com/
========================================================================
================================================
From: Peter Myers <myers@cyberone.com.au>
Date: April 28, 2006 3:58:00 AM EST
To: clem clarke <oscarptyltd@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Iran says it's 'ridiculous' that Israel is vice-chair of UN
Disarmament Commission
The organiser of the petition about Mordecai Vanunu assumes that Noam
Chomsky
would be keen to sign it.
But a Search of Chomsky's website http://www.chomsky.info/ fails to
find any
mention of Vanunu, as of April 28, 2006:
Noam Chomsky invited to sign Vanunu
petition
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:30:40 +0500 From: "Eric Walberg"
<eric@albatros.uz>
from Gideon Spiro <spiro@bezeqint.net>
Dear Friends,
This is the statement which we are putting into the Israeli newspaper
Haaretz
for Sunday 30th April. Noam Chomsky, Nobel Laureate Adolfo Perez
esquivel and
well known names in Israel/Palestine and world community will be
invited to
sign. If you know of such well known names willing to sign please send
them
immediately to. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO USE THIS PETITION IN ANY WAY YOU
CAN.
WEBSITE, NEWSPAPERS, SENT TO GOVERNMENT REP., UN, ALL INTERNATIONAL
BODIES AND
FAITH COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOU ARE DOING FOR ME.
Gideon Spiro at his email above. vmjc.
Subject: The petition
To the Government of Israel -
Stop mistreating Mordechai Vanunu!
Lift the restrictions imposed on him!
In the past week the Government of Israel has extended for the third
year the
restrictions it imposed on Mordechai Vanunu when he was released from
prison. He
is forbidden to leave Israel; may not move freely inside Israel; is
forbidden to
speak to foreign nationals, 'for fear of causing damage to the security
of the
State'.
Mordechai Vanunu served the sentence that was imposed on him - 18 years
in
prison, of which he spent 11 and a half years in complete isolation. He
came out
of prison wholly committed to the idea of a world without weapons of
mass
destruction - the same idea he upheld when he was imprisoned. He remains
convinced of the rightness of this cause.
The element of vengence by the Israeli Government is plain to see.
No-one in
their senses believes that Vanunu represents a threat to the security
of Israel.
He told everything he knew to the Sunday Times in 1986. All the experts
in
Israel and abroad - except those who speak for the secret services -
agree that
after 20 years away from the Dimona reactor Vanunu has not a shred of
information that could endanger the security of the State.
The restrictions imposed on Mordechai Vanunu violate the basic rights of
citizens in a democratic country - the freedom of _expression and of
movement.
These restrictions also conflict with the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights,
and the Convention on Political and Civil Rights.
Mr Prime Minister, the Chiefs of the Security Services of Israel -
Let Mordechai Vanunu leave, to live wherever he chooses. He would like
to have a
family of his own and to exist as a free man, without Big Brother
dominating his
existence.
Let Mordechai Vanunu go free.
(On May lst the court hearing will take place in Jerusalem.)
--
Peter Myers, 381 Goodwood Rd, Childers 4660, Australia ph +61 7 41262296
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers Mirror:
http://mailstar.net/index.html I
use the old Mac OS; being incompatible, it cannot run Windows viruses or
transmit them to you. If my mail does not arrive, or yours bounces,
please ring
me: this helps beat sabotage. To unsubscribe, reply with "unsubscribe"
in the
subject line; allow 1 day.
========================================================================
================================================================
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 9
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:32am(PDT)
Subject: Internet shut-down in two to four days during flu pandemic: Booz All
----- Original Message -----
From: Lori R Price
To: US_bioterror_events
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 12:31 AM
Subject: [Recall_Bush] Internet shut-down in two to four days during flu pandemic: Booz Allen
News Updates from Citizens for Legitimate Government
28 April 2006
http://www.legitgov.org/
http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news
Internet shut-down in two to four days during flu pandemic: Booz Allen Telephone and Internet services could be overwhelmed and shut down in the early stages of a bird flu pandemic, according to a report released on Thursday. Businesses need to think of other ways to keep going as governments close schools and direct people to stay home, management consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton reported... "Telecommunications (phone and Internet) will likely be overwhelmed early in a pandemic, with experts predicting shut-downs in two to four days, meaning that telecommuting will not be viable and alternative communications need to be explored," the report read. "Governments will likely direct the general population to stay in their homes, and minimize social contact," it added. ['Overwhelmed?' No. The Bush bioterror team is going to *shut it down.*]
Why is Booz Allen Hamilton sending a speaker to a Bird Flu Summit? New-Fields 2nd Bird Flu Summit Washington, DC, June 28-29, 2006. By Lori Price "The purpose of the summit is to prepare the US and the world to fight [profit from] this potentially infectious disease." Confirmed speakers: Douglas E. Himberger, vice president and member of the board of directors at Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., USA; Michael S. Cochran, Engelhard Company, USA. [Source: e-mail obtained by Citizens For Legitimate Government, 24 Apr 2006. See also: New Fields to Assist Companies in Networking for Iraq Opportunities Washington, DC, June 08, 2005. See: Wargaming and Strategic Simulation "Recognized worldwide as a leader in wargaming and strategic competitive simulations, Booz Allen Hamilton has created and facilitated wargames for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, military services, and numerous other government organizations."]
Bird flu one of many pandemic threats 27 Apr 2006 Birds are not the only source of viruses that could become the next flu pandemic, say two Australian virus experts, who argue the 1918 Spanish flu virus came from mammals, not birds, as recently suggested... In October 2005, a team led by Dr Jeffrey Taubenberger of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in the US, reported in Nature that the Spanish flu virus, which killed millions around the world in 1918-1919, was a bird virus that leapt the species barrier into humans.
http://www.legitgov.org/flu_oddities.html
Address to receive newsletter: http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg
Please write to: signup@legitgov.org for inquiries. lrp/mdr
CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, General Manager. Copyright © 2006, Citizens For Legitimate Government ® All rights reserved. CLG Founder and Chair is Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D.
SPONSORED LINKS Bush administration George w bush Bush lied
George bush War crimes Gulf war syndrome
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
a.. Visit your group "Recall_Bush" on the web.
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Recall_Bush-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.0/325 - Release Date: 4/26/2006
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 10
From: "DOUGLAS CLARK" bushsept11mastermind@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:11am(PDT)
Subject: EMERGENCY POST!! DEAD OR ALIVE...WHERE'S DICK CHENEY?!
HEY GROUP:
THAT HEADLINE IS NO JOKE!! I USED IT BEFORE, AND THE KGB GOT SO MAD AT ME, THAT THEY SENT ONE OF THEIR FEMALE AGENTS OVER TO THE LIBRARY TO GET ME THROWN OFF OF THE COMPUTER.
FOR AS MESSED UP AS DICK CHENEY IS, ESPECIALLY FOR HIS FOOLISHLY AGREEING TO HIDE THE SECRET OF BUSH'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE 9/11 ATTACKS; HE'S THE ONLY REASON THIS COUNTRY HASN'T BEEN TAKEN OVER BY RUSSIA'S VLADIMER PUTIN.
I HAVE A REAL BAD FEELING FOR THIS WEEKEND, AND WANT IT MADE CLEAR, THAT IF "SOMETHING BAD" IS ANNOUNCED ABOUT DICK CHENEY, BUSH AND HIS KGB STAFFERS WERE BEHIND IT.
EVERYONE KEEPS SAYING HOW THERE HASN'T BEEN ANOTHER 9/11 STYLE ATTACK SINCE...AND GIVE ALL THE CREDIT TO BUSH. WELL THINK ABOUT THIS: EVER SINCE 9/11, YOU AIN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT CHENEY'S MEDICAL CONDITIONS EITHER. NO MENTION OF HEART PROBLEMS, OR ANYTHING ELSE FOR THAT MATTER. IT WOULD PLAY RIGHT INTO THE KGB'S HANDS IF HE WAS TO DO THAT, SINCE 9/11 WAS THEIR ATTEMPT TO GET HIM OUT OF THE WAY.
