Today's conditions brought to you by the Bush Junta - marionettes of their hyperdimensional puppet masters - Produced and Directed by the CIA, based on an original script by Henry Kissinger, with a cast of billions.... The "Greatest Shew on Earth," no doubt, and if you don't have a good sense of humor, don't read this page! It is designed to reveal the "unseen."
If you can't stand the heat of Objective Reality, get out of the kitchen!
Sunday, June 27, 2004
Picture of the Day
On Wednesday, June 23, the Congress of the United States passed an incredible resolution. By a vote of 407 to 9, the House passed Concurrent Resolution 460 to give total support to Israel,s hard right Likud government to annex the great bulk of Palestine and make it part of Israel.
The Resolution, which appears to have been passed with little discussion or debate, expressed two main thoughts: It strongly endorses the April 14, 2004 George W. Bush letter to Ariel Sharon that gives US approval to Israeli Likud plans for the West Bank and Gaza. It supports efforts to build Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism that will "prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat to the security of Israel."
But the really devastating language of this resolution is in the whereas clauses, those statements made to justify the resolution. Those clauses in summary affirm that: President Bush and Ariel Sharon already have made a deal, and the Palestinians, the United Nations, and all third parties no longer have anything to say on this subject. "The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan."
In light of "new realities", mainly because the Israeli settlements exist (they are called "Israeli population centers" in the Bush letter) they have become part of Israel. The Palestinian refugee issues can be resolved only "through the establishment of a permanent alternative and the settling of Palestinian refugees there rather than in Israel."(emphasis added). "The United States remains committed to the security of Israel - and to preserving and strengthening the capability of Israel to deter enemies and defend itself."
Stripped of any polite language, this resolution is a total commitment of the President and the Congress of the United States to creation of the Zionist dream of a greater Israel. To the Palestinians, this resolution says any territory they retain in this deal will look like a piece of Swiss cheese and include no more than 10% of their ancestral home. Israeli peace activist, Ury Avnery, called this plan "a recipe for continuing the war".
Particularly to Arab states, the resolution is take it or leave it: "All Arab states must oppose terrorism, support emergence of a peaceful and democratic Palestine, and state clearly that they will live in peace with Israel." Moreover, the resolution leaves no doubt that the United States will continue to arm the Israelis. Arming them also means that the United States will continue to look the other way while (contrary to US law) Israeli forces use modern, powerful, US supplied weapons to repress the Palestinian people. Why would Bush and the Congress do this now? The Bush letter, says the Resolution, "will enhance the security of Israel and advance the cause of peace in the Middle East." ...
[C]onsidering the chaos in Iraq, the Congress of the United States has just codified the most powerful terrorism generator that has come into existence since 9-11. ... [T]his resolution tells the Palestinians that they should abandon hope, recognize that their future will be worse than their past, but get in line, and cooperate with the inevitable. The prospect this paints for them is that they not only must accept loss of their homes and property, and the withering of any viable Palestinian state, but they should expect no compensation and they must look elsewhere for a place to live.
Not only are Palestinian extremists strengthened by this, but their support bases will grow among the Palestinian people and among other peoples of the region. [...] What is most striking about the situation is that the Zionists have to know that the risks of Palestinian terrorist attacks, as well as attacks by sympathizers, will greatly increase.
Perhaps the Zionists are so dedicated to the idea of greater Israel that they do not care, but as several analysts recently have concluded, and as the overall tone of the Congressional resolution suggests, Sharon could not move ahead with his plans, and he certainly would not receive promised levels of US support, if the terrorists stopped attacking. Probably no members would concede that this resolution makes the President and the Congress responsible for coming rounds of terrorist violence and military reprisals in Palestine, as well as attacks on Americans abroad, but that is the simple fact.
In a slavish bid for political support in November, both the President and the Congress have bought into Zionist plans. Neither seems aware that polls show the majority of American Jews oppose Sharon's plan, even though they are too intimidated by the Zionists to object. In any case, in order to get themselves elected, Congress and the President have assured continuing violence in Palestine and they collectively have chosen to make the world less safe for Americans
Comment: And all the Signs point to the fact that making the world a very dangerous and frightening place has been the plan all along - and we are only getting started...
The Saudi ambassador to London has reinforced controversial claims by the kingdom's royal family of a link between "Zionists" and recent al-Qaeda terror attacks in the country.
In a television interview, to be broadcast today, Prince Turki al-Faisal is asked about comments made by Crown Prince Abdullah, Saudi Arabia's de facto leader, that "Zionist hands" have been behind the attacks.
The ambassador replies: "When you're under attack by people who come and kill your countrymen and visitors to your country, and you see at the same time an attack on the kingdom from the outside, from Zionist circles, it is natural to make a connection."
He declined to expand on his remarks yesterday but his comments were condemned by Lord Janner of Braunstone, the former Labour MP. "In my view it is highly offensive and he must realise that the statement is totally unfounded."
"No terrorism serves the interests of Zionism. The allegation by the Crown Prince was rubbish and he must know that."
Prince Abdullah made his original remarks when he addressed a conference of leading Saudi officials and academics last month after an attack on contractors at the Yanbu oil facility that left six Westerners - including two Britons - dead.
"Zionism is behind it," he said. "It has become clear now. It has become clear to us. It is not 100 per cent, but 95 per cent that Zionist hands are behind what happened."
In his interview today, Prince Turki contends that Saudi Arabia has been subjected to concerted attacks by "so-called 'experts' with Zionist connections" for 50 years, and particularly since the terror atrocities of September 11, 2001.
"Is it beyond any comprehension or understanding that such attacks come at us from the Zionists on one side and from al-Qaeda on the other side and not make connection between them?" he asked.
The ambassador also says that the families of victims of terror attacks committed in Saudi Arabia, including Westerners, can still insist on the death penalty for their killers under Islamic sharia law, despite the offer of a state amnesty to terrorists who surrender in the next month.
He insists that the regime is doing everything it can to root out terrorists and rejects claims that the Saudi royal family's days are numbered.
Comment: While we have no love lost for the Saudis, what is clear is that Lord Janner of Braunstone is an ignorant man whose ignorance is a danger to his constituents. The poor guy has obviously never heard of what are commonly called "False Flag Operations." FFOs are standard operating procedure for MOSSAD, the CIA and other agencies with agendas.
We now count the Saudi Ambassador to London among those that support the view that Mossad and their "Zionist" masters are behind the "terrorist" attacks. To date the only groups that disagree with this assessment are the accused and their supporters, which naturally, we expect them to do. It is NOT rocket science, at this stage it is very, very clear that Israel was behind the 9/11 attacks, and are doing much to perpetuate a "phony war on terror" that clearly serves the interests of Israel.
Bruce Kennedy | June 25 2004
Over the past months, JUS has been watching a frightening trend of "false flag" operations being waged by US intelligence. The latest in the series is Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, who has been accredited with everything from the Ricin attacks (which later turned out to be fake) to the resistance in Fallujah. An amazing enemy in deed for a man who has the starring role in an American "False Flag" operation.
As America escalates its "war on terrorism" which in fact is a war on Islam, the need to escalate disinformation and propaganda is also prevalent, particularly when the American public is losing its stomach for the battle, when American lives are being lost each day and when the President continues to be caught red handed in one scandal after another.
To rouse public opinion to support America's colonial war effort, the US intelligence community has created it own terrorist organizations. War propaganda, disinformation and counterterrorism are braided together to achieve the maximum result, for "terrorism" must remain front and center in the minds of American citizens if America is going to reach its foreign policy objectives, be it under George Bush or John Kerry.
Here’s how it works. The disinformation is circulated to the news media and then the intelligence community creates its own terror warnings concerning the very organizations it has created. In some cases, the disinformation appears in advance, in order to pave the way for an up and coming act of "terror" that roots in a desired political outcome. This problem/solution equation always appears when the war effort is waning and serves to give a face to terror via an expensive advertising campaign.
And this is precisely what we have in Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, America’s new "public enemy No 1". Zarqawi and his group have been used, from the justification for the invasion of Iraq to the latest "barbaric" videotaped beheadings that his group claims to have carried out. The US State Department has increased the reward for his arrest from $10 million to $25 million, which puts his "market value" at par with that of Osama. Interestingly, Al Zarqawi is not on the FBI most wanted fugitives list.
What follows are excerpts from an in-depth report from The Centre for Research on Globalization that has gone to considerable lengths to document this false flag operation. The complete article can be read here
Al Zarqawi's Links to Al Qaida
Al Zarqawi is often described as an "Osama associate", the bogyman, allegedly responsible for numerous terrorist attacks in several countries. In other reports, often emanating from the same sources, it is stated that he has no links to Al Qaida and operates quite independently. He is often presented as an individual who is challenging the leadership of bin Laden.
His name crops up on numerous occasions in press reports and official statements. Since early 2004, he is in the news almost on a daily basis.
Osama belongs to the powerful bin Laden family, which historically had business ties to the Bushes and prominent members of the Texas oil establishment. Bin Laden was recruited by the CIA during the Soviet-Afghan war and fought as a Mujahideen. In other words, there is a longstanding documented history of bin Laden-CIA and bin Laden-Bush family links, which are an obvious source of embarrassment to the US government.
In contrast to bin Laden, Al-Zarqawi has no family history. He comes from an impoverished Palestinian family in Jordan. His parents are dead. He emerges out of the blue.
He is described by CNN as "a lone wolf" who is said to act quite independently of the Al Qaida network. Yet surprisingly, this lone wolf is present in several countries, in Iraq, which is now his base, but also in Western Europe. He is also suspected of preparing a terrorist attack on American soil.
He seems to be in several places at the same time. He is described as "the chief U.S. enemy", "a master of disguise and bogus identification papers". We are led to believe that this "lone wolf" manages to outwit the most astute US intelligence operatives.
According to The Weekly Standard --which is known to have a close relationship to the Neocons in the Bush administration: "Abu Musab al Zarqawi is hot right now. He masterminded not only Berg's murder but also the Madrid carnage on March 11, the bombardment of Shia worshippers in Iraq the same month, and the April 24 suicide attack on the port of Basra. But he is far from a newcomer to slaughter. Well before 9/11, he had already concocted a plot to kill Israeli and American tourists in Jordan. His label is on terrorist groups and attacks on four continents." (Weekly Standard, 24 May 2004)
Al-Zarqawi's profile "is mounting a challenge to bin Laden's leadership of the global jihad."
