Article - The Blair Belief Project
Strike Flash Presentation by a QFS member
of the Day
Nuages à St. Gely
|Where have all the Heroes Gone?
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending
spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead
of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may
murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish
the truth. Through violence you murder the hater, but you do not
murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate...Returning
violence for violence multiples violence, adding deeper darkness
to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out
darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate;
only love can do that."
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
The scene outside
New York's spooky old Dakota apartment building on the evening
of December 8, 1980, was as surreal as it was horrifying. John
Lennon, probably the world's most famous rock star, lay semiconscious,
hemorrhaging from four flat-tipped bullets blasted into his back.
His wife Yoko Ono held his head in her arms and screamed.
A few yards away a pudgy young man stood eerily still, peering
down into a paperback book. Moments earlier he had dropped into
a military firing stance - legs spread for maximum balance, two
hands gripping his .38 revolver to steady his aim - and blown
away the very best Beatle. Now he leafed lazily through the pages
of the one novel even the most chronically stoned and voided-out
ninth grader will actually read, J. D. Salinger's Catcher in the
The Dakota doorman shouted at the shooter, Mark David Chapman,
"Do you know what you've done?"
"I just shot John Lennon," Chapman replied, accurately
It was a tragedy of Kerkegaardian pointlessness. There was only
one apparent way to squeeze any sense from it; write it off as
random violence by a "wacko."
"He walked past me and then I heard in
my head, 'Do it, do it, do it,' over and over again, saying 'Do
it, do it, do it,' like that," Chapman, preternaturally serene,
recalled in a BBC documentary several years after going to prison.
"I don't remember aiming. I must have done, but I don't remember
drawing a bead or whatever you call it. And I just pulled the
trigger steady five times."
Chapman described his feeling at the time
of the shooting as "no emotion, no anger dead silence in
His unnatural tone sounded all-too-familiar. British lawyer/journalist
Fenton Bresler took it as a tip-off. Chapman
was a brainwashed hit man carrying out someone else's contract.
"Mark David Chapman," writes Bresler, "is in many
ways as much the victim of those who wanted to kill John Lennon
as Lennon himself."
Prosecutors, as a loss for motive, opted for the cliché:
Chapman did it for the attention- the troublesome American preoccupation
with grabbing that elusive fifteen minutes of propels many a daily-newspaper-journalist-cum-pop-sociologist
into raptures of sanctimony. But Arthur
O'Connor, the detective who spent more time with Chapman immediately
following the murder than anyone else, saw it another way.
"It is definitely illogical to say that
Mark Committed the murder to make himself famous. He did not want
to talk to the press from the very start. It's possible Mark could
have been used by somebody. I saw him the night of the murder.
I studied him intensely. He looked as if he could have been programmed."
O'Connor was speaking to Bresler, and publicly for the first
time. Bresler's book Who Killed John Lennon? Offers the most cogent
argument that Lennon's murder was not the work of yet another
Conspiracy theories abounded after the Lennon assassination,
many rather cruelly fingering Yoko as the mastermind. Another
focused on Paul who, by this line of reasoning, blamed Yoko for
engineering his arrest in Japan on reefer charges. The Lennon
conspiracy turns up on radio talk shows with some frequency, where
hosts fend off callers with the "Why bother to kill that
Only Bresler's thesis, that Chapman was a mind-controlled assassin
manipulated by some right-wing element possibly connected to the
newly elected (and not even inaugurated) Reagan apparatus of reaction,
transcends the confines of pure speculation, extending into the
realm of actual investigation.
Even so, Bresler's book a little too often substitutes rhetorical
questions ("What does that steady repetition of a voice saying
'Do it, do it, do it,' over and over again in Mark's head sound
like to you?") for evidentiary argument. We can forgive him
for that failing. Bresler tracked the case for eight years, conducted
unprecedented interviews, and extracted a ream of previously unreleased
government documents. But unlike researchers into the assassinations
of the Kennedys and Martin Luther King, he did not have volumes
of evidence gathered by any official investigation, even a flawed
one, to fall back on. The New York police had their man, the case
was closed the very night of the murder - and, anyway, what political
reason could possibly exist for gunning down the composer of "I
Am the Walrus"?
In building his case, Bresler established some
key points that put the lie to any "Who would want to kill
an aging rock star?" brush-off.