EVER SINCE THEY ANNOUNCED THAT TONY SNOW WAS REPLACING SCOTT McCLELAND, I HAVEN'T SEEN OR EVEN HEARD A PEEP FROM OR ABOUT DICK CHENEY. THAT WORRIES ME, SINCE TONY SNOW IS A KGB INSIDER, WHO WAS DADDY BUSH'S SPEECH WRITER. AND WAS THE ONE WHO "SLIPPED IN" THAT LITTLE MISINFORMATION ABOUT D-DAY BEING ON DECEMBER 7th, INSTEAD OF DECEMBER 6th. HAD A "WWII HERO" LOOKING GOOFY DURING THAT SPEECH, AS HE KEPT LOOKING FOR THE RIGHT PAGE/DATE.
ALL I KNOW IS THAT THERE'S A LOT OF DESPERATE PEOPLE LOOKING FOR A WAY OUT OF THIS 9/11 MESS THAT BUSH HAS THEM PROTECTING.
PUTIN THINKS OF HIMSELF AS A god, AND WOULD LOVE TO PROVE HE'S IN CONTROL THIS WEEKEND.
PLEASE...PLEASE...PLEASE...KEEP ALERT!!
IF ANYTHING HAPPENS, IT WAS ANOTHER BUSH/KGB MOMENT, AND ALL THOSE FOOLISH ENOUGH TO HAVE TRIED TO PROTECT HIM ARE GONNA BE SORRY. AND WITH CONDI AND RUMSFELD IN IRAQ, THEY MAY HAVE ALREADY DONE THE DEED.
I JUST WANT TO GIVE A HEADS-UP.
FOR ALL OF US, WHO HAVE FOUGHT THE FIGHT...BE PROUD!!
GOTTA GO...MY LIBRARY COMPUTER TIME IS RUNNING OUT!!
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT MY WEBSITE (911again.tripod.com) TO OTHER GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS.
AS ALWAYS, THE BEST OF HEALTH AND TIMES TO YOU AND YOURS.
DOUGLAS CLARK
7320 HERMITAGE ST
PITTSBURGH PA 15208
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 11
From: "stoelting1981" fiat@sofnet.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:19am(PDT)
Subject: Pan Am flight 103 ...
Corrupt CIA officials, allowed the bombing of Pan Am 103 to proceed,
because Charles McKee knew too much about "Operation Ringwind" ... The
masterminds who engineered the 9/11 attacks, George Bush Sr. and
Robert Gates, were passengers on the 1980 October Surprise flight to
Paris.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 12
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:22am(PDT)
Subject: "Lashon Hara" -- calling a man "Anti-Semite"
Mail Order Torah lesson: "Lashon Hara" or evil talk.
Forwarded by Joni:
There is a power in the words that is actually, spiritually destructive.
When people speak badly about a third person this is the very process which is set in
motion. This process is fuelled by a power of destruction which is very effective,
running smoothly from teller to listener to the third person. If Person A lies,
telling you that Person B is a fraudster or a serial killer, for the rest of your
life you will remember and believe this as truth at some level. No matter what you
may subsequently learn when digging up his garden finding no bodies, you are never
really sure. There's no smoke without fire, as they say. Every time you see that
person, however far-fetched the allegation, it will cross your mind.
Conversely, we have a power in speech to build up, to actually create growth and
strength.
A child who has thrown eggs all over the kitchen wall, requires telling off and
perhaps punishment. A parent who understands this aspect of Torah will sit down with
the child and explain that this behaviour does not become a fine child like them.
There is no question of allowing the action to pass; but the child is not made to
clean up because he/she is an idiot, or dirty, or irresponsible; he/she is made to
clean up because this behaviour does not become him/her. Far from being torn down and
belittled, the child is built up in stature at that moment.
When we use our speech to give a blessing, reality is rearranged to conform to that
blessing. When we use speech for lashon hora, it kills as surely as with a knife.
Understanding this factor in the creative process, enables us to use our speech to
elevate ourselves and our environment. Discipline in avoiding lashon hora makes us
worthy of the awesome responsibility the gift of speech bestows.
The risk of falling is greater as the opportunity is greater. It takes a lot of
courage and strength to walk away from lashon hora and, conversely, to speak instead
words which build, strengthen and positively motivate each other and the world around
us, but it is so vital for our family and community relationships in order to
function together and build together.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 13
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:58am(PDT)
Subject: US planned war in Afghanistan long before September 11
US planned war in
Afghanistan long before September 11
http://www.freeindiamedia.com/america/dec01_2.htm
By Patrick Martin
Insider
accounts published in the British, French and Indian media have
revealed that US officials threatened war against Afghanistan during
the summer of 2001. These reports include the prediction, made in July,
that "if the military action went ahead, it would take place before the
snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the
latest." The Bush administration began its bombing strikes on the
hapless, poverty-stricken country October 7, and ground attacks by US
Special Forces began October 19.
It is not an accident
that these revelations have appeared overseas, rather than in the US.
The ruling classes in these countries have their own economic and
political interests to look after, which do not coincide, and in some
cases directly clash, with the drive by the American ruling elite to
seize control of oil-rich territory in Central Asia.
The American media has conducted a systematic cover-up of the real
economic and strategic interests that underlie the war against
Afghanistan, in order to sustain the pretence that the war emerged
overnight, full-blown, in response to the terrorist attacks of
September 11.
The pundits for the American television networks and major daily
newspapers celebrate the rapid military defeat of the Taliban regime as
an unexpected stroke of good fortune. They distract public attention
from the conclusion that any serious observer would be compelled to
draw from the events of the past two weeks: that the speedy victory of
the US-backed forces reveals careful planning and preparation by the
American military, which must have begun well before the attacks on the
World Trade Centre and the Pentagon.
The official American myth is that "everything changed" on the day four
airliners were hijacked and nearly 5,000 people murdered. The US
military intervention in Afghanistan, by this account, was hastily
improvised in less than a month. Deputy Defence Secretary Paul
Wolfowitz, in a television interview November 18, actually claimed that
only three weeks went into planning the military onslaught.
This is only one of countless lies emanating from the Pentagon and
White House about the war against Afghanistan. The truth is that the US
intervention was planned in detail and carefully prepared long before
the terrorist attacks provided the pretext for setting it in motion. If
history had skipped over September 11, and the events of that day had
never happened, it is very likely that the United States would have
gone to war in Afghanistan anyway, and on much the same schedule.
Afghanistan and the scramble for oil
The United States ruling elite has been contemplating war in Central
Asia for at least a decade. As long ago as 1991, following the defeat
of Iraq in the Persian Gulf War, Newsweek magazine published an article
headlined "Operation Steppe Shield?" It reported that the US military
was preparing an operation in Kazakhstan modelled on the Operation
Desert Shield deployment in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.
If the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union provided the opportunity
for the projection of American power into Central Asia, the discovery
of vast oil and gas reserves provided the incentive. While the Caspian
Sea coast of Azerbaijan (Baku) has been an oil production centre for a
century, it was only in the past decade that huge new reserves were
discovered in the northwest Caspian (Kazakhstan) and in Turkmenistan,
near the southwest Caspian.
American oil companies have acquired rights to as much as 75 percent of
the output of these new fields, and US government officials have hailed
the Caspian and Central Asia as a potential alternative to dependence
on oil from the unstable Persian Gulf region. American troops have
followed in the wake of these contracts. US Special Forces began joint
operations with Kazakhstan in 1997 and with Uzbekistan a year later,
training for intervention especially in the mountainous southern region
that includes Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan.
The major problem in exploiting the energy riches of Central Asia is
how to get the oil and gas from the landlocked region to the world
market. US officials have opposed using either the Russian pipeline
system or the easiest available land route, across Iran to the Persian
Gulf. Instead, over the past decade, US oil companies and government
officials have explored a series of alternative pipeline routes-west
through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey to the Mediterranean; east
through Kazakhstan and China to the Pacific; and, most relevant to the
current crisis, south from Turkmenistan across western Afghanistan and
Pakistan to the Indian Ocean.
The Afghanistan pipeline route was pushed by the US-based Unocal oil
company, which engaged in intensive negotiations with the Taliban
regime. These talks, however, ended in disarray in 1998, as US
relations with Afghanistan were inflamed by the bombing of US embassies
in Kenya and Tanzania, for which Osama bin Laden was held responsible.