In Iraq, he is said to be determined to "ignite a civil war between Sunnis and Shiites". But is that not precisely what US intelligence is aiming at ( "divide and rule") as confirmed by several analysts of the US led war? Pitting one group against the other with a view to weakening the resistance movement.
The CIA, with its $30 billion plus budget, pleads ignorance: they say they know nothing about him, they have a photograph, but, according to the Weekly Standard (24 May 2004), they apparently do not know his weight or height.
There is an aura of mystery surrounding this individual which is part of the propaganda ploy. Zarqawi is described as "so secretive even some operatives who work with him do not know his identity."
What is the role of this new mastermind in the Pentagon's disinformation campaign, in which CNN seems to be playing a central role?
In previous propaganda ploys, the CIA hired PR firms to organize core disinformation campaigns, including the Rendon Group. The latter worked closely with its British partner Hill and Knowlton, which was responsible for the 1990 Kuwaiti incubator media scam, where Kuwaiti babies were allegedly removed from incubators in a totally fabricated news story, which was then used to get Congressional approval for the 1991 Gulf War.
What is the pattern?
Almost immediately in the wake of a terrorist event or warning, CNN announces (in substance): we think this mysterious individual Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi is behind it, invariably without supporting evidence and prior to the conduct of an investigation by the relevant police and intelligence authorities.
In some cases, upon the immediate occurrence of the terrorist event, there is an initial report which mentions Al-Zarqawi as the possible mastermind. The report will often say (in substance): yes we think he did it, but it is not yet confirmed and there is some doubt on the identity of those behind the attack. One or two days later, CNN may come up with a definitive statement, quoting official police, military and/or intelligence sources.
Often the CNN report is based on information published on an Islamic website or a mysterious Video or Audio tape. The authenticity of the website and/or the tapes is not the object of Discussion Or Detailed Investigation. [...]
Was it a coincidence? At the very outset of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, there were rumors of an Al Zarqawi terrorist attack on American Soil, in Jordan as well as in Iraq.
Al Zarqawi identified by CNN as "the lone wolf" was, according to these reports, planning terrorist attacks simultaneously in several countries. Then there was the mysterious video on the Nicholas Berg execution.
The Attacks in Jordan
A mysterious tape released by CNN pointed to Al Zarqawi's plan to attack the Jordanian intelligence headquarters in an attack using chemical weapons which could have been more deadly than 9/11. Again the evidence is based on a mysterious tape.
Alleged Al Zarqawi "Attack on America"
Two days later, following the alleged terrorist threat on Jordanian intelligence, the State Department announced that Al Zarqawi was planning an attack on America (29 April 2004, CNN Report). Note that the rumours of an attack on America and the attack in Jordan took place virtually at the same time. [...]
"The State Department says terrorists are planning an attack on U.S. soil. High on their anxiety list, terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. He is representative of a very real and credible threat. His operatives are planning and attempting now to attack American targets, and we are after them with a vengeance." CNN
Bear in mind that the Attack on America report, focusing on "We are after them with a vengeance", was published one day following the CBS 60 minutes program on torture at the Abu Ghraib prison. (Complete transcript at http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CBS405A.html ).
The Nicholas Berg Video
Barely a couple of weeks later (11 May 2004), Al Zarqawi is reported as being the mastermind behind the execution of Nicholas Berg on May 11, 2004.
Again perfect timing! The report coincided with calls by US Senators for Defense Sec Donald Rumsfeld to resign over the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. It occurs a few days after President Bush's "apology" for the Abu Ghraib prison "abuses" on May 6.
The Nicholas Berg video served to create "a useful wave of indignation" which served to distract and soften up public opinion, following the release of the pictures of torture of Iraqi prisoners.
CNN coverage of the Nicholas Berg execution was based on a mysterious report on an Islamic website, which CNN upholds as providing "evidence" of Al-Zarqawi's involvement: "The Web site claims that the killing was done by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian terrorist whose al Qaida affiliated group is held responsible by U.S. intelligence for a string of bombings in Iraq and for the killing of an American diplomat in Amman. CNN Arab linguists say, however, that the voice on the tape has the wrong accent. They do not believe it is Zarqawi. U.S. officials said the killers tried to take advantage of the prison abuse controversy to gain attention."
A subsequent more definitive report by CNN was aired 2 days later on 13 May 2004.
"The CIA confirms that Nicholas Berg's killer was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi; The CIA acknowledges sticking to strict rules in tough interrogations of top al Qaida prisoners." (CNN)
"Blitzer: Because originally our own linguists here at CNN suspected that -- they listened to this audiotape and they didn't think it sounded like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. But now definitively, the experts at the CIA say it almost certainly is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? Ensor: They say it almost certainly is. There's just a disagreement between the CNN linguists and the CIA linguists. The U.S. Government now believes that the person speaking on that tape and killing Nick Berg on that tape is the actual man, Abu Musab al- Zarqawi."
Did the US officials check the mysterious website or was it CNN?
The video footage published on the website was called "Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi shows killing of an American". Then the CIA experts released a statement saying that Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was the man in the mask who beheaded the US citizen Nick Berg in front of a camera." Yet several reports question the authenticity of the video.
Al Zarqawi is Jordanian. Yet the man in the video posing as Jordanian native Zarqawi does not speak the Jordanian dialect. Zarqawi has an artificial leg, but none of these murderers did. The man presented as Zarqawi had a yellow ring, presumably a golden one, which Muslim men are banned from wearing, especially so-called fundamentalists. Another report states that Zarqawi was dead.
Immediately when the issue of his artificial leg was mentioned in relation to the video, US officials revised their story, stating they were not sure whether he actually lost a leg: "U.S. intelligence officials, who used to believe that Zarqawi had lost a leg in Afghanistan, recently revised that assessment, concluding that he still has both legs." (News and World Report, 24 May 2004).
There were a number of other aspects of the video, which suggest that it was a fraud: there was no blood when Nicholas Berg was beheaded. The audio was not in synchrony with the video, indicating that the film might have been manipulated.
We now also have the Kim Sun-Il beheading to add to Al-Zarqawi "list". The video tape strikes a close resemblance to that of Nick Bergs and raises just as many questions about its authenticity, with almost the same individuals appearing, the same orange prison gear and the same bloodless execution. It appeared on a website hosted in California and boasted links to Reuters, to the March of Dimes and the National Wildlife Federation. Both "barbaric" incidents have curiously occurred in quick succession following the Abu Ghraib atrocities.
While the US State Department has increased the reward for Al Zarqawi’s arrest from $10 million to $25 million, which equals that of Bin Laden, he is not on the FBI most wanted fugitives list. That’s because Al- Zarqawi is a product of American intelligence and the main actor in this covert false flag operation.
America is both creator and defender in this war on terrorism that exists only because of its greed for global dominance. While hatred is now raging against Muslims who are being attributed with the brutal acts the American government is in fact staging, Muslim anger is also growing as is the number of those who are prepared to stand in legitimate resistance against an enemy that respects no law, no human life or moral code.
By Tom Segel (06/26/2004)
[...] The shock of the initial explosion smashed into the vessel, breaking pipes, hydraulic lines, and twisting the propeller shaft. The fire pump was torn loose from its retaining straps; a smaller fire pump was torn loose and damaged equipment, including that used for fire control.
The ship was tossed about wildly and then was completely submerged by the surge. Slowly floundering to the surface, what was left of a 30,000-foot towline served to hold the ship steady, saving it from complete disaster.
The scene, in various forms, was repeated over and over again that afternoon on May 14, 1955. The initial devastation and the horrors of the aftermath were the result of the only deep-water atomic test performed by any nation. The test was conducted 500 miles southwest of San Diego, California and impacted 6,700 military service personnel, 120 civilian scientists and a fleet of 30 vessels. This was Operation Wigwam and it provided no safety for anyone involved.
It was only a matter of seconds following the detonation when the ocean seemed to explode. The surface at point zero became a boiling white circle, which spread outward for two miles. Radioactive seawater, spray and mist leaped upward until there was a column of water 3,500 feet high above the surrounding ships. Then a fireball broke the surface and became a two-mile circle of bright light.
There were repeated shock waves, which slammed into the circle of ocean craft, assembled for the test. The fleet was tossed and battered. Some were submerged in a tidal surge that reached 800 feet above their main masts. A giant wave 1,200 feet high rolled in the direction of the ships.
From that giant wave a spray of atomic mist enveloped every ship and every observer of the blast. The spray was later described in official government reports as an “insidious hazard, which turned into an invisible radioactive aerosol.”
[...] The complete devastation of Operation Wigwam may never be known. Due to signed secrecy agreements, high security classifications placed on government documents and even the removal of comments from military records showing individual participation in Operation Wigwam, the public remains uninformed. It may never be known how many became very ill, how many had lives of increased suffering or how many died because of the government’s failure to provide radiation protection and even health care to those how participated in the test.
As for the scientific evaluations of Operation Wigwam, they have now been released under the Freedom of Information Act.
*Scientists revealed that largely because of adverse weather conditions, fully 70 percent of the experiments were failures.
*The Wigwam detonation produced sufficient airborne contamination activity to have given radiation doses many times above the tolerance level of those military and civilian personnel exposed to the hot seawater fallout, and to the radioactive contaminated monitoring equipment.
*Airborne monitors stationed at San Diego measured a higher level of radioactivity over that city within four days of the blast. The radioactivity ranged from ten to twenty times the normal background levels for the next nine days.
*The frightening base surge tidal wave, created by the blast was characterized as an insidious hazard that turned into an invisible radioactive mist lingering for several days.
It has now been more than 49 years since Operation Wigwam and it was but one of 1066 United States sponsored atomic detonations participated in by the military personnel of this country. Those participants from all the uniformed services have still not been recognized as casualties of the “Cold War” and the Congress has still not passed legislation to give them unlimited medical assistance in the same manner as we treat all others who were wounded in action.
Comment: The men and women in the military are considered cannon fodder for the politicians at the top who have no scruples about sacrificing a country's youth on the battlefield, as long as a profit can be made or, at worst, a competitor can be prevented from making the profit. We see this in the fact that the US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan haven't been adequately prepared. They were dumped there with no thought of an exit strategy or of the consequences to them of occupying the country. Placed in an impossible position, they are reacting like the killing machines they have been trained to be.
The willingness of the Powers That Be to sacrifice "their own" shines a special light on the question of torture in Iraq. If these mad men and women are willing to sacrifice good, white soldiers for their nuclear experiements, why wouldn't they torture and humiliate a bunch of A-rabs if they thought it would help in the ficticious War on Terror? These types of experiments on US soldiers and civilians have been ongoing for decades. See out Cosmic COINTELPRO Timeline for more.