Richard Nixon, his administration and other right-wing
politicians (including ultraconservative ancient Senator Strom
Thurmond, who personally memoed Attorney Gerneral John Mitcell
on the matter) were fixated on what they saw as the Lennon problem.
To them, the politically outspoken singer-songwriter was an insidious
subversive of the worst kind, the famous and beloved kind.
J. Edgar Hoover shared their concerns.
One page of Lennon's FBI file bears the handwritten, block-lettered,
under lined words, ALL EXTREMISTS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS.
The government went all-out to deny Lennon his longed-for permanent
U.S. residency, and more than that, to deport him altogether (that
was the subject of Thurmond's memo).
Lennon's FBI file - at nearly three hundred pages as chubby as
Hoover himself - reveals that he was under "constant surveillance."
Nor did the G-men keep a particularly low profile around the ex-Beatle,
apparently attempting to harass him into silence or at least drive
him nuts, similar to the tactic they had used on Martin Luther
King, Jr., a few short but eventful years earlier.
In late 1972, when the "surveillance"
was at its peak, Lennon told humorist Paul Krassner, "Listen,
if anything happens to Yoko and me, it was not an accident."
The FBI and the CIA tracked Lennon at least from his "Free
John Sinclair" concert in 1969 until 1976 - even though by
then Lennon had won his immigration battle and dropped out of
not only political activism but public life altogether into what
turned out to be a five-year period of seclusion. His apartment
was watched, he was followed, his phone was tapped.
Placing a person under "constant surveillance" and
ordering that person executed are admittedly two different things.
Nevertheless, Bresler's point is that the
government did not consider John Lennon a harmless rock 'n' roller
whose awkward entrance into the world of political activism
often carried a high cringe factor (as in his Montreal "bed-in").
He was viewed as a dangerous radical who needed
to be stopped.
And in a way that official paranoia might have
been justified, because as embarrassing as Lennon and Ono's political
publicity stunts occasionally became, John Lennon was always capable
of seizing the spotlight and speaking directly to millions of
young people who venerated him.
With unfettered access to the media, his
power was immense, at least potentially so, and recognized
by more experienced radicals like Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman,
who linked themselves to Lennon, clinging to close that they made
the rock star uncomfortable.
Lennon was killed just four years after the intense FBI/CIA surveillance
ceased. In those intermittent years, Jimmy Carter was president
- a Democrat who kept the two gestapo-ish agencies more or less
But in December 1980, when John Lennon's first
album in half a decade was high on the charts, Carter was a lame
duck chief executive, having lost his reelection bid to Ronald
Reagan. Reagan's campaign was managed by career secret agent William
Casey, who under President Reagan became the CIA's most freewheeling
chief since Allen Dulles. The new far-right administration would
reassemble the intelligence services and grant them a cheerful
The forces that tried desperately to neutralize
Lennon for at least seven years lost power in 1976. Lennon's government
dossier ends in that year. In 1980, as those forces were preparing
to retake control of the government, "dangerous extremist"
John Lennon emerged from retirement. Within a few months he was
A final note to the mystery of Mark David Chapman: As he was
ready to go to trial and his diligent public defender was winding
up six months spent assembling Chapman's defense, the accused
killer suddenly decided to change his plea to guilty. His lawyer
was perplexed and more than a little perturbed. But Chapman was
determined. He said he was acting on instructions
from a "small male voice" that spoke to him in his cell.
Chapman interpreted it as the voice of God.
CHAPTER VIII-b -
THE BAY OF PIGS AND THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION
[...] According to George Bush's official biography, he was during
1963 a well-to-do businessman residing in Houston, the busy president
of Zapata Offshore and the chairman of the Harris County Republican
Organization, supporting Barry Goldwater as the GOP's likely 1964
presidential candidate, while at the same time actively preparing
his own 1964 bid for the US Senate. But during that same period
of time, Bush may have shared some common acquaintances with Lee
Between October, 1962 and April, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald and
his Russian wife Marina were in frequent contact with a Russian
emigré couple living in Dallas: these were George de Mohrenschildt
and his wife Jeanne.
During the Warren Commission investigation of the Kennedy assassination,
de Mohrenschildt was interviewed at length about his contacts
When, in the spring of 1977, the discrediting of the Warren
Commission report as a blatant coverup had made public pressure
for a new investigation of the Kennedy assassination irresistible,
the House Assassinations Committee planned to interview de Mohrenschildt
once again. But in March, 1977, just before de Mohrenschildt was
scheduled to be interviewed by Gaeton Fonzi of the House committee's
staff, he was found dead in Palm Beach, Florida.