In August 1998, the Clinton administration launched cruise missile
attacks on alleged bin Laden training camps in eastern Afghanistan. The
US government demanded that the Taliban hand over bin Laden and imposed
economic sanctions. The pipeline talks languished.
Subverting the Taliban
Throughout 1999 the US pressure on Afghanistan increased. On February 3
of that year, Assistant Secretary of State Karl E. Inderfurth and State
Department counter terrorism chief Michael Sheehan travelled to
Islamabad, Pakistan, to meet the Taliban's deputy foreign minister,
Abdul Jalil. They warned him that the US would hold the government of
Afghanistan responsible for any further terrorist acts by bin Laden.
According to a report in the Washington Post (October 3, 2001), the
Clinton administration and Nawaz Sharif, then president of Pakistan,
agreed on a joint covert operation to kill Osama bin Laden in 1999. The
US would supply satellite intelligence, air support and financing,
while Pakistan supplied the Pushtun-speaking operatives who would
penetrate southern Afghanistan and carry out the actual killing.
The Pakistani commando team was up and running and ready to strike by
October 1999, the Post reported. One former official told the
newspaper, "It was an enterprise. It was proceeding." Clinton aides
were delighted at the prospect of a successful assassination, with one
declaring, "It was like Christmas."
The attack was aborted on October 12, 1999, when Sharif was overthrown
in a military coup by General Pervez Musharraf, who halted the proposed
covert operation. The Clinton administration had to settle for a UN
Security Council resolution that demanded the Taliban turn over bin
Laden to "appropriate authorities," but did not require he be handed
over to the United States.
McFarlane and Abdul Haq
US subversion against the Taliban continued in 2000, according to an
account published November 2 in the Wall Street Journal, written by
Robert McFarlane, former national security adviser in the Reagan
administration. McFarlane was hired by two wealthy Chicago commodity
speculators, Joseph and James Ritchie, to assist them in recruiting and
organizing anti-Taliban guerrillas among Afghan refugees in Pakistan.
Their principal Afghan contact was Abdul Haq, the former mujahedin
leader who was executed by the Taliban last month after an unsuccessful
attempt to spark a revolt in his home province.
McFarlane held meetings with Abdul Haq and other former mujahedin in
the course of the fall and winter of 2000. After the Bush
administration took office, McFarlane parlayed his Republican
connections into a series of meetings with State Department, Pentagon
and even White House officials. All encouraged the preparation of an
anti-Taliban military campaign.
During the summer, long before the United States launched air strikes
on the Taliban, James Ritchie travelled to Tajikistan with Abdul Haq
and Peter Tomsen, who had been the US special envoy to the Afghan
opposition during the first Bush administration. There they met with
Ahmed Shah Massoud, the leader of the Northern Alliance, with the goal
of coordinating their Pakistan-based attacks with the only military
force still offering resistance to the Taliban.
Finally, according to McFarlane, Abdul Haq "decided in mid-August to go
ahead and launch operations in Afghanistan. He returned to Peshawar,
Pakistan, to make final preparations." In other words, this phase of
the anti-Taliban war was under way well before September 11.
While the Ritchies have been portrayed in the American media as
freelance operators motivated by emotional ties to Afghanistan, a
country they lived in briefly while their father worked as a civil
engineer in the 1950s, at least one report suggests a link to the oil
pipeline discussions with the Taliban. In 1998 James Ritchie visited
Afghanistan to discuss with the Taliban a plan to sponsor small
businesses there. He was accompanied by an official from Delta Oil of
Saudi Arabia, which was seeking to build a gas pipeline across
Afghanistan in partnership with an Argentine firm.
McFarlane's revelations come in the course of a bitter diatribe against
the CIA for "betraying" Abdul Haq, failing to back his operations in
Afghanistan, and leaving him to die at the hands of the Taliban. The
CIA evidently regarded both McFarlane and Abdul Haq as less than
reliable-and it had its own secret war going on in the same region, the
southern half of Afghanistan where the population is predominantly
Pushtun-speaking.
According to a front-page article in the Washington Post November 18,
the CIA has been mounting paramilitary operations in southern
Afghanistan since 1997. The article carries the by line of Bob
Woodward, the Post writer made famous by Watergate, who is a frequent
conduit for leaks from top-level military and intelligence officials.
Woodward provides details about the CIA's role in the current military
conflict, which includes the deployment of a secret paramilitary unit,
the Special Activities Division. This force began combat on September
27, using both operatives on the ground and Predator surveillance
drones equipped with missiles that could be launched by remote control.
The Special Activities Division, Woodward reports, "consists of teams
of about half a dozen men who do not wear military uniforms. The
division has about 150 fighters, pilots and specialists, and is made up
mostly of hardened veterans who have retired from the US military.
"For the last 18 months, the CIA has been working with tribes and
warlords in southern Afghanistan, and the division's units have helped
create a significant new network in the region of the Taliban's
greatest strength."
This means that the US spy agency was engaged in attacks against the
Afghan regime-what under other circumstances the American government
would call terrorism-from the spring of 2000, more than a year before
the suicide hijackings that destroyed the World Trade Centre and
damaged the Pentagon.
With the installation of George Bush in the White House, the focus of
American policy in Afghanistan shifted from a limited incursion to kill
or capture bin Laden to preparing a more robust military intervention
directed at the Taliban regime as a whole.
The British-based Jane's International Security reported March 15, 2001
that the new American administration was working with India, Iran and
Russia "in a concerted front against Afghanistan's Taliban regime."
India was supplying the Northern Alliance with military equipment,
advisers and helicopter technicians, the magazine said, and both India
and Russia were using bases in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan for their
operations.
The magazine added: "Several recent meetings between the newly
instituted Indo-US and Indo-Russian joint working groups on terrorism
led to this effort to tactically and logistically counter the Taliban.
Intelligence sources in Delhi said that while India, Russia and Iran
were leading the anti-Taliban campaign on the ground, Washington was
giving the Northern Alliance information and logistic support."
On May 23, the White House announced the appointment of Zalmay
Khalilzad to a position on the National Security Council as special
assistant to the president and senior director for Gulf, Southwest Asia
and Other Regional Issues. Khalilzad is a former official in the Reagan
and the first Bush administrations. After leaving the government, he
went to work for Unocal.
On June 26 of this year, the magazine IndiaReacts reported more details
of the cooperative efforts of the US, India, Russia and Iran against
the Taliban regime. "India and Iran will 'facilitate' US and Russian
plans for 'limited military action' against the Taliban if the
contemplated tough new economic sanctions don't bend Afghanistan's
fundamentalist regime," the magazine said.
At this stage of military planning, the US and Russia were to supply
direct military assistance to the Northern Alliance, working through
Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, in order to roll back the Taliban lines
toward the city of Mazar-e-Sharif-a scenario strikingly similar to what
actually took place over the past two weeks. An unnamed third country
supplied the Northern Alliance with anti-tank rockets that had already
been put to use against the Taliban in early June.
"Diplomats say that the anti-Taliban move followed a meeting between US
Secretary of State Colin Powell and Russian Foreign Minister Igor
Ivanov and later between Powell and Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant
Singh in Washington," the magazine added. "Russia, Iran and India have
also held a series of discussions and more diplomatic activity is
expected."
Unlike the current campaign, the original plan involved the use of
military forces from both Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, as well as Russia
itself. IndiaReacts said that in early June Russian President Vladimir
Putin told a meeting of the Confederation of Independent States, which
includes many of the former Soviet republics, that military action
against the Taliban was in the offing. One effect of September 11 was
to create the conditions for the United States to intervene on its own,
without any direct participation by the military forces of the Soviet
successor states, and thus claim an undisputed American right to
dictate the shape of a settlement in Afghanistan.
The US threatens war-before September 11
In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade
Centre and the Pentagon, two reports appeared in the British media
indicating that the US government had threatened military action
against Afghanistan several months before September 11.
The BBC's George Arney reported September 18 that American officials
had told former Pakistani Foreign Secretary Niaz Naik in mid-July of
plans for military action against the Taliban regime:
"Mr. Naik said US officials told him of the plan at a UN-sponsored
international contact group on Afghanistan which took place in Berlin.