The CIA has halted harsh interrogation techniques approved by the White House pending a review by the justice department, a US newspaper reports.
The Washington Post said the techniques - including feigned drowning, denial of pain medication and sleep deprivation - had been used on al-Qaeda suspects.
An unnamed official was quoted as saying the tactics were on hold while checks were made on their legality.
The move follows the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq.
The White House said on Tuesday it was reviewing a justice department memo from August 2002 that detailed how to avoid violating US and international laws when interrogating prisoners.
The CIA's decision to suspend what it calls "enhanced interrogation techniques" applies to the agency's facilities around the world and not military prisons such as Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, the Post said.
Comment: Pushed into a corner, the CIA is becoming concerned with "legality". What a joke. They have been illegally meddling in the internal affairs of other countries since the agency was founded. We see their current work not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also in the coup attempt and massive destabilisation of Venezuela. This is business as usual for the CIA and the other alphabet soup organizations in the US and elsewhere.
But what to do about it?
Ah, there's the rub. We don't think that military coups in defense of the Constitution are the way. There are no political solutions. There are no economic solutions. Face it, people have been trying for thousands of years to create societies where we could raise our families in peace, have the security of food, shelter, and the satisfaction of work that is fulfilling. And after these thousands of years of trying, of theories and philosophies and religions, what do we see?
The Signs of the Times each day telling us that this poor old globe is spinning out of control, and this may not even be a figure of speech!
The trouble is, we are all little George Bushes in one way or another. We lie to others, we think we are just so important, so special, we think we deserve all that we desire and get upset when life doesn't work out. And a lot of the time we aren't even thinking at all, just lost in an automatic process of daydreams. Bush said he likes being president because everyone has to explain themselves to him, but he never needs to explain himself to anyone else. Aren't we all a bit like that, too?
So if this is how WE are, how can we complain when a primping and prancing psychopath like Bush becomes the leader of the most powerful country in the world? The universe is sending us a message; can we read it?
www.chinaview.cn 2004-06-27 13:36:00
BEIJING, June 27 (Xinhuanet) -- WASHINGTON: The United States is losing the war against terrorism, and sticking to current policies will only make its enemies in the Islamic world grow stronger, a CIA analyst says in a book signed "anonymous."
"Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror," scheduled to be released on July 15, is the latest book by a government insider criticizing the administration's national security policies, reported Saturday's China Daily.
This one is still more unusual in that the CIA's role in government is to provide intelligence to policymakers, not formulate opinions about those policies.
"Anonymous" has appeared this week in silhouette on television news shows talking about the book. His first name is Mike and he is an analyst at the CIA's Counterterrorist Centre where he once led the unit that focused on al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
The book's main point is that US leaders are wrong to tell the public that Muslim extremists attack Americans because of disapproval of the US' way of life.
Instead, it is anger at specific US policies that is fueling growing anti-American sentiment in the Islamic world, even among non-radicals.
Comment: The one important point left out of this book is that al Qaeda was put into place by the CIA and it continues to function as a CIA asset. Or is that a Mossad asset? These days there isn't much difference. Sure, it is great that someone is finally stating the obvious: US politics in the Middle East are the cause of the intense hatred many people in this region feel for the US. This is a logical, quite normal reaction to having your homes razed, your livelihoods taken away, your family and friends blown away by a facist force masquarading as democrats. Look at the rabid reaction among Americans when they thought it was "Islamic terrorists" that did in the World Trade Center! Of course the people in the Mid East are upset!
But you couldn't tell that to the US mindless masses. No, they preferred to believe that "they hated our freedoms."
Maybe the tide is turning. It would be nice to think so. Unfortunately, it is a little too convenient. Throw out Bush and put in Kerry. Everyone thinks that "America has been saved", then, wham, the process continues with no change. Sure, Kerry may be "better" internally in the US. In a small way. Very small. But for those of us in the rest of the world, it ain't gonna change jack. Same foreign policy, same bosses.
Look back to Watergate. Remember how good it felt to get rid of Tricky Dick? And what did Gerald Ford do? Bring in the gang that is running things today! Cheney, Rummy, Bush Sr. Ah! America works!
Now we have folks telling us that the CIA is patriotic, that they are ready to defend the Constitution. Same thing for the military. And there are some people out there who buy into this. The folks that teach crooks in Latin America to torture are going to defend the Constitution. The same people that are in the process of undermining democracy in Venezuela are going to defend it in the USA!
Trouble is, the ways out are shrinking. The more you study them, the more you understand that they are traps. It is a labyrinth with all paths leading to the cancerous growth glittering gold in the middle. The only way out of the labyrinth is... well, you have to study the labyrinth, know it. You follow the various paths, look at how it is made, look at how it tricks you into thinking you are making progress when, in fact, you are simply going the same direction on a different branch. As long as you accept that one of the branches gets you out, you are lost. You'll only start looking for the real way out when you come to the conclusion that the apparent and visible paths are not going to do it. Then you may meet up with others who have taken some of the paths you haven't tried. You compare notes, exchange information. You form a network, a group of people who are all working for the same thing, who have turned their back on the labyrinth, on the need for the labyrinth.
For one group of people looking at ways out of the labyrinth, there is the casschat group on Yahoo.
J. McDonnell Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
BAGHDAD — As this week's coordinated violence demonstrates, Iraq's insurgent movement is increasingly potent, riding a wave of anti-U.S. nationalism and religious extremism. Just days before an Iraqi government takes control of the country, experts and some commanders fear it may be too late to turn back the militant tide.
The much-anticipated wave of strikes preceding Wednesday's scheduled hand-over could intensify under the new interim government as Sunni Muslim insurgents seek to undermine it, U.S. and Iraqi officials say.
"I think we're going to continue to see sensational attacks," said Army Maj. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the 101st Airborne Division commander who will oversee the reshaping of Iraq's fledgling security forces.
Long gone are the days when the insurgents were dismissed as a finite force ticketed for high-tech annihilation by superior U.S. firepower.
Wreaking havoc and derailing plans for reconstruction of this battered nation, the dominant guerrilla movement — an unlikely Sunni alliance of hard-liners from the former regime, Islamic militants and anti-U.S. nationalists — has taken over towns, blocked highways, bombed police stations, assassinated lawmakers and other "collaborators," and abducted civilians.
Although Shiite Muslim fighters took U.S. forces by surprise in an April uprising, the Sunni insurgents represent a stronger, long-term threat, experts agree. The fighters, commanders say, are overwhelmingly Iraqis, with a small but important contingent of foreign fighters who specialize in carrying out suicide bombings and other spectacular attacks, possibly including this week's coordinated strikes that killed more than 100 people.
"They are effective," said Army Lt. Gen. Thomas F. Metz, operational commander of U.S. troops here.
The insurgent force has picked up legions of part-time nationalist recruits enraged by the lengthy occupation and the mounting toll on civilians. Whether the result of U.S. or insurgent fire, the casualties are blamed on Americans.
The anti-U.S. momentum is evident in both the nation's urban centers and the palm-shrouded Sunni rural heartland, where resentment over military sweeps and the torturous pace of reconstruction is pervasive. Support for the insurgency ranges from quiet assent to participation in the fighting.
"We're talking about people who are the equivalent of the Minutemen," said Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert who served as an advisor for the U.S.-led occupation here. "They pick up their weapons and join the fight and then go back to their homes and farms. It makes it so fluid. And the media functions as the town crier, like the calls from the minaret." [...]
The characteristics of the insurgency in Iraq are familiar from earlier campaigns in Vietnam and elsewhere, Hoffman wrote in a recent paper: "A population will give its allegiance to the side that will best protect it." [...]
Although U.S. officials have labeled Jordanian fugitive Abu Musab Zarqawi a mastermind in the wave of attacks that has shaken the country since last year, commanders say the insurgents' coordination is unclear.
"We can't find … a particular command and control structure that leads to one or two or three particular nodes," Metz said. "But I'm confident there are some leaders who have the wealth to continue … paying people to do business."
U.S. authorities have jailed dozens of cell chiefs but watched in frustration as the groups have regenerated and fought anew. "These kinds of networks, you chop off one part and the other part keeps on moving," Petraeus said.
The insurgents have other strengths: plentiful weapons (in many cases, looted from unguarded armories at the end of the invasion last year); easy mobility, in the form of a relatively modern highway system; and communications, in the form of cellphones and access to regional television channels such as Al Jazeera. [...]
Trying to defeat such a foe militarily can drag opposing forces into a withering cycle of violence, especially in a culture where families feel obliged to avenge the death of loved ones.
"The nature of this culture is you can't win a war of attrition with them," said Col. Robert B. Abrams of the Army's 1st Cavalry Division in Baghdad, "because it's a circle of violence — there will always be someone in the family who will pick up arms. Unless you want to kill too many people. Which of course we never want to do." [...]
Amid the triumphant declarations, it is now widely agreed, the U.S. leadership was disastrously slow to anticipate that this primitive enemy could grow into a formidable foe. [...]
As disillusionment with the occupation grew, the armed resistance spread throughout the Sunni heartland, from greater Baghdad to the vast expanses to the west and north. [...]
By DENNIS HANS
Fans of romance are disheartened to see Vice President Dick Cheney lash out at his long-time sweetie pie, the New York Times, for allegedly distorting the findings of the 9-11 Commission to make it appear that it had contradicted statements by Cheney and his boss about the relationship between Saddam’s Iraq and al Qaeda.
It seemed like only yesterday that Cheney and the Times strolled hand in hand.
Harken back to the summer of 2002. In August, Cheney delivered a scary speech about Saddam’s programs for nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. A couple weeks later, on Sept. 8, New York Times reporters Judith Miller and Michael Gordon wrote a lurid (and now discredited) tale about aluminum tubes and other things that gave credence to Cheney’s warning. That very morning, Cheney popped up on Meet the Press and cited the Times story as further evidence of Saddam’s nuclear obsession!
“There's a story in the New York Times this morning — this is — I don't — and I want to attribute the Times,” said Cheney. “I don't want to talk about, obviously, specific intelligence sources, but it's now public that, in fact, he has been seeking to acquire, and we have been able to intercept and prevent him from acquiring through this particular channel, the kinds of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge.”
Yes, in 2002 Cheney and the Times were quite the item.
But if you had been paying close attention, you already knew that. Cheney and the Times first got together in 2001 — on the very story that’s at the heart of the current spat: the Iraq-al Qaeda connection, and in particular, Iraq’s connection to 9-11.