"Mr. Naik told the BBC that at the meeting the US representatives told
him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take
military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden and the Taliban
leader, Mullah Omar.
"The wider objective, according to Mr. Naik, would be to topple the
Taliban regime and install a transitional government of moderate
Afghans in its place-possibly under the leadership of the former Afghan
King Zahir Shah.
"Mr. Naik was told that Washington would launch its operation from
bases in Tajikistan, where American advisers were already in place.
"He was told that Uzbekistan would also participate in the operation
and that 17,000 Russian troops were on standby.
"Mr. Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take
place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of
October at the latest."
Four days later, on September 22, the Guardian newspaper confirmed this
account. The warnings to Afghanistan came out of a four-day meeting of
senior US, Russian, Iranian and Pakistani officials at a hotel in
Berlin in mid-July, the third in a series of back-channel conferences
dubbed "brainstorming on Afghanistan."
The participants included Naik, together with three Pakistani generals;
former Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations Saeed Rajai Khorassani;
Abdullah Abdullah, foreign minister of the Northern Alliance; Nikolai
Kozyrev, former Russian special envoy to Afghanistan, and several other
Russian officials; and three Americans: Tom Simons, a former US
ambassador to Pakistan; Karl Inderfurth, a former assistant secretary
of state for south Asian affairs; and Lee Coldren, who headed the
office of Pakistan, Afghan and Bangladesh affairs in the State
Department until 1997.
The meeting was convened by Francesc Vendrell, then and now the deputy
chief UN representative for Afghanistan. While the nominal purpose of
the conference was to discuss the possible outline of a political
settlement in Afghanistan, the Taliban refused to attend. The Americans
discussed the shift in policy toward Afghanistan from Clinton to Bush,
and strongly suggested that military action was an option.
While all three American former officials denied making any specific
threats, Coldren told the Guardian, "there was some discussion of the
fact that the United States was so disgusted with the Taliban that they
might be considering some military action." Naik, however, cited one
American declaring that action against bin Laden was imminent: "This
time they were very sure. They had all the intelligence and would not
miss him this time. It would be aerial action, maybe helicopter gun
ships, and not only overt, but from very close proximity to
Afghanistan."
The Guardian summarized: "The threats of war unless the Taliban
surrendered Osama bin Laden were passed to the regime in Afghanistan by
the Pakistani government, senior diplomatic sources revealed yesterday.
The Taliban refused to comply but the serious nature of what they were
told raises the possibility that Bin Laden, far from launching the
attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon out of
the blue 10 days ago, was launching a pre-emptive strike in response to
what he saw as US threats."
Bush, oil and Taliban
Further light on secret contacts between the Bush administration and
the Taliban regime is shed by a book released November 15 in France,
entitled Bin Laden, the Forbidden Truth, written by Jean-Charles
Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie. Brisard is a former French secret
service agent, author of a previous report on bin Laden's Al Qaeda
network, and former director of strategy for the French corporation
Vivendi, while Dasquie is an investigative journalist.
The two French authors write that the Bush administration was willing
to accept the Taliban regime, despite the charges of sponsoring
terrorism, if it cooperated with plans for the development of the oil
resources of Central Asia.
Until August, they claim, the US government saw the Taliban "as a
source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction
of an oil pipeline across Central Asia." It was only when the Taliban
refused to accept US conditions that "this rationale of energy security
changed into a military one."
By way of corroboration, one should note the curious fact that neither
the Clinton administration nor the Bush administration ever placed
Afghanistan on the official State Department list of states charged
with sponsoring terrorism, despite the acknowledged presence of Osama
bin Laden as a guest of the Taliban regime. Such a designation would
have made it impossible for an American oil or construction company to
sign a deal with Kabul for a pipeline to the Central Asian oil and gas
fields.
Talks between the Bush administration and the Taliban began in February
2001, shortly after Bush's inauguration. A Taliban emissary arrived in
Washington in March with presents for the new chief executive,
including an expensive Afghan carpet. But the talks themselves were
less than cordial. Brisard said, "At one moment during the
negotiations, the US representatives told the Taliban, 'either you
accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of
bombs'."
As long as the possibility of a pipeline deal remained, the White House
stalled any further investigation into the activities of Osama bin
Laden, Brisard and Dasquie write. They report that John O'Neill, deputy
director of the FBI, resigned in July in protest over this obstruction.
O'Neill told them in an interview, "the main obstacles to investigate
Islamic terrorism were US oil corporate interests and the role played
by Saudi Arabia in it." In a strange coincidence, O'Neill accepted a
position as security chief of the World Trade Centre after leaving the
FBI, and was killed on September 11.
Confirming Naiz Naik's account of the secret Berlin meeting, the two
French authors add that there was open discussion of the need for the
Taliban to facilitate a pipeline from Kazakhstan in order to insure US
and international recognition. The increasingly acrimonious US-Taliban
talks were broken off August 2, after a final meeting between US envoy
Christina Rocca and a Taliban representative in Islamabad. Two months
later the United States was bombing Kabul.
The politics of provocation
This account of the preparations for war against Afghanistan brings us
to September 11 itself. The terrorist attack that destroyed the World
Trade Centre and damaged the Pentagon was an important link in the
chain of causality that produced the US attack on Afghanistan. The US
government had planned the war well in advance, but the shock of
September 11 made it politically feasible, by stupefying public opinion
at home and giving Washington essential leverage on reluctant allies
abroad.
Both the American public and dozens of foreign governments were
stampeded into supporting military action against Afghanistan, in the
name of the fight against terrorism. The Bush administration targeted
Kabul without presenting any evidence that either bin Laden or the
Taliban regime was responsible for the World Trade Centre atrocity. It
seized on September 11 as the occasion for advancing longstanding
ambitions to assert American power in Central Asia.
There is no reason to think that September 11 was merely a fortuitous
occurrence. Every other detail of the war in Afghanistan was carefully
prepared. It is unlikely that the American government left to chance
the question of providing a suitable pretext for military action.
In the immediate aftermath of September 11, there were press
reports-again, largely overseas-that US intelligence agencies had
received specific warnings about large-scale terrorist attacks,
including the use of hijacked airplanes. It is quite possible that a
decision was made at the highest levels of the American state to allow
such an attack to proceed, perhaps without imagining the actual scale
of the damage, in order to provide the necessary spark for war in
Afghanistan.
How otherwise to explain such well-established facts as the decision of
top officials at the FBI to block an investigation into Zaccarias
Massaoui, the Franco-Moroccan immigrant who came under suspicion after
he allegedly sought training from a US flight school on how to steer a
commercial airliner, but not to take off or land?
The Minneapolis field office had Massaoui arrested in early August, and
asked FBI headquarters for permission to conduct further inquiries,
including a search of the hard drive of his computer. The FBI tops
refused, on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence of
criminal intent on Massaoui's part-an astonishing decision for an
agency not known for its tenderness on the subject of civil liberties.
This is not to say that the American government deliberately planned
every detail of the terrorist attacks or anticipated that nearly 5,000
people would be killed. But the least likely explanation of September
11 is the official one: that dozens of Islamic fundamentalists, many
with known ties to Osama bin Laden, were able to carry out a
wide-ranging conspiracy on three continents, targeting the most
prominent symbols of American power, without any US intelligence agency
having the slightest idea of what they were doing.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\By arrangement with www.wsws.org , U.K
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 14
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:06pm(PDT)
Subject: [Fwd: More on WTC South Tower]
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.5/321 - Release Date: 4/21/2006
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 15
From: "Dick Eastman" olfriend@nwinfo.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:56pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Pentagon
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Wakefield Sault
To: Dick Eastman
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 11:42 AM
Subject: Pentagon
> Hi Dick
>
> I don't know exactly what your current thinking is but it just occurred to
> me that a fuel-laden small plane could have been used merely to create a
> fireball and lots of smoke as a cover for the arrival a Mach X
> bunker-busting tomahawk cruise missile. The problems with a scenario in
> which a missile was fired at close range by the small plane are several.
The "small plane" theory is that a single-engine jet aircraft, perhaps an F-16 fired a missile ahead of its own crash into the Pentagon west wall at pillar #14.
> 1. A typical underwing-borne missile is first dropped to create a safety
> zone between it and the launching plane, several metres, and does not fire
> up until that separation is achieved. A missile dropped in that way from the
> small plane would have buried itself in the lawn.
Perhaps the tomahawk or other "typical" missile is dropped before firing up, however missiles exist that fire hot from the wing -- gaining those essential fractions of a second so critical in combat. Click on my page here and scroll down to the fourth picture showing an F-16 firing a missile hot from the wing.
>
> 2. A small plane cannot carry a missile large enough to achieve that degree
> of penetration.
The small-plane theory that I accept has the F-16 firing the missile ahead of itself merely to soften the outer wall for the planes complete entry. This does not mean that other missiles were not converging at the same time. Obviously a missile entered the same wall on the second floor at about pillar 20 -- south of the killer jet impact point at pillar #14.
>
> 3. To achieve bunker-busting speed and kinetic energy takes at least several
> miles of continuous acceleration.
I take your word for it, Peter. But the missile that was fired ahead of the killer jet did not have to be a bunker buster -- it just had to soften the outer wall. The plane that entered the wall south of the crash may have been a bunker buster with the characteristics you describe.
>
> 4. A small plane could not tear lightpoles out of the ground and twist them
> up. There were no actual impacts on the lightpoles. No marks. Only the tail
> vortex of an extremely fast object could do that kind of damage.
Long ago I concluded that off-wing turbulence knocked down the first pole. I also allow that poles 2,4 and 5 may have been brought down by the jetliner that was flying low over the Pentagon at the same time.
>
> By the time such a missile reached the Pentagon it would be travelling so
> fast it would be effectively invisible to the human eye and its sonic booms
> would arrive long after it had struck the Pentagon and the sounds of that
> impact reached the ears of anyone nearby.
Yes, this is why we cannot rule out other missiles being in play during this operation.
Peter, you are the only man who will discuss my theory with me. I hope Allah rewards you.
Dick
>
> Regards
> Peter
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 16
From: "copernicus122223" copernicus122223@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:57pm(PDT)
Subject: Is this it , the end of Dean ROger Ray of Edmonton Alberta Canada
Is this it , the end of Dean ROger Ray of Edmonton Alberta Canada
Only 1 message in topic - view as tree
From: teslacoils2006 - view profile
Date: Fri, Apr 28 2006 2:40 pm
Email: "teslacoils2006" <deanr...@telus.net>
Groups: tor.general, edm.general
Not yet ratedRating:
show options
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message |
Show original | Remove | Report Abuse | Find messages by this
author
Is this it , the end of Dean ROger Ray of Edmonton Alberta Canada
tune into sciforums to see if my ex spymaster boss reveals where I
am?
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=1037475#post1037475
samsonite
Registered User (88 posts) Today, 04:03 PM
edit | reply
your sick bait and switch should not work on anybody of
intelligence.
You are right I do believe I am right Communism failed miserably and
will fail again and again because hiearchies from the top never work
and will always have to be controlled bottom up.
Just to explain bait and switch:
you told the truth I do know the truth but then you added
He is trying to convince us to go on a killing spree against the
"haves" because he thinks that they are Illuminati members, and
killing
them will "free the world" from the oppression of the "Illuminati"
(who, needless to say, exist only in his delusions
I have proven they exist at the start of these posts
There should be no one above the law yet there is
I am asking that the courts and democracy be restored.
Here is what you are worried about
they have weapons for demonstrations
http://groups.msn.com/psycologicalw...569575507448631
they have no weapon that can stop the force of justice if the rest
of
us desire our birth right and continue to be free of tyranny
http://groups.msn.com/psycologicalw...petmasters.msnw
http://groups.msn.com/psycologicalw...rwebpage21.msnw
Sock puppet path
Devilicious (497 posts) Today, 04:06 PM
report | reply
Samsonite you are leaving me no choice, with your next post I will
be
forced to make your identity and location public. Do not
underestimate
me this is your last warning.
Let's see how paranoid he is
samsonite
Registered User (88 posts) Today, 04:12 PM
edit | reply
Robert L Thompsett take note that the stockers are not as effective
as
your bosses grow scared and clamp tighter on the public. Especially
if
I am busy telling the neighbours why they are woke up in the middle
of
the night by rude satanists trying to convince me I have no right to
exist because I know something I should not. The Iluminati brag they
have the children in the palm of their hand using Neuro linguistic
programming, wrong again these kids go home and play strategy game s
all day and with the truth in their hands, a bible and a gun they
are
just as lethal as I am.
samsonite
Registered User (88 posts) Today, 04:14 PM
edit | reply
go ahead I am Dean ROger RAy and the enemy is already all around me
samsonite
Registered User (88 posts) Today, 04:18 PM
edit | reply
I am safer with everyone knowing who I am and what I represent
because
samsonite dies no one will know who or what he died for but if Dean
ROger RAy of Edmonton DIes everyone knows I stood for something. Is
RObert L THompsett still at 125 rue st jacque Hull Quebec and lydia
his
boss next apartment over on the top. ROberts on the left of the
youth
centre lydia on the right and to be exact right behind bertrand
Bycicle. Now go ahead reveal my address because I will post to
everyone
that national security allowed you to do so.
more information
http://groups.msn.com/psycologicalwarfare/yourwebpage22.msnw
http://groups.msn.com/psycologicalwarfare
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 17
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:56pm(PDT)
Subject: RUSH
DRUG USER RUSH LIMBAUGH WAS ARRESTED IN PALM BEACH ,FLORIDA FOR BUYING DRUGS TODAY , APRIL 28,2006
BUGS
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 18
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:02pm(PDT)
Subject: [Fwd: Flight 77]
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:
Flight 77
Date:
Fri, 28 Apr 2006 19:36:02 EDT
From:
Lorensharane@aol.com
To:
apfn@apfn.org
I watched this video. What a horror! Question tho, a comment was
made that the tape of Bin Ladin admitting guilt had "problems".
It does not quantify. Where can I read about this? Thank you.
http://www.loosechange911.com/download/trailer.wmv
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Results 1 - 10 of about 15,500,000 for 9/11
Bin Laden . ( 0.21
seconds)
Sponsored
Links
The 9/11 Report
The New York Times reports on the
history and aftermath of 9/11 .
www.nytimes.com
News
results for 9/11 Bin Laden - View today's top stories
Full
bin Laden message posted on Web - CNN International - 23 hours ago
Washington
Post, New York Times on Zarqawi, Bin Laden's Side?
- FOX News - Apr 27, 2006
Call
to kill 9 / 11 plotter who 'loved' victims' pain - Times Online - Apr
25, 2006
FOXNews.com
- Bin Laden Claims Responsibility for 9/11 - US &
World
Bin Laden Claims
Responsibility for 9/11 , Usama bin Laden made his first
televised appearance in more than a year in which he admitted for the
first time ...
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html
- 31k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
9-11
Research
9-11 Research Home ...
Blurry Video of Man With Osama-like Turban and Beard Proves bin
Laden's Guilt. Even with all flaws of the American judicial system,
...
911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/ deceptions/ bin ladinvideo.html
- 15k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
The
Fake 2001 Osama bin Laden Video Tape
This
is very odd indeed because in bin Laden's September 28, 2001
denial of involvement in the 9/11 attacks he had plenty to say
about the US and Israel: ...
www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html - 21k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
September
11, 2001 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 9/11 Commission could
only establish that two of the hijackers had recently purchased ...
In the tape, bin Laden admits to planning the attacks. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks
- 145k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
CBC
News: Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11
Bin Laden claims
responsibility for 9/11 . Last Updated Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:21:01
EDT. CBC News. QATAR - Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared
in a new ...
www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/ 2004/10/29/ bin laden
_message041029.html
- 31k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
Transcript
of Rice's 9/11 commission statement
I think you can see here a
president struggling with whether he ought to be talking about pre- 9/11
attempts to kill bin Laden . And so, that is the context ...
www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/08/rice.transcript/
- 215k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
Telegraph
| News | Bin Laden : Yes, I did it
Daily news from the UK, business
news, countryside news, UK technology news, obituaries and UK education
news - telegraph.co.uk, UK online newspaper.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ news/2001/11/11/w bin 11.xml
- 35k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
Where
was Osama bin Laden on 9/11 ? Bush Administration knew
the ...