In the past few days Cheney has been trashed in the media — particularly what passes for the “liberal” media — over an exchange in a June 17, 2004 interview with CNBC’s Gloria Borger. Have a listen:
Alas, as many have now pointed out, Cheney did say what Borger said he had said. Here’s his reply to Tim Russert on the Dec. 9, 2001 Meet the Press: “it's been pretty well confirmed that he [Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack.”
Fast forward to mid-October. President Bush continues to trail Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry in the presidential election polls, not so much because Kerry has electrified the American electorate, but because he's not Bush. Then it happens - the "October Surprise."
The original "October Surprise" was allegedly carried out in 1980 by officials of Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign. Iranian militants had stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979, taking approximately 66 American hostages. President Jimmy Carter's administration pursued the return of the hostages but had little success. Years later, former Carter administration staffer Gary Sick attributed Carter's setback in this matter to overtures made to the Iranian government by officials of the Reagan campaign.
By encouraging the Iranians to continue holding the hostages beyond the November 1980 presidential election, the Reagan supporters believed that their candidate would have a much better opportunity to unseat Carter. Whether or not Reagan's entourage actually convinced the Iranians to withhold the release of the hostages is still rigorously disputed. What is beyond dispute, however, is that Iran released the remaining hostages on Jan. 20, 1981, immediately after Reagan took office.
So if you were Karl Rove, Bush's top political strategist, and your candidate was slipping in the polls, what re- election strategy would you be cooking up right now?
And, of course, some unexpected events could occur over which the Bush campaign has no control. A Web site called October Surprise!, is hosting an online poll in which visitors can vote for the incident they regard most likely to occur before the November election. The events below (in ascending order) received the most votes from the 6,000-plus respondents. [...]
Ednalino and Jim Ward
Could the weekend premiere of the movie "Fahrenheit 9/11" influence the outcome of November's presidential elections?
It appears to be so for several moviegoers who attended screenings on Friday of controversial documentary director Michael Moore's latest film. [...]
Visalia resident Mike Lorah went to a 2 p.m. screening. Lorah, 28, said he considers himself a conservative Republican but the film has convinced him not to vote for President Bush.
"I'd have to say that I agree with the message that was made in the film, even with me being a Republican," Lorah said. "This would probably be the first time I don't vote for a Republican, but I don't think John Kerry's any better." [...]
Many people said they would recommend the movie to others.
"I think every responsible adult should watch this movie so they can make up their own mind about what's going on in this country," Visalia resident Buddy Jones said.
Comment: Nothing has changed. Americans are being reprogrammed to question Bush instead of supporting him. Anyone who thinks that watching one film can help them to make up their mind about what is occurring in the US is deluding themselves.
"It was excellent, Paul Garcia of Visalia said. "It told the truth about why we went to war."
Comment: If the war was not about finding Osama in Afghanistan and liberating Iraq, then Bush and the corporate media lied. Why would anyone assume, then, that the whole truth would be in one little film?
Ed Bergtholdt of Springville called the film "compulsory viewing."
"It's a crime how we got involved in this immoral war," he said.
Nancy Dowd of Visalia said she was originally concerned the movie would be too violent.
"But it's not a violent movie," she said. "It makes you think about what's going on and realize that the war is harming a lot of people."
Comment: It seems that people do not want to think on their own. They want to be made to think - instructed on what and how to think. How could the war not be harming a lot of people? That's why they call it war instead of peace.
Melinda Lumpkin, Dowd's daughter, said she was shocked to learn in the film that President Bush's family had done business in the past with Osama bin Laden and his family. She also said she's no longer supportive of the president or any of his family.
Comment: We have brought up this link on the Signs page since Bush first began his war on terror. The data was always there, but very few people actually bothered to look for it. Now Ms. Lumpkin and other moviegoers are confronted with the idea that they were not told the whole truth. So what do they do? They stop supporting Bush and start supporting Kerry, since there is no other alternative. Do they ever stop to think that if they were lied to or given half-truths in the past two years, then this new "revelation" in the form of Michael Moore's latest film could also be revealing only part of the true story?
"I have a brother-in-law who's a Marine," she said. "It's scary. There is no reason for this. No reason."
Three Rivers resident Bruce Keller said his wife cried during the film.
"It was a very sad movie," he said. "It was a great piece of art about the horrors of war."
By Stephanie Simon Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
Before the movie started, Leslie Hanser prayed.
"I prayed the Lord would open my eyes," she said.
For months, her son Joshua, a college student, had been drawing her into political debate. He'd tell her she shouldn't trust President Bush. He'd tell her the Iraq war was wrong. Hanser, a 41-year-old homemaker, pushed back. She defended the president, supported him fiercely
But Joshua kept at her, until she prayed for help understanding her son's fervor.
Emerging from Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," her eyes wet, Hanser said she at last understood. "My emotions are just…. " She trailed off, waving her hands to show confusion. "I feel like we haven't seen the whole truth before."
That's the reaction Moore hopes to provoke with his film, which explores the ties between the Bush family and Osama bin Laden's relatives, the president's response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the war in Iraq. Moore has said he aims to shake the apathetic, move the undecided — and inspire voters to deny President Bush a second term.
Riding a week of enormous publicity, and controversy, "Fahrenheit 9/11" was a hit at the box office. Opening Friday on 868 screens, the movie grossed more than the farces "White Chicks" and "DodgeBall," even though those films showed on far more screens.
Industry sources estimated that the weekend gross for "Fahrenheit 9/11" could approach $20 million. That's close to the $21.6 million that Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" — until now, the highest-grossing documentary ever — took in during its entire run.
"Fahrenheit 9/11" got a shot of free publicity when Walt Disney Co., concerned about the movie's partisan edge, barred its subsidiary from releasing it. The buzz only grew last month when the film won the top prize at the Cannes Film Festival.
Yet its appeal seemed to take some by surprise: In the heavily Latino and Asian community of Downey, theater manager William Vasquez was surprised at the line — which was so long, he decided to show the film on two screens simultaneously Friday night. "I don't know of any documentary that has created this kind of stir," he said, noting that even teenagers seemed "glued to the screen."
In many cities, and even in conservative suburbs, the crowds were predictably (and loudly) liberal, hissing and hooting their reactions to Bush on screen.
Here in suburban St. Louis — in a multiplex catering to well-off neighborhoods that were flocked with Bush/Cheney signs in 2000 — the rowdy throng cheered when a man in back stood to shout an appeal for Democratic Party volunteers. "Anyone here for [Ralph] Nader?" another man called out. He was booed.
Across the country, in another conservative neighborhood, the audience at an Orange County multiplex chanted: "Throw Bush out! Throw Bush out!" as the lights came on. [...]
Outside a sold-out screening Friday on Santa Monica's Third Street Promenade, activists stamped hands with peace signs and passed around petitions calling for universal healthcare, gay rights and the repeal of the Patriot Act.
"I can't imagine anyone coming out of [the movie] and not working their brains out to get rid of this administration," said Mimi Adams, 70, who was holding a sign that said: "No One Died When Clinton Lied."
In theaters nationwide, many viewers said they couldn't imagine loyal Republicans coming to see a movie the Bush administration had dismissed as a twisted montage of misleading innuendo and outright falsehoods. But for all the partisan hooting, the movie did appear to draw at least a strong smattering of the Republican and the undecided voters that Moore most desperately hopes to reach.
And some of them said they were deeply moved.
Moved enough, perhaps, to consider voting for Kerry in November.
For Richard Hagen, 56, it was the footage from Iraq: the raw cries of bombed civilians, the clenched-teeth agony of wounded American troops. A retired insurance agent from the wealthy River Oaks neighborhood in central Houston, Hagen described himself as a lifelong Republican. But then, standing by his silver Mercedes, he amended that: A former lifelong Republican.
"Seeing [the war] brings it home in a way you don't get from reading about it," he said. "I won't be voting for a Republican presidential candidate this time."
Mary Butler, too, may not bring herself to punch the ballot for Bush.
She didn't vote for him in 2000. But Butler, 48, said until this weekend, she was leaning strongly toward supporting him this year. "In a war situation, I figured it was too hard to switch horses midstream. I thought the country would be too vulnerable," she said.
Butler, a librarian from suburban St. Louis, said one sentence in Moore's film made her rethink.
After showing faces of the men and women of America's military, Moore reminds his audience that they have volunteered to sacrifice their futures for our country. We owe them just one obligation, he says: to send them into harm's way only when we absolutely must.
That got Butler. She doesn't feel the war in Iraq fits into that category. And that one sentence — a filmmaker's accusing voice-over — might cost Bush her vote in the pivotal swing state of Missouri: "This is probably the strongest I've ever felt about voting against him," she said.
Their tears reflected in the bluish light of the movie screen, many viewers here and elsewhere seemed especially moved by the story of Lila Lipscomb, the mother at the heart of "Fahrenheit 9/11." When Moore first encounters her in Flint, Mich., she speaks with pride of her children's military service, of all the opportunities the armed forces can give them. Then her son was killed in Iraq.
Appearing with Moore at the film's premiere in Washington, Lipscomb received a standing ovation.
"President Bush said he was a president of war," Lipscomb said. "Well, I stand before you tonight as a mother that is now a mother of war. I urge all of America to stop being ignorant. Open your eyes to see. Open your ears to hear. Open your mouth to speak."
Many who watched "Fahrenheit 9/11" over the weekend vowed the movie would spur them to do just that — to look deeper, listen closer, to speak out with conviction. [...]
Not content with lambasting the Bush administration, Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is now poised to bite the very hand that feeds it - albeit inadvertently.
One of Moore's prime targets is the Carlyle Group, a Washington DC-based investment firm that allegedly links the Bush and Bin Laden families. The trouble is that the company recently became co-owner of the very cinema chain due to screen Fahrenheit 9/11 across America.
On its US release this Friday, Moore's film will play on 59 screens of the Loews cinema chain. But Variety reports that the chain is now part-owned by the Carlyle Group, a defence contractor that Moore derides as a war profiteer with extensive ties with the Bin Ladens and the Saudi royal family. The first president Bush worked as a highly paid adviser to the company, while James Baker - chief of staff under Ronald Reagan - is currently employed as a senior counsellor.
Yesterday the film's independent distributor, Lion's Gate Films Releasing, appeared to be steering clear of the controversy, claiming that they were not even aware of the Carlyle Group's involvement in the Loews chain. "Loews has been very supportive," said Lion's Gate president Tom Ortenberg. [...]