According to
Dan Rather, CBS, Bin Laden was back in Hospital, one day before
the 9/11 attacks, on September 10, this time, courtesy of
America's ...
www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO311A.html
- 23k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
Chief
9/11 Architect Critical of Bin Laden - Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON To hear Sept. 11
mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed tell it, Osama bin Laden was
a meddling boss whose indiscretion and poor judgment threatened ...
www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/
la-na-ksm5apr05,0,1052343.story?coll=la-home-headlines
- Similar pages - Remove
result
Complete
911 Timeline
He will still hold these positions
on 9/11 . But a newspaper reports that his past [is] not
forgiven and most important decisions in the [ bin Laden family ...
www.cooperativeresearch.org/ timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline
- 349k - Cached
- Similar pages - Remove
result
Result Page:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Next
New! Crack the Code: Play
the Da Vinci Code Quest on Google .
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:
Flight 77
Date:
Fri, 28 Apr 2006 19:36:02 EDT
From:
Lorensharane@aol.com
To:
apfn@apfn.org
I watched this video. What a horror! Question tho, a comment was
made that the tape of Bin Ladin admitting guilt had "problems".
It does not quantify. Where can I read about this? Thank you.
http://www.loosechange911.com/download/trailer.wmv
=======================================
----------
Site Not Found
No web site is configured at this address.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 19
From: "MarshaMcClelland" mofmars3@sbcglobal.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:44pm(PDT)
Subject: They were arresting and hand cuffing congress people
They were arresting and hand cuffing congress people
I was watching The Situation Room on CNN..."Wolf Blitzer"...Waiting
to hear George Clooney talk about why he believes Hillary Clinton is
polarizing America...
Damn...O'Reilly started taping and what I was watching was not taped
or in real time so when the taping started I lost that show
Don't like giving fox any ratings but like more catching
them...mainly bill the shill, in lies and spins so I can help call
attention to it by notifying his peers in media...He hates
that...It's important because this type person is a danger to
America's youth and must be stopped
God Bless George Clooney spending his wealth on the poor because of
the genocide in Sudan...
Okay here's where I got lost and was planning to run it back to get
accurate details for you...
Some kind of shake up because of illegal weapons sales or something,
resulting in 2 million refugees because of war in Sudan...Not sure I
got that exactly right
This is because I was taking notes and planned to run it back for
details
They were arresting and hand cuffing congress people...I was jotting
the names down for you when I lost the report and O'Reilly started
taping
They were handcuffing and taking away Rep. Sheila Jackson of Texas,
James Moran of Virginia, James McGovern from Massachusetts, Tom
Lantos of California who was a holocaust survivor, too, they said
Not clear on exact details of these arrests but see this as evidence
of what I believe to be part of the demise of the evil empire
Please watch CNN as well as MSNBC when you can...The media is coming
around with much truth
Sunday at 1 PM Eastern time>>>"On The Story on CNN is>>>Barbara
Starr is On the Story of how a Nevada desert bomb
test will simulate how the US could attack an enemy's
underground nuclear plant. Among many other urgent reports
This is called the Divine Drake and is to happen on May 2nd as Randi
Rhodes from Air America has been trying to draw media attention too
They're going to create a mushoom cloud...Imagine the fallout
poisoning the masses just as all the depleted uranium is
My God...They are insane...Keep track of the shills for the corrupt
administration on fox news by subscribing to
http://www.newshounds.us/...They watch fox, so you don't have to
Please give them no ratings
Oh yeah...On "On The Story on CNN, Sunday they will be talking about
Tony Snow from fox news too...I really liked him even though he was
a fox employee...Thinking he may be among the few good guys there
But to take a job to be the mouth piece of a liar...How could anyone
do that?
Marsha
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 20
From: "Richard Pierce" phobicflyonthewall@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:50pm(PDT)
Subject: Pentagon implements Global Military Policing-Second 9/11 to provide
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060424&articleId=2323
Pentagon implements Global Military Policing
Second 9/11 to provide an "Opportunity" to Intervene
By Michel Chossudovsky
April 24, 2006
The following report raises some very serious concerns. It points to the involvement of US special forces in countries which do not represent a threat to the US and with which the US is not at war. The SOCOM program essentially carries out the mandate of the 2000 Project for a New American Century, which contemplated the sending in of Special Forces in "non theater war" situations. These operations were described in the PNAC as part of the so-called "constabulary functions".
"Constabulary functions"
Distinct from theater wars, "constabulary functions" imply a form of global military policing using various instruments of military intervention including punitive bombings and the sending in of US Special Forces, etc. It goes beyond the "preemptive war doctrine": the constabulory operations are predicated on US military intervention in countries which are acknowledged as not constituting a threat to US national security.
The PNAC outlines a roadmap of conquest. The PNAC blueprint also outlines a consistent framework of war propaganda. One year before 9/11, the PNAC called for "some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor," which would serve to galvanize US public opinion in support of a war agenda.
(See http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NAC304A.html ).
The PNAC architects seem to have anticipated with cynical accuracy, the use of the September 11 attacks as "a war pretext incident."
Special Operations Command carries out the PNAC mandate pertaining to constabulary functions. SOCOM is predicated on a Second 9/11, which could be used to justify US military intervention in the 'global war on terrorism". Its legitimacy rests on the shaky consensus that the "war on terrorism" is real and that Al Qaeda is an outside enemy of the US. The initiative goes beyond the pretext or justification. A second 9/11 now constitutes a golden opportunity to intervene militarily: "Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets"
National Sovereignty
The program is consistent with the 2005 National Security Strategy. Whereas the preemptive war doctrine envisages military action as a means of "self defense" against countries categorized as "hostile" to the US, the new Pentagon doctrine envisages the possibility of military intervention against countries which do not visibly constitute a threat to the security of the American homeland.
The conduct of the Special Operations Command program raises serious issues of national sovereignty. It is an imperial project predicated on US military intervention anywhere in the World, using the war on terrorism as the sole pretext. It provides legitimacy to US military intervention in so-called "failed states" or countries which do not share America's conception of a "free market" economy.
The SOCOM program is characterized by a multibillion dollar budget and some 53,000 special forces. As such, the program overshadows the more discrete covert operations of the CIA. It also marks the militarisation of US foreign policy, overshadowing the diplomatic/ intelligence functions of US embassies around the globe
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 24 April 2006
[salient features in the Washington Post report are indicated in italics]
---------------------------------
New Plans Foresee Fighting Terrorism Beyond War Zones
Pentagon to Rely on Special Operations
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 23, 2006; A01
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has approved the military's most ambitious plan yet to fight terrorism around the world and retaliate more rapidly and decisively in the case of another major terrorist attack on the United States, according to defense officials.
The long-awaited campaign plan for the global war on terrorism, as well as two subordinate plans also approved within the past month by Rumsfeld, are considered the Pentagon's highest priority, according to officials familiar with the three documents who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about them publicly.
Details of the plans are secret, but in general they envision a significantly expanded role for the military -- and, in particular, a growing force of elite Special Operations troops -- in continuous operations to combat terrorism outside of war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Developed over about three years by the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in Tampa, the plans reflect a beefing up of the Pentagon's involvement in domains traditionally handled by the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department.
For example, SOCOM has dispatched small teams of Army Green Berets and other Special Operations troops to U.S. embassies in about 20 countries in the Middle East, Asia, Africa and Latin America, where they do operational planning and intelligence gathering to enhance the ability to conduct military operations where the United States is not at war.
And in a subtle but important shift contained in a classified order last year, the Pentagon gained the leeway to inform -- rather than gain the approval of -- the U.S. ambassador before conducting military operations in a foreign country, according to several administration officials. "We do not need ambassador-level approval," said one defense official familiar with the order.
Overall, the plans underscore Rumsfeld's conviction since the September 2001 terrorist attacks that the U.S. military must expand its mission beyond 20th-century conventional warfare by infantry, tanks, ships and fighter jets to fighting non-state groups that are, above all, difficult to find.