"FAHRENHEIT 9/11" documents that the American people have been lied to in the push for war. There were no weapons of mass destruction. Saddam was not a threat. Iraq had no link to 9-11. Iraq was not supporting Al Qaeda. The government of Iraq under Saddam killed far fewer Iraqi people than the government of Iraq under George Bush. The Kurds were actually gassed by Iran (and does the name "Waco" ring a bell?). The only nuclear weapons found in Iraq are the tons of depleted uranium munitions dropped on the Iraqi people by the United States. And, far from being the champion of human rights, the United States stands exposed as a willing user of torture on prisoners who in many cases were innocent of any wrongdoing.
That's the major message. We The People were lied to about, well, just about everything. Including 9-11 itself. Bush sat there and read about goats while the towers fell. The video tape of "Osama's" confession turned out to be fake. Osama himself turned out to be a fake, a CIA asset trained and funded by the US to fight the USSR in Afghanistan. Blair's dossier turned out to be fake, plagiarized from a student thesis. The mobile biological weapons trailers turned out to be fake; actually balloon inflators sold by the British to Iraq. And on and on and on. Deception after deception after deception.
Everyone agrees on this major message. We've been lied to. We are the victims of history's greatest and deadliest hoax; a hoax perpetrated to ignite a war of conquest. Michael Moore's film does a great job of confronting that deadly fact.
But, Michael Moore has himself either fallen for disinformation, or simply not done his homework, and seems willing to accept without question the official story of 9-11.
Now, it may be that Michael Moore just didn't care to get into 9-11 itself that deeply. Moore seems mostly focused on the aircraft allowed to fly out of the United States in the days immediately after 9-11 while the rest of the nation's aircraft were grounded. On these flights were members of Osama bin Laden's family. The Bush's and bin Ladens go back a long way. Osama's brother was George's business partner in Abusto Energy and source of the seed money to start the company. It is reportedly because of this connection that Osama was recruited to play holy warrior for the CIA in Afghanistan against the USSR. So there is no question that those flights did occur, and that Osama's family members were among the passengers.
At issue is whether this fact of the aircraft flights points the finger of blame for 9-11 at Saudi Arabia. After first being told that Afghanistan was to blame for 9-11, then Iraq was to blame for 9-11, one should take any claims of any Arab country being identified as the perpetrator of 9-11 with a huge heaping of salt. Michael Moore, who clearly recognized the claims about Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction, the supposed link from Saddam to Al Qaeda and to 9- 11 as lies, shows a dangerous naiveté in his willingness accept the official story of 9-11 without question.
So, let's take a look at the idea of Saudi Arabia as the perpetrator of 9-11. Why would they do it? What would they gain? Immediately after the attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attack would mean for US-Israeli relations. His quick reply was: "It's very good……. Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)". The months since 9-11 have borne that out. US support for Israel's agenda grew stronger as Israel committed more atrocities against the Palestinians. More money flowed from the US to Israel. World opinion, which had been growing against Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, temporarily abated. World hostility towards Arabs in general grew. Forgotten was the fact that Israel was actually in defiance of more UN Resolutions than Saddam had ever been. And, it was assumed at the start of the war that direct access to Iraq's oil would reduce American demand for Saudi oil, and likely force prices down as Iraq's oil came to market. So, where was the motive? Do you really think Saudi Arabia would commit an act that would strengthen US-Israeli ties? Do you really think Saudi Arabia would commit an act that would undercut their own oil revenues? Do you really think Saudi Arabia would commit an act that would anger the world against Arabs? Do you really think Saudi Arabia would commit an act that could result in their almost one trillion dollars invested in the United States to be legally frozen and confiscated? Me neither. If Saudi Arabia wanted to hurt the United States, all they would have to do is withdraw their investment cash all at once. The move would be perfectly legal, and cause greater economic damage than the 9-11 attacks.
Here are some facts that for some reason did not make it into the final cut of "Fahrenheit 9/11"
On 9-11, five men were arrested for suspicious behavior, cheering and laughing while the WTC collapsed. In the van police found cash, multiple passports, and maps with the World Trade Center highlighted. Bomb-sniffing dogs indicated explosives residue were present in the truck. The arrested men were Israelis, later identified by Pacific Radio as agents of the Israeli intelligence service, the Mossad. According to Carl Cameron's FOX News story on the Israeli spy ring, the US Government classified evidence that linked the arrested Israeli spies to 9-11. The Mossad agents were using a moving company, Urban Moving Systems, for a cover. The owner of the company, Dominic Suter, abandoned his business after 9-11 and fled to Israel on 9-14.
The 9-11 scene was littered with passports using Saudi names, passports which the FBI admitted just ten days later were high-quality fakes using identities stolen from Arab men. We don't know who was on those planes, only who we were supposed to THINK were on those planes. Why would Saudi Arabia commit 9-11 and use phony passports pointing back to themselves? If Saudi Arabia had done 9-11, it is safe to assume the phony passports would have likely pointed to Israel. FBI Director Robert Mueller has admitted in public that there is actually no evidence that proves the named 9-11 hijackers were actually on the aircraft.
The warnings of the attack sent to Odigo in New York and Israel before the 9-11 planes had even left the ground confirms beyond question that Israeli-linked companies did receive advance warning. Why would Saudi Arabia warn Israeli companies if they were behind 9-11?
It wasn't a Saudi-owned company in charge of security at all three of the 9-11 airports.
If Saudi Arabia was a partner with Al Qaeda for 9-11, why is Al Qaeda carrying out terror attacks against the Saudi Royal family now?
Speaking of "Al Qaeda", when Palestinian police arrested an Al Qaeda cell, they discovered they were holding a group of Mossad agents.
A final point: The nation that helped the US Government stage a fake terror event to launch wars of conquest in the Mideast would be in an ideal position to blackmail the US Government with that very secret. So, look back over the more than two years since 9-11 and find the nation for whom the US Government just cannot seem to do enough, cannot give enough money and weapons, cannot block enough UN Resolutions, the nation for whom a long standing neutral foreign policy has been cast aside in favor out total support for an expansionist agenda. Find the nation whose leaders openly brag of their control of the US Government.
If Michael Moore didn't quite do all his homework with regard to who may have been behind the 9-11 attack, that does not change the fact that the people of the United States were lied to to trick them into wars. And it is THAT message of the film which is the important one. But the hard fact remains that Michael Moore did not get ALL of the story of 9-11. Not by a long shot. "Fahrenheit 9/11" is just the tip of the iceberg.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is not an indictment of just George Bush. Fahrenheit 9/11 is not an indictment of just Republicans. Fahrenheit 9/11 is an indictment of the entire US Government that had to know Bush was lying to the American people to initiate as war and stood there smiling blandly while he did it. Like Hitler, Bush could not do what he did without a lot of cooperation by the entire government and the media. Look at the voting records for the authorization for the use of force in Iraq and in the draconian assaults on our freedoms. Both parties voted those "Ayes". The rush to war and dictatorship was a bipartisan one, worthy of bipartisan blame. Everyone is spinning Fahrenheit 9/11 to attack their own favorite scapegoats, but the truth is there is more than enough blame for the wars and the current state of the nation to share all around.
Comment: The above spells out clearly how untenable the official story as promoted by the mainstream media actually is. Any rational being with a functioning frontal cortex should be able to See, with a little research, that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job, designed to facilitate the entire bogus "war on terror", allowing extremist elements within the US (and global) power structure to herd the planet's population to a much finer order of control.
But to what end?
In the short term and on one level, it is clearly an attempt to consolidate US power around the world. In the slightly longer term this 'herding' process may well be to ensure the continued control of humanity's perception of reality, in preparation for some cataclysmic event, which may, or may not transpire in the next few years. How can we say all this? Research. Objective analysis of history, science, religion etc. The Signs are all around us, for those with the mission to See.
Thanks to the Bush-Rumsfeld team the American Psychiatric Association can breathe a sigh of relief. As you may know, their bulky Diagnostic and Statistical Manual or DSM, has hundreds of diagnoses ranging from V62.3 Academic Problem to 302.82 Voyeurism. It’s a veritable cornucopia of mental illness with something in there for almost everyone. And quite frankly that’s just the problem. The latest edition, referred to as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, has apparently given the impression that some folks don’t fall into at least one of the hundreds of possible diagnoses. So, and this is what makes mental health professions so noble, a new manual has to be produced at the risk it will be sold through local bookstores at $49.95.
Mental health professionals and most insurance providers regard this current manual as the final word in diagnosis. It is intended to help match symptoms with the appropriate diagnosis in a format that anyone can understand provided he or she has advanced degrees in Quantum Physics.
So with much gratitude to Bush and his boys, this bulky book can be simplified. You can trash the DSM-IV-TR and utilize a far less complicated diagnostic manual. For your mental wellness I offer the brief unabridged NSM-V (Non-Neocon Symptom Manual) according to George Bush and his merry neocon lackeys. Feel free to send me $49.95.
Anti-Imperialism Personality Disorder: A characterological refusal to accept the neocon argument that its values must be imposed on the world, by force if necessary, and a chronic resistance to sacrificing the Bill of Rights, and other ideas of individual liberty as indicated by four of the following:
Israeli Delusional Disorder: A distinct period of elevated, expanded, or pernicious belief that Israel is using the neocon movement to assert its dominance over the Middle East and the United States by portraying itself as an innocent victim of history demonstrated by three of the following:
Intelligence Gathering Illusions: A complete failure to understand that to liberate Iraqi's from Saddam's tortures you have to torture some Iraqi's, that is, you just have to slap a few folks around until they're red, white, and blue and have at least two of the following:
Doublespeak Disorder: Inability to accept the neocon redefinition of freedom, rights, democracy, limited government, etc., as characterized by two of the following:
Anti-Amnesia Disorder: Complete failure to forget the many lies President Bush made leading up to the War in Iraq with failure to forget at least four of the following:
I suggest you carefully examine these symptoms to see if you are afflicted. If so, apply for an officially reformed Medicare discount card. Then you can spend more money on medicines compared to the same medicines that Bush declares illegal for you to purchase out of Canada for a fraction of the price. Furthermore, for therapy you must watch Fox News 24 hours a day (Motto: We give you the Pro-Bush bull, We decide for you) until you have recovered from your affliction sufficiently from your affliction.
And that $49.95? Checks are acceptable.
June 27, 2004
WASHINGTON - The CIA has suspended use of some White House-approved aggressive interrogation tactics employed to extract information from reluctant al-Qaida prisoners, The Washington Post said.
Citing unnamed intelligence officials, the newspaper reported in Sunday's editions that what the CIA calls "enhanced interrogation techniques" were put on hold pending a review by Justice Department and other lawyers.
The techniques include such things as feigned drowning and refusal of pain medication for injuries.
The paper quoted current and former CIA officers aware of the recent decision as saying the suspension reflects the agency's concern about being accused of unsanctioned and illegal activities, as it was in the 1970s.
The decision applies to CIA facilities around the world, but not to military prisons at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere, the Post said. A CIA spokesman declined to comment on the issue, it said.
It said CIA interrogations will continue, but without the suspended techniques, which also include feigning suffocation, "stress positions," light and noise bombardment, sleep deprivation, and making captives think they are being interrogated by another government.
The newspaper said the interrogation methods were approved by Justice Department and National Security Council lawyers in 2002, outlined to congressional leaders and required the authorization of CIA Director George J. Tenet for use.
Comment: Apparently, other "enhanced interrogation techniques" - such as beatings, rape, and being mauled by dogs - are still acceptable.
ISTANBUL (Reuters) - The United States Sunday condemned Iran for persisting with what Washington regards as an atomic bomb-making program.[...]
Iran said Sunday it would resist international pressure to reverse its decision to produce parts for centrifuges that enrich uranium, reneging on a pledge to suspend all enrichment activities.
Its decision was a retaliation against an IAEA resolution last week that "deplored" Iran's failure to cooperate fully with IAEA inspectors.
But Iran also pledged in the letter to continue to allow IAEA inspectors access to nuclear sites for short-notice, intrusive inspections under the IAEA's so- called Additional Protocol, which Tehran signed last year but has yet to ratify.
If enriched to a low level, uranium can be used as fuel for electricity- generating reactors such as the one Iran is building on its south coast. But if enriched further, to weapons-grade, it can be deployed in warheads.
Washington has pushed its Western allies to take a tougher line on Iran but Britain, Germany and France have resisted, preferring to try to persuade Tehran that it is in its interests to come clean on nuclear activities.[...]
The United States, the European Union and the IAEA condemned Iran Saturday for resuming centrifuge part production and urged Iran to rethink its decision.
Iran insists its ambitions are entirely peaceful and has said it has no immediate plans to pump uranium hexafluoride gas into spinning centrifuges to start the enrichment process.
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
You can set your watch by it. The minute some halfway decent government in Latin America begins to reverse the order of things and give the have-nots a break from the grind of poverty and wretchedness, the usual suspects in El Norte rouse themselves from the slumber of indifference and start barking furiously about democratic norms. It happened in 1973 in Chile; we saw it again in Nicaragua in the 1980s; and here’s the same show on summer rerun in Venezuela, pending the August 15 recall referendum of President Hugo Chávez.
Chávez is the best thing that has happened to Venezuela’s poor in a very long time. His government has actually delivered on some of its promises, with improved literacy rates and more students getting school meals. Public spending has quadrupled on education and tripled on healthcare, and infant mortality has declined. The government is promoting one of the most ambitious land-reform programs seen in Latin America in decades.
Most of this has been done under conditions of economic sabotage. Oil strikes, a coup attempt and capital flight have resulted in about a 4 percent decline in GDP for the five years that Chávez has been in office. But the economy is growing at close to 12 percent this year, and with world oil prices near $40 a barrel, the government has extra billions that it’s using for social programs. So naturally the United States wants him out, just as the rich in Venezuela do. Chávez was re-elected in 2000 for a six-year term. A US-backed coup against him was badly botched in 2002.
Sun Jun 27,
3:15 AM ET
The US president arrived Saturday from an EU-US summit in Ireland for his first trip to Turkey. He and wife Laura were driven from Ankara's Esenboga airport in an armored-plated car to the downtown Hilton hotel.
A bomb exploded outside the hotel on Thursday, injuring three people, two of them policemen. On the same day in Istanbul, four people died and 21 were injured when a bomb exploded on a crowded bus. Another home-made bomb was defused in a town near Istanbul. [...]
No one has claimed immediate responsibility for the bombs but police believe the attacks are the work of underground left-wing organizations opposed to the United States and NATO.
Four officers were injured on Saturday in clashes between anti-US protestors and Turkish riot police after a largely peaceful protest in Ankara just hours ahead of Bush's arrival.
The clashes came at the end of a demonstration by about 5,000 protestors who chanted slogans such as "USA Murderer, get out of the Middle East" and "Down with American imperialism," Anatolia news agency said. [...]
Comment: Four officers were injured... How many protestors were injured or arrested?
LEE MYERS, The Associated Press
PHOENIX - The "human tragedy" of illegal immigrants dying and being abused as they attempt to enter the United States will continue until the federal government acknowledges the important economic role undocumented workers play, Sen. John McCain told Hispanic leaders Saturday.
"It is in our national interest to bring the 8 to 12 million undocumented immigrants out of the shadows and allow them an opportunity to become citizens of this great nation," McCain said at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, a civil rights group and political think tank dedicated to promoting Hispanic issues.
The Arizona Republican said federal policy and border enforcement have failed to alleviate the deaths of migrants crossing the sweltering Southwest deserts and the violence of smugglers who often hold immigrants for ransom once they reach America.
An example of the government's wrongheaded approach, McCain said, is its recent introduction of unmanned aerial vehicles in Arizona that use thermal and night-vision equipment to help Border Patrol agents spot illegal immigrants.
"That ignores the fundamental problem," he said. "Where there's a demand, there's a supply ... There's a demand for people to fill jobs that Americans won't do." [...]
McCain also spoke about the war in Iraq, stressing the importance of success in the June 30 transfer of power to the Iraqi government.
"We cannot afford to fail," he said. "We have sent our most precious blood and treasure so that (Iraqis) might have the same opportunities that we do."
He said successful democracy in the Middle East would curb terrorism by teaching children that America is not the enemy.
Comment: We fail to see how invasion, occupation, and the torture and/or murder of a child's parents will help her to see that America is not the enemy.
"Throughout the history of mankind there have been murderers and tyrants; and while it may seem momentarily that they have the upper hand, they have always fallen." (Mahatma Gandhi)
The United States has discarded pretensions to international legality and decency, and embarked on a course of raw imperialism run amok." (William Rockler, Nuremberg Tribunal prosecutor)
[...] The military oath taken at the time of induction demands unbending support and allegiance to the US Constitution, while also demanding that US troops obey orders from their President and Commander in Chief:
The President and Commander in Chief has blatantly violated all tenets of domestic and international law. So that making an oath to "obey orders from the President" is tantamount to violating rather than defending the US Constitution.
According to Lawrence Mosqueda:
The Commander in Chief is a war criminal. According to Principle 6 of the Nuremberg Charter:
Let us make that "moral choice" possible, to enlisted American, British, Canadian and Coalition servicemen and women.
Disobey unlawful orders! Abandon the battlefield! ...
Refuse to fight in a war which blatantly violates international law and the US Constitution!
But this is not a choice which enlisted men and women can make individually.
It is a collective and societal choice, which requires an organizational structure.
Across the land in the US, Britain, Canada and in all coalition countries, the anti-war movement must assist enlisted men and women to make that moral choice possible, to abandon the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan.
This will not be an easy task. Committees at local levels must be set up across the United States, Canada, Britain, Italy, Japan and other countries, which have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
These committees should provide protection, support and legal council to soldiers who refuse to fight and who face the possibility of prison sentences for desertion, as in the case of Sergeant Camilo Mejia, who was sentenced by a military court in May:
"I sit here a free man... I will sit behind bars a free man because I did the right thing," said Mejia.
When service men and women come home, we must ensure that they are not obliged to return to the war theater. We must engage a process which protects them from court martial.
We call upon veterans' associations and local communities to support this process.
This movement needs to dismantle the disinformation campaign. It must effectively reverse the indoctrination of coalition troops, who are led to believe that they are fighting "a just war": "a war against terrorists".
The legitimacy of the US military authority must be broken.
The Bush Administration must learn the lessons of history. The Iraqi and Afghan people are waging a struggle to oust the US invaders. And that resistance is winning. Ultimately, the only solution is for the American, British and coalition occupiers to withdraw.
Coalition nations should follow the example of the Spanish government of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, which has withdrawn its troops from Iraq.
The anti-war movement must question the legitimacy not only of the Bush administration and its indefectible British ally, but also of all those governments, which directly support or pay lip service to the US-led military occupation. [...]
A question to our American readers:
Have you ever heard of bill 'HR 163'? Perhaps this is a rather flippant question, since few Americans, or indeed citizens of western democratic countries, really know or care what laws are passed by those that they have, in theory, elected to rule them. While the majority of legislation that has sneaked in under the malfunctioning radar of the US public has not effected them in a direct or immediate way, bill HR 163 appears to break with tradition in this respect. The actual text of the bill is as follows:
Note the phrase "homeland security", which sprung up as a result of the faked terror attacks on 9/11.
So the only way a person can avoid being drafted is if they are already a member of the 'uniformed services'. Unless of course...
Which means that the President's friends and their families will probably not have to enlist.
A prison term perhaps?
Kidnapped from their homes and thrown on a cargo plane maybe?
So the President is going to decide the criteria for exemption...
So if you happen to be between 20 and 26 and in full-time education, you have the choice of giving up your education and being drafted into 'service', or, suffer the "penalties for failure to perform civilian service satisfactorily", as defined by the President.
Is it just us, or is this beginning to look like a plan to replace most of the active military personnel with civilian conscripts?
Interestingly, the above mentioned act, under the provison for who should be drafted, states the following:
The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to any alien lawfully admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (66 Stat. 163; 8 U.S.C. 1101), for so long as he continues to maintain a lawful nonimmigrant status in the United States.
1-108. Aliens and noncitizen nationals of the United States who, on or after July 1, 1980, come into and reside in the United States shall present themselves for registration in accordance with Sections 1-101 to 1-105 or within 30 days after coming into the United States, whichever is later.
Only "lawful nonimmigrants", are exempt, this seems to suggest that all illegal immigrants are 'eligible' to be drafted. Could this be a reason for the many recent reports of the southern US borders essentially being opened to immigrants? More cannon fodder perhaps?
Cleaning Dick Cheney's toilet bowl perhaps?
Yes, you may be dead, but you will be discharged, and need not fear that your grave will be desecrated and your bones dragged off for another tour of duty. Now that's peace of mind!
Now isn't that nice, they have even informed women that, to register, they must make it clear that they are women by using feminine rather than masculine personal pronouns, or simply call yourself, "the person".
It appears that, this time, the apathy of the US public and their extreme aversion to taking responsibility for their own lives may well produce some very direct and unsavory effects. But look on the bright side, you get paid!