The plans each run more than 100 pages and cover a wide range of overt and clandestine military activities -- such as man-hunting and intelligence gathering on terrorist networks; attacks on terrorist training camps and recruiting efforts; and partnering with foreign militaries to eliminate terrorist sanctuaries. Together, they amount to an assignment of responsibilities to different military commands to conduct what the Pentagon envisions as a "long war" against terrorism.
The main campaign plan sets priorities, allocates resources such as manpower and funding, and coordinates operations among regional military commands to implement the Pentagon's broader National Military Strategic Plan for the War on Terrorism, published in unclassified form in February. It lays out nine key goals, such as targeting terrorist leaders, safe havens, communications and other logistical support, and countering extremist ideology.
A second detailed plan is focused specifically on al-Qaeda and associated movements, including more than a dozen groups spread across the Middle East, Central Asia, Southeast Asia and Africa. Such groups include the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Ansar al-Islam in the Middle East, Jemaah Islamiya in Indonesia, and the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat in Saharan Africa.
A third plan sets out how the military can both disrupt and respond to another major terrorist strike on the United States. It includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets, according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan.
This plan details "what terrorists or bad guys we would hit if the gloves came off. The gloves are not off," said one official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject.
The Pentagon declined to comment on the counterterrorism plans or their approval, citing longstanding policy. "We do not discuss contingency plans or future operations," said Cmdr. Greg Hicks, a Defense Department spokesman. SOCOM's deputy commander, Vice Adm. Eric T. Olson, said earlier this month in Senate testimony that the plans had been approved.
Special Operations Command, led by Gen. Doug Brown, has been building up its headquarters and writing the plans since 2003, when Rumsfeld first designated it as the lead command for the war on terrorism. Its budget has grown 60 percent since 2003 to $8 billion in fiscal 2007. President Bush empowered the 53,000-strong command with coordinating the entire military's efforts in counterterrorism in 2004.
"SOCOM is, in fact, in charge of the global war on terror," Brown said in testimony before the House last month. In this role, SOCOM directs and coordinates actions by the military's regional combatant commands. SOCOM, if directed, can also command its own counterterrorist operations -- such as when a threat spans regional boundaries or the mission is highly sensitive -- but it has not done so yet, according to Olson, and other officials say that is likely to be the exception to the rule.
To extend its reach to more countries, SOCOM is increasing by 13,000 the number of Special Operations troops, including Special Forces soldiers skilled in language and working with indigenous militaries, and Delta Force operatives and Navy SEAL teams that form clandestine "special mission units" engaged in reconnaissance, intelligence gathering and man-hunting. Already, SOCOM is seeing its biggest deployments in history, with 7,000 troops overseas today, but the majority have been concentrated in Iraq and Afghanistan, with 85 percent last year in the Middle East, Central Asia or the Horn of Africa.
But SOCOM's more robust role -- while adding manpower, specialized skills and organization to the fight against terrorism -- has also led to some bureaucratic tensions, both inside the military with the joint staff and regional commands, as well as with the CIA and State Department. Such tensions are one reason SOCOM's plan took years.
When SOCOM first dispatched military liaison teams abroad starting in 2003, they were called "Operational Control Elements," a term changed last year because "it raised the hackles of regional commanders and ambassadors. It was a bad choice of language," said one defense official, adding: "Who can pick on Military Liaison Elements?"
State Department officials, meanwhile, said that although, for the most part, cooperation with the military teams has been good, they remain concerned over continued "gray areas" regarding their status. "Special Ops wants the flexibility and speed to go in there. . . . but there's understandably questions of how you do that and how you have clear lines of authority," one U.S. official said. There remains "continuing discussion, to put it politely, in terms of how this is going to work," the official said. SOCOM says the teams work for the regional commanders.
Copyright the Washington Post 2006
---------------------------------
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on community internet sites, as long as the text & title are not modified. The source must be acknowledged and an active URL hyperlink address to the original CRG article must be indicated. The author's copyright note must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.
To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion at Global Research's News and Discussion Forum
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 2006
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=2323
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 21
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:40pm(PDT)
Subject: WHAT HAPPEN?
WHAT HAPPEN TO MISSION ACCOMPLISH?
BUGS
Published on Friday, April 28, 2006 by the Independent / UK
Iraq War Set To Be More Expensive Than Vietnam
by Rupert Cornwell
The Iraq war has already cost the United States $320bn (£180bn), according to an authoritative new report, and even if a troop withdrawal begins this year, the conflict is set to be more expensive in real terms than the Vietnam War, a generation ago.
The estimate, circulated this week by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service (CRS), can only increase unease over the US presence in Iraq, whose direct costs now run at some $6bn a month, or $200m a day, with no end in sight.
The Bush administration has refused to provide any specific overall figure for the war's cost. But the Senate is set to approve another emergency spending bill in May, meaning that Iraq will have consumed $101bn in fiscal 2006 alone, almost double the $51bn of 2003, the year of the invasion itself - and all at a time when the federal budget deficit is running at near record levels.
But these figures pale beside what lies in store, the CRS says in its analysis. The Bush administration is desperate to announce a reduction in the 130,000-strong US force before November's mid-term elections, where public disillusion with the war threatens disaster for the Republicans.
However, even if everything goes relatively smoothly, costs until a phase-out is complete could top $370bn. This would make the Iraq conflict, now into its fourth year, more expensive financially than the Vietnam War, which lasted eight years. Vietnam claimed 58,000 American lives, far more than the almost 2,400 lost in Iraq thus far. But in today's dollars it cost "only" $549bn, much less than the $690bn for Iraq, and a projected combined $811bn bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is a far cry from the weeks before the war, when a White House official was rapped on the knuckles for suggesting the cost might be between $100bn and $200bn, and Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, was touting "a number that's somewhere under $50bn".
Paul Wolfowitz, now president of the World Bank but then Mr Rumsfeld's deputy at the Pentagon, even theorised before Congress that the post-invasion period might pay for itself as Iraq's oil revenues soared.
The financial analysis by the Congressional Research Service lists various "key war cost questions" and "major unknowns", such as future troop levels, but its financial conclusions are restrained compared with other non-official figures.
Scott Wallsten of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank, has estimated an overall cost of $500bn thus far, with as much again possible. Most, he says, will be paid for by the US (unlike the 1990-91 Gulf War, which the US fought almost for free, thanks to contributions from Saudi Arabia, Japan and other allies).
In January, a study by Joseph Stiglitz, the Columbia University economist and former Nobel Prize winner, and the Harvard lecturer Linda Bilmes reckoned the conflict could ultimately cost $2 trillion, if all factors are taken into account. These include the long-term healthcare costs for the 16,000 US soldiers already wounded in the conflict, and other indirect or hidden costs such as the rise in the price of oil, the need to finance larger budget deficits, higher recruiting costs and losses to the economy caused by the wounded.
The Pentagon has treated such outside estimates with disdain. But it resolutely refused to give a detailed picture of its own. Some experts suggest, however, that the Pentagon may have deliberately inflated its financial needs now, fearing that as the war becomes ever more unpopular, Congress will grow less willing to provide funds in the future.
© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited
###
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 22
From: "APFN" apfn@apfn.org
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:43pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: 9/11 - THE HISTROY CHANNEL
THE HISTROY CHANNEL
http://www.historychannel.com/
Tune In:
Friday, April 28 @ 8pm ET/PT
At 08:46 on the morning of September 11, 2001, American
Airlines Flight
11, a fully fueled Boeing 767, exploded into the North Tower of New
York City's World Trade Center. It's the first terrorist strike on that
day of infamy. On the fateful morning, Mohammed Atta and a small army
of hijackers take thousands of lives. The sheer number of dead makes it
easy to forget that the day's first victims were the pilots, flight
attendants, and passengers aboard Flight 11. Using a real-time
split-screen format, the viewer experiences these 60 critical minutes
as they happen to the terrorists, flight crew, Air Traffic Control in
Boston and New York, and a mother-to-be as she makes her way from her
Brooklyn home to her office in the Tower. Interviews with
anti-terrorism experts and victims' relatives offer new information and
detailed insight into the story of Flight 11 and Mohammed
Atta's mindset. TVPG
http://www.historychannel.com/
Tune In:
Friday, April 28 @ 9pm ET/PT
In response to the attacks on September 11, 2001, the
FAA orders all
planes out of the air. US and Canadian air traffic controllers face a
calamity of epic proportions--how to safely re-route and land 6,500
planes carrying close to a million people. For individual air traffic
controllers, the work is chaotic, intense, and deceptively simple: pick
a new route for each flight; radio instructions to turn; listen for
pilot confirmation; hold traffic to keep airways from overcrowding.