While the above bill has not yet passed into law, there are plans to do so in the spring of 2005. In recent months various "lawmakers" have been pushing for "all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price"...
WASHINGTON (AFP) Apr 20, 2004
A senior Republican lawmaker said Tuesday that deteriorating security in Iraq may force the United States to reintroduce the military draft.
"There's not an American ... that doesn't understand what we are engaged in today and what the prospects are for the future," Senator Chuck Ha gel told a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on post-occupation Iraq.
"If that's the case, why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?" Hagel said, arguing that restoring compulsory military service would force "our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."
The Nebraska Republican added that a draft, which was ended in the early 1970s, would spread the burden of mililitary service in Iraq more equitably among various social strata.
"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he observed.
Comment: Note the above comment:
"restoring compulsory military service would force our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."
You don't believe that the "war on terror" is real? Well, we can fix that! Why should all the regular troops be the only ones to be duped into giving their lives for the power lust of their 'leaders'? Notice also the good Senator's comments that it is the middle and lower middle classes that are dying for no good reason. The solution? Introduce a draft so that even more middle and lower middle class citizens can also die for no good reason, and they'll throw in a few dissenting upper middle and upper classes just for good measure. Bush and the Neocons have fabricated a 'war without end' and now they want every American citizen to take responsibility for that which they have wrought.
"You can fool some of the people all the time, and these are the ones you want to concentrate on." - President George W. Bush -- Speaking at a Gridiron Club Dinner, Washington D. C.; March of 2001
The Norwegian Police Security Service (PST) has asked the employees at the universities to keep track of all suspicious students and researchers.
PST called in all employees at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences at University of Oslo for a meeting. Similar meetings are planned at several other institutions of education, according to the Norwegian paper VG.
During the meeting, the PST presented a list of 15 points they should be looking for, and at several occasions the employees were reminded that students in several instances had been aiders and abettors in the production of weapons used in terror attacks.
"It’s disgraceful that professors are going to be informers because this is nothing, but informing," said Bjorn Niklas Sjøstrøm, leader of the student parliament. "This reminds me of the methods which are used by countries which we are trying to protect ourselves against."
Ågot Valle, member of the Socialist Left party, who is heading the Norwegian parliament’s control and constitution committee, is also reacting to the request made by the PST.
"This reminds me of Eastern Germany in the old days," Valle stated.
June 20, 2004
Every once in a while in America's consumer society, a company, product or service rises above its mere utility to achieve iconic status in the culture. Its very novelty, innovation, or just manufactured "cool" allow it to enter the daily American lexicon. As nouns, brands like Kleenex (facial tissues), Rollerblade (in-line skates), or Coke (any soft drink south of the Mason Dixon Line) are equated with an entire product category, eclipsing all competitors. Others achieve the even loftier status of verbs, as in "to Xerox."
Google has joined this elite group of culture-changing brands. Starting with excellent technology, the company nurtured a cult following into dominance of web searching, a daily task now common to most Americans. Its IPO has become one of the dominant business – and social – news stories of the year.
Far more important to American society, Google's pervasiveness has given it a unique and privileged role as the information gatekeeper of the 21st century. "To Google" someone or something has become synonymous with using the Internet to find information, images or news. The New York Times has detailed the emergence of Google as an alternative to the traditional library for research. As individuals, businesses and publishers leverage its search, email and advertising tools to reach readers, sell products and assemble communities, Google is on the verge of becoming the Internet arbiter of the First Amendment.
As I learned this week, however, Google may be playing a darker, more sinister role in American society: corporate censor. On June 15, the Google Adwords team informed me that it had discontinued all advertisements placed by Perrspectives.com due to "unacceptable content" on the site that includes "language that advocates against an individual, group or organization." As we'll see below, this may or may not be blatant bias against liberal viewpoints. There can be no doubt, though, that the current Google editorial guidelines, evenly applied, would bar almost any newspaper, magazine, opinion journal, political party, advocacy campaign or even religious organization from advertising on its site. And that puts Google dangerously at odds with core American values of free speech and assembly. [...]
Google may not necessarily have a conservative bias in filtering advertisers, but it would seem to be blatantly sizeist. That is, large organizations, well- known brands, big-spending advertisers, both political parties and other high- profile groups get a pass on the "advocates against" standard. Left or right, secular or sacred, size does matter:
This might explain why a large number of conservative, Bush-friendly ads appear on Google as well as the odd anti-Bush ad that appears. (It is worth noting, as we'll see below, that Google similarly dropped the maker of the "Deck of Bush" playing cards parodying the Pentagon's Iraq Most Wanted List.) This approach seems to suggest that Google is very susceptible to complaints, especially loud and organized ones, from its users. [...]
Intended or not, Google is stifling free expression and imposing de facto censorship with its dangerously vague "advocates against" standard. By definition, Google's standard is unevenly and unequally applied, as ads are reviewed only after the fact and on an ad hoc basis. Thousands of web sites are foreclosed from using a tool that competitors and perhaps more ideologically acceptable alternatives can leverage to reach customers and readers.
Google has a well-earned reputation as a progressive and friendly brand. To maintain it in this case, it would seem Google has two options: (a) drop hundreds of current advertisers through the consistent application of its rigid and overly broad prohibitions, or; (b) revise its standards to limit only those advertisers advocating violence, whose products are inherently dangerous or whose content appeals to prurient interests. Political opinion of any stripe would be protected; ads regarding guns, terrorism, or pornography would not.
Of course, Google is not the government; as a commercial entity, it does not have the obligation to respect all speech constitutionally protected under the 1st Amendment. Google is, however, one of those rare corporate brands that cross the world of business into mainstream culture. That status brings both precious commercial benefits and real social responsibilities. Google has simply become too central to Americans' ability to speak out, recruit the like- minded, sell products and build businesses. One role Google must not be allowed to assume is that of 21st century censor.
Help save free speech and help save Google – from itself. Contact Google today!
By Tom Hamburger
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration has ordered that government scientists must be approved by a senior political appointee before they can participate in meetings convened by the World Health Organization, the leading international health and science agency.
A top official from the Health and Human Services Department in April asked the WHO to begin routing requests for participation in its meetings to the department's secretary for review, rather than directly invite individual scientists, as has long been the case.
Officials at the WHO, based in Geneva, Switzerland, have refused to implement the request, saying it could compromise the independence of international scientific deliberations. Denis G. Aitken, WHO assistant director-general, said Friday that he had been negotiating with Washington in an effort to reach a compromise.
The request is the latest instance in which the Bush administration has been accused of allowing politics to intrude into once-sacrosanct areas of scientific deliberation. It has been criticized for replacing highly regarded scientists with industry and political allies on advisory panels. A biologist who was at odds with the administration's position on stem-cell research was dismissed from a presidential advisory commission. This year, 60 prominent scientists accused the administration of "misrepresenting and suppressing scientific knowledge for political purposes." [...]
The superdollar is the name given to an almost perfect forgery of an American banknote. Millions of dollars of the fake cash have been passed into circulation since its existence was first noticed over a decade ago.
The money, officially known as Note Family - C14342, is thought to originate from communist North Korea. Experts believe that the money is being produced and flooded into the system, mostly by North Korean diplomats as they travel abroad. It is also circulated by criminals - with the Russian mafia and even Republican organisations in Northern Ireland involved in the distribution process.
One school of thought is that it is part of a plan to try to destabilise the American economy by putting millions and millions of dollars into the system. However, North Korea dismisses the allegations and says that the claims being made against it are just Western propaganda.
What is known, is that in the late 1980s, US Intelligence discovered that the North Korean government had acquired a highly sophisticated printing press, known as the intaglio. This press is similar to the one used to print money in the US and would give North Korea the ability to produce sophisticated banknotes if they wanted to.
Further evidence comes from defectors, whose stories all seem to be consistent with US claims. Although it is impossible to corroborate their stories, they appear to be consistent.
One defector who spoke to Panorama on the condition of anonymity said he had spent his life making counterfeit US dollars, adding that they were such good quality that they fooled experts.
He said: "The counterfeiting was all done at government level. We had a special plant for doing it. [...]
Sunday, 27 June 2004
A South Island radio station is being swamped with reports of a meteor strike in the Mackenzie Country.
People from Christchurch to Timaru say they saw a bright light streaking across the sky around 9.30 last night.
Port FM announcer James Valentine says he has taken dozens of calls describing the dramatic end of the meteor's journey.
He says it exploded before it hit the ground, and flames and debris were seen in the sky.
James Valentine says a consensus is building around the idea the meteor crashed to earth somewhere near Twizel.
Seen a strange orange streak moving across the early morning sky recently? Think you've seen a meteor? Well, you're not alone.
North Shore residents have been reporting suspected meteor sightings for the past four weeks, according to the Stardome Observatory at One Tree Hill.
Leonie Anderson spotted "a big orange streak" in the sky about 7.30am yesterday while walking to work in Takapuna with a friend.
"It was thicker at one end and then tapered," she said. "We watched it for about four minutes then it disappeared."
But Warren Hurley of the Stardome said what people had actually seen was a high-flying aircraft moving from southeast to northeast.
The plane and its vapour trail were illuminated by the morning sun, creating the orange effect.
"It looks quite bright. It does look orangey - the same as clouds at sunset. And the fact that it moves across the sky so slowly would eliminate a meteor," Mr Hurley said.
"More aircraft are flying north from Christchurch without stopping in Auckland these days so it's a relatively normal sight."
Comment: Oh, what a relief! Here we thought that all these reports of fireballs and meteors that we have been tracking were actually REAL - and yet it turns out there was a rational explanation all along. It's just vapor trails from airplanes that reflected the sunlight. Of course, one might stop to think that many sightings have occurred at night. In the case of evening sightings, obviously the only rational explanation is the light of Venus reflecting off of airplane vapor trails. The light appears orange due to atmospheric distortion and swamp gas, of course...
FLASHBACK: Car-Sized Meteor Rocks Missouri Residents
Saturday June 19, 2004 08:40PM
was getting ready for work Friday morning when two thunderous explosions
a split second apart rocked the sky above his home.
Jethro left unscathed
HOMER - An earthquake jolted Homer, Ninilchik and other parts of the Kenai Peninsula on Saturday.
The Alaska Tsunami Warning Center reported the quake occurred at 10:47 a.m. and had a preliminary magnitude of four-point-four.
It was centered about 6 miles southwest of Ninilchik.
According to the Alaska Earthquake Information Center in Fairbanks, some items were knocked off shelves in Ninilchik.
There have been no further reports of injury or damage.