From Cleveland, Ohio to Gander, Newfoundland, controllers on September
11th searched for alternate airports to land large jets even as their
traumatized colleagues stream back from break rooms after watching the
attacks on TV. TVPG
http://www.historychannel.com/
==========================
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 23
From: "Richard Pierce" phobicflyonthewall@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:49pm(PDT)
Subject: Retired Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizo
http://www.rense.com/general70/res.htm
Retired Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizon As Trotskyites Within Government On The Move To Destroy America
By Greg Szymanski
4-28-6
A slow, meticulous and patient takeover of the United States is now under way by a group of Trotskyites embedded in the government using terrorism as a means of "fear and control," according to a retired Air Force General. And the only way to defeat them, said Gen. Ben Parton, is to immediately take back the political process from the treasonous hijackers before it's too late and America is turned into a fascist state. Gen. Parton added the insidious onslaught on freedom is well underway and the initial groundwork of "manipulation and takeover" is clearly visible with events like Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, the first WTC bombing and 911. And now Americans should brace themselves for bigger and more bloody terrorist acts, as the New World Order is not yet finished with its diabolical plan to destroy America from within. Coming from a civilian these ominous sounding words may go in one ear and out the other. But coming from a General with more than 30
years of active service, the only real question remaining is not if but when the next 911 will take place? "They are not finished with us yet and there will be another terrorist attack," said Gen. Parton in an interview this week on Greg Szymanski's radio show, The Investigative Journal. "The one thing that has to be clearly understood about those who have taken over our government and the governments of most every other country in the world is that they are very patient while calculating every move in order to eliminate any chance of failure." Saying the U.S. government and its intelligence agencies have been infiltrated by New World Order minions and strategists, he warns America 's only chance for survival is a quick takeover of the government, not a military coup or revolution as both will fail due to power structure set up by the enemy. "It boils down to this: the American people need to take back the political process or the New World Order will
succeed," added Gen. Parton. The New World Order program, according to Gen. Parton, is nothing new and can be traced to the writings of Leon Trotsky in the 1928 Program of the Communist Third International.
He said the Trotsky plan has been adopted throughout the world, including by those now in command of the U.S., who are pushing the world towards a one world government, meaning the end of liberty, freedom and the American way. For rest of story and more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com
Disclaimer <http://www.rense.com/disclaimer.htm>
; &
nbsp; ; document.write("Email This Article
<\"">mailto:?subject=Recommended&body=I> "); &
nbsp; ; Email This Article http://www.rense.com/general70/res.htm
MainPage: http://www.rense.com
This Site Served by TheHostPros <http://www.thehostpros.com/>
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 24
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:34pm(PDT)
Subject: Retired Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizo
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Pierce
Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizon
http://www.rense.com/general70/res.htm
Retired Air Force General Warns
Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizon
As Trotskyites Within Government
On The Move To Destroy America
By Greg Szymanski
4-28-6
A slow, meticulous and patient takeover of the United States is now under way by a group of Trotskyites embedded in the government using terrorism as a means of "fear and control," according to a retired Air Force General. And the only way to defeat them, said Gen. Ben Parton, is to immediately take back the political process from the treasonous hijackers before it's too late and America is turned into a fascist state. Gen. Parton added the insidious onslaught on freedom is well underway and the initial groundwork of "manipulation and takeover" is clearly visible with events like Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, the first WTC bombing and 911. And now Americans should brace themselves for bigger and more bloody terrorist acts, as the New World Order is not yet finished with its diabolical plan to destroy America from within. Coming from a civilian these ominous sounding words may go in one ear and out the other. But coming from a General with more than 30 years of active service, the only real question remaining is not if but when the next 911 will take place? "They are not finished with us yet and there will be another terrorist attack," said Gen. Parton in an interview this week on Greg Szymanski's radio show, The Investigative Journal. "The one thing that has to be clearly understood about those who have taken over our government and the governments of most every other country in the world is that they are very patient while calculating every move in order to eliminate any chance of failure." Saying the U.S. government and its intelligence agencies have been infiltrated by New World Order minions and strategists, he warns America 's only chance for survival is a quick takeover of the government, not a military coup or revolution as both will fail due to power structure set up by the enemy. "It boils down to this: the American people need to take back the political process or the New World Order will succeed," added Gen. Parton. The New World Order program, according to Gen. Parton, is nothing new and can be traced to the writings of Leon Trotsky in the 1928 Program of the Communist Third International.
He said the Trotsky plan has been adopted throughout the world, including by those now in command of the U.S., who are pushing the world towards a one world government, meaning the end of liberty, freedom and the American way. For rest of story and more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com
Disclaimer <http://www.rense.com/disclaimer.htm>
; &nb sp; & nbsp; ; &nb sp; document.write("Email This Article <\"mailto:?subject=Recommended&body=I> "); &nb sp; & nbsp; ; &nb sp; Email This Article http://www.rense.com/general70/res.htm
MainPage: http://www.rense.com
This Site Served by TheHostPros <http://www.thehostpros.com/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message 25
From: "Bugs" brawny@twlakes.net
Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:55pm(PDT)
Subject: Retired Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizo
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Pierce
Air Force General Warns Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizon
http://www.rense.com/general70/res.htm
Retired Air Force General Warns
Another 'Terrorist Attack' On Horizon
As Trotskyites Within Government
On The Move To Destroy America
By Greg Szymanski
4-28-6
A slow, meticulous and patient takeover of the United States is now under way by a group of Trotskyites embedded in the government using terrorism as a means of "fear and control," according to a retired Air Force General. And the only way to defeat them, said Gen. Ben Parton, is to immediately take back the political process from the treasonous hijackers before it's too late and America is turned into a fascist state. Gen. Parton added the insidious onslaught on freedom is well underway and the initial groundwork of "manipulation and takeover" is clearly visible with events like Ruby Ridge, Waco, Oklahoma City, the first WTC bombing and 911. And now Americans should brace themselves for bigger and more bloody terrorist acts, as the New World Order is not yet finished with its diabolical plan to destroy America from within. Coming from a civilian these ominous sounding words may go in one ear and out the other. But coming from a General with more than 30 years of active service, the only real question remaining is not if but when the next 911 will take place? "They are not finished with us yet and there will be another terrorist attack," said Gen. Parton in an interview this week on Greg Szymanski's radio show, The Investigative Journal. "The one thing that has to be clearly understood about those who have taken over our government and the governments of most every other country in the world is that they are very patient while calculating every move in order to eliminate any chance of failure." Saying the U.S. government and its intelligence agencies have been infiltrated by New World Order minions and strategists, he warns America 's only chance for survival is a quick takeover of the government, not a military coup or revolution as both will fail due to power structure set up by the enemy. "It boils down to this: the American people need to take back the political process or the New World Order will succeed," added Gen. Parton. The New World Order program, according to Gen. Parton, is nothing new and can be traced to the writings of Leon Trotsky in the 1928 Program of the Communist Third International.
He said the Trotsky plan has been adopted throughout the world, including by those now in command of the U.S., who are pushing the world towards a one world government, meaning the end of liberty, freedom and the American way. For rest of story and more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com
Disclaimer <http://www.rense.com/disclaimer.htm>
; &nb sp; & nbsp; ; &nb sp; document.write("Email This Article <\"mailto:?subject=Recommended&body=I> "); &nb sp; & nbsp; ; &nb sp; Email This Article http://www.rense.com/general70/res.htm
MainPage: http://www.rense.com
This Site Served by TheHostPros <http://www.thehostpros.com/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