Politics: 27 June 2004, Sunday.
A second in the day quake has shaken Bulgaria, this time rattling through the southern parts of the country in close proximity to Turkish and Greek borders.
The earthquake, like the earlier one in western Bulgaria, was rated at 4.3 on the Richter scale, causing no casualties or material damages. The epicenter was located some 300 km south-east of capital Sofia.
Meanwhile, the Anadolu Agency reported about 4.5-Richter-scale jolts on the territory of Turkey.
Thursday 24th June 2004
During the past few week there has been an almost continuous emission of steam and gas from Tungurahua volcano. Seismic activity has been characterised by long period earthquakes, and there has been 5-10 explosions per day. The current level of volcanic activity is moderate. On Wednesday 23rd June at 2108 hr there was an explosion which sent incandescent blocks down the side of the volcano.
The Northern Marianas is asking the U-S to conduct a study on Anatahan volcano.
Gemma Casas reports the emergency Management Office Director Rodolfo Pua says he asked the U.S. Geological Survey to further study the movements of Anatahan volcano as soon as it settles down.
Mr. Pua says the study is needed so that nearby islands can prepare for any eventualities.
He says the USGS already accepted the task and is now waiting for the volcano to settle down.
Anatahan volcano is located 75 miles north of Saipan, the center of Northern Marianas, a chain of 14 islands in the Pacific politically linked to the U.S.
The volcano erupted in May 2003 and then again in April this year. The office says the volcano continues to spew ashes and lava but scientists say it is still not an immediate danger to the nearby islands.
Climate Change: New Research Supports Hypothesis That Ocean Currents Redistributed
Heat During Rapid Warming And Cooling
A paper published this week in the journal Science supports the hypothesis that heat transfer by ocean currents – rather than global heating or cooling – may have been responsible for the global temperature patterns associated with the abrupt climate changes seen in the North Atlantic during the past 80,000 years.
Authored by the University of Bremen's Frank Lamy and colleagues, the paper provides new evidence that Southern Hemisphere climate may not have changed in step with Northern Hemisphere climate. Though these new measurements of ocean surface temperature off Chile are consistent with information from Antarctic ice core samples, they still contradict measurements made on land in the Southern Hemisphere – suggesting additional research will be needed to resolve the issue.
Scientists have found evidence of rapid and dramatic climate change that took place in a matter of decades during cool periods of the last 80,000 years in the North Atlantic. Knowing whether climate changes took place simultaneously in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres is vital to understanding the mechanism involved – and assessing whether similar abrupt climate change could be a threat today.
"People are very interested in these dramatic climate changes because they occur on very human time scales," said Jean Lynch-Stieglitz, associate professor in the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology and author of a "Perspectives" article accompanying the Lamy paper in Science. "It's really important to understand what is causing them and what conditions are necessary for the climate to rapidly transition from cold to warm and back again." [...]
"The real significance of this paper is that it gets us closer to understanding the mechanism causing these rapid climate changes," she said. "Earlier sediment core work at lower resolution has suggested that the Southern Hemisphere has been doing its own thing. The record from Antarctica is nicely resolved and shows that the Southern Hemisphere is not participating either in magnitude or timing with the climate changes that have occurred in the North Atlantic."
The Lamy researchers studied sediment cores taken from a location off the coast of southern Chile where sediment builds up rapidly, providing detailed information about climate change with good time resolution. Their 50,000-year record is consistent with Antarctic ice core data showing that Southern Hemisphere climate change did not occur at the same or in the same magnitude as Northern Hemisphere change.
"What this paper suggests is that that when it was really cold off Greenland in the North Atlantic, it was actually a bit warm off Chile," said Lynch- Stieglitz. "That's very similar to the record in Antarctica. The fact that the ocean off Chile looks so much like what has been going on in Antarctica gives us hope that there may be a consistent response throughout the Southern Hemisphere."
Knowing what was happening in the Southern and Northern Hemispheres is important because the mechanisms that could have caused synchronized change differ dramatically from those that could have caused unsynchronized change.
Both hemispheres warming and cooling at the same time would imply global changes caused by rising levels of greenhouse gases. But one hemisphere cooling while the other warmed would suggest simple heat transfer, accomplished by changes in ocean or atmospheric currents.
"You can make the climate cool in certain places just by redistributing the heat through changes in ocean currents, atmospheric circulation or both," said Lynch-Stieglitz. "The most fully developed theory to account for these rapid climate changes is that they do represent changes in the transport of heat into the North Atlantic by what we call overturning circulation of the ocean."
In that scenario, warm water flows northward from the Southern Hemisphere into the North Atlantic, where it gives up its heat. Being denser, the cooled water then sinks and flows back south. The scenario accounts for both heating in the north and cooling in the south.
It's possible, Lynch-Stieglitz notes, that both global warming and changes in ocean heat transport occurred simultaneously, though records of carbon dioxide concentrations do not show concentration increases that would be enough by themselves to account for the climate change. [...]
Saturday June 26th 2004
"Irish Independent" THE White House has lodged a complaint with the Irish Embassy in Washington over RTE journalist Carole Coleman's interview with US President George Bush.
And it is believed the President's staff have now withdrawn from an exclusive interview which was to have been given to RTE this morning by First Lady Laura Bush.
It is understood that both RTE and the Department of Foreign Affairs were aware of the exclusive arrangement, scheduled for 11am today. However, when RTE put Ms Coleman's name forward as interviewer, they were told Mrs Bush would no longer be available.
The Irish Independent learned last night that the White House told Ms Coleman that she interrupted the president unnecessarily and was disrespectful.
She also received a call from the White House in which she was admonished for her tone.
And it emerged last night that presidential staff suggested to Ms Coleman as she went into the interview that she ask him a question on the outfit that Taoiseach Bertie Ahern wore to the G8 summit.
Comment: So because the Irish reporter would not ask the pre-prepared banal question and wanted to get to the truth of the matter, she was maligned by the White House. Now that's democracy for ya!
By Paul Dykes
TWO men working high up a radio mast in Co Monaghan believe they have spied a top-secret inter-planetary craft flying toward Belfast.
Miles Johnston, of the Irish UFO Research Centre, and Dublin-based rigger Terry Malone claim the delta-winged craft traversed the sky at ultrasonic speed, taking just a few seconds to reach the horizon.
"I am convinced it was a man-made advanced space craft - we had a good long look at it in a clear blue sky," Mr Johnston said.
Mr Malone confirmed the object was "absolutely enormous".
"It was huge, high, and travelling at some speed," he said.
"I've seen B52s going over and you can hear them buzzing, but there was not a sound from this thing. And it was gone in an instant."
Comment: If the craft sighted was flying towards Belfast from Co. Monaghan, and if it continued on in the same general direction, it would have passed over Scotland...
Flashback: Top Secret US plane ‘caused Chinook crash’
When an RAF Chinook helicopter carrying almost all the senior intelligence officers working in Northern Ireland crashed into the Mull of Kintyre (Scotland) six years ago, pilot error was given as the official explanation of the disaster.
Since then, a number of people and especially UK IT mag Computer Weakly have continued to maintain that it was software in the on-board systems which led to the crash rather than human error.
But a third explanation for the crash has now come to light: that a top secret hypersonic US plane, codenamed Aurora and which is reportedly capable of flying at up to 20 times the speed of sound, created a massive jet wake into which the helicopter flew, causing the crew to lose control.
RAF Machrihanish lies just ten miles from the Chinook crash site and at the time of the crash was operated by the US Air Force. Machrihanish boasts the longest runway in Europe (over three miles) and the entire surface of the runway is painted four times a year, to match the surrounding undergrowth.
The massive runway length is necessary so it can be used as an Emergency Airfield Over-flow (EAOF) site. It is one of the few runways in Britain that can cope with any aircraft landing with technical problems, including the Russian Bear and the P3 Orions of the Royal Norwegian Air force, who regularly used the air base as part of the NATO 'staging point' exercises.
A number of military-watching web sites claim that the US military was at the time using Machrihanish as a base for testing its Aurora - the existence of which is still denied. When the Aurora codename leaked out, the US government is alleged to have renamed the project 'Senior Citizen'.
Shortly after the crash, the Americans left Machrihanish. The British government would certainly have been none too pleased if the US had indeed wiped out most of the UK's senior intelligence officials in one fell swoop.
Machrihanish is now reported to be deactivated, with only a skeleton staff, but still appears to be guarded like Fort Knox. During the 1980s, NATO invested a lot of money in the base and decided to post an American Navy Special Warfare (SEALs) unit there, known as Spec. War 2.
The UFO BBS has a story which originally ran in the Scottish Sunday Post in May 1993.
Oil rig engineer Chris Gibson is reported to have seen the aircraft from the rig Galveston Key. Gibson saw a dart-shaped plane taking on fuel from a US Air Force Tanker. Mach 3 blips were detected on radar over Machrihanish, and Gibson, a man who had worked for the British military and was trained to recognise enemy aircraft, saw a triangular object that he could not identify. It was travelling with two F-111s and refuelling from a KC-135 tanker plane.
First news of Aurora using Machrihanish came when a report filtered out about an RAF radar man picking up an unidentified craft travelling at three times the speed of sound near the Kintyre peninsula. Locals started querying terrific sonic booms ripping through the sky near the base.
Then the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute investigated earth tremors and strange shock waves across the Friesian coast, and said the probable cause was the sonic boom from an aircraft flying at a speed of 4000mph.
McNeil reported that Ron Halliday, the chairman of Scottish Earth Mysteries Research, had claimed that remote areas of rural Scotland were being used in similar ways to the mysterious Area 51 in the United States, where secret aircraft are supposedly tested and where the alien victims of the Roswell UFO crash were supposedly taken for dissection.
According to Halliday, the prime candidate for Scotland's Area 51 was Machrihanish, which he said had long been the subject of rumour and bizarre speculation. He added that the MoD owned huge areas of land in Scotland but no one knew what they were doing.
"These are parts of Scotland where people just never visit because access is so difficult. Extra-terrestrial flying discs could be stored here as, geographically, we're in a good situation for communication with London, the US and western Europe," Halliday is reported as saying.
"Machrihanish would be an ideal spot from which to operate aircraft technology that the Government wanted to keep secret - including devices allegedly developed from captured alien discs."
People living nearby have frequently reported strange ear-splitting noises and mysterious smoke-rings in the sky
Remember, we need your help to collect information on what is going on in your part of the world!
We also need help to keep the Signs of the Times online.
Check out the Signs of the Times Archives
Fair Use Policy
Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org