His death was quickly ruled a suicide. One of the last people
to see him alive was Edward Jay Epstein, who was also interviewing
de Mohrenschildt about the Kennedy assassination for an upcoming
book. Epstein is one of the writers on the Kennedy assassination
who enjoyed excellent relations with the late James Angleton of
the CIA. If de Mohrenschildt were alive today, he might be able
to enlighten us about his relations with George Bush, and perhaps
afford us some insight into Bush's activities during this epoch.
Jeanne de Mohrenschildt rejected the finding of suicide in her
husband's death. "He was eliminated before he got to that
committee," the widow told a journalist in 1978, "because
someone did not want him to get to it." She also maintained
that George de Mohrenschildt had been surreptitiously injected
with mind-altering drugs.
After de Mohrenschildt's death, his personal address book was
located, and it contained this entry: "Bush, George H.W.
(Poppy) 1412 W. Ohio also Zapata Petroleum Midland." There
is of course the problem of dating this reference. George Bush
had moved his office and home from Midland to Houston in 1959,
when Zapata Offshore was constituted, so perhaps this reference
goes back to some time before 1959. There is also the number:
"4-6355." There are, of course, numerous other entries,
including one W.F. Buckley of the Buckley brothers of New York
City, William S. Paley of CBS, plus many oil men, stock brokers,
and the like. [...]
It is established that between October, 1962 and late April,
1963, de Mohrenschildt was a very important figure in the life
of Oswald and his Russian wife. Despite Oswald's lack of social
graces, de Mohrenschildt introduced him into Dallas society, took
him to parties, assisted him in finding employment, and much more.
It was through de Mohrenschildt that Oswald met a certain Volkmar
Schmidt, a young German geologist who had studied with Professor
Wilhelm Kuetemeyer, an expert in psychosomatic medicine and religious
philosophy at the University of Heidelberg, who compiled a detailed
psychological profile of Oswald.
Jeanne and George helped Marina move her belongings during one
of her many estrangements from Oswald. According to some accounts,
de Mohrenschildt's influence on Oswald was so great during this
period that he could virtually dictate important decisions to
the young ex-marine simply by making suggestions. Oswald was in
awe of de Mohrenschildt, according to some. [...]
According to Mark Lane, "there is evidence that de Mohrenschildt
served as a CIA control officer who directed Oswald's actions."
Much of the extensive published literature on de Mohrenschildt
converges on the idea that he was a baby sitter, handler, case
officer, or control agent for Oswald on behalf of some intelligence
De Mohrenschildt's pedigree evokes haunting parallels to the
typical figures of the PERMINDEX networks of Georges Mandel, Ferenc
Nagy, Max Hagerman, Max Seligman, Carlo d'Amelio, Lewis Mortimer
Bloomfield, and Clay Shaw, to which public attention was called
during the investigations of New Orleans district attorney James
It is therefore highly interesting that George Bush's name turned
up in the personal address book of George de Mohrenschildt.
The Warren Commission went to absurd lengths to cover up the
fact that George de Mohrenschildt was a denizen of the world of
the intelligence agencies. This included ignoring the well-developed
paper trial on de Mohrenschildt as Nazi and communist sympathizer,
and later as a US asset abroad. The Warren Commission concluded:
The Commission's investigation has developed no signs of subversive
or disloyal conduct on the part of either of the de Mohrenschildts.
Neither the FBI, CIA, nor any witnesses contacted by the Commission
has provided any information linking the de Mohrenschildts to
subversive or extremist organizations. Nor has there been any
evidence linking them in any way with the assassination of President
On the day of the Kennedy assassination, FBI
records show George Bush as reporting a right-wing member of the
Houston Young Republicans for making threatening comments about
President Kennedy. According to FBI documents released under the
Freedom of Information Act,
On November 22, 1963 Mr. GEORGE H.W. BUSH, 5525 Briar, Houston,
Texas, telephonically advised that he wanted to relate some hearsay
that he had heard in recent weeks, date and source unknown. He
advised that one JAMES PARROTT had been talking of killing the
President when he comes to Houston.
PARROTT is possibly a student at the University of Houston and
is active in politics in the Houston area.
According to related FBI documentation, "a check with Secret
Service at Houston, Texas revealed that agency had a report that
PARROTT stated in 1961 he would kill President Kennedy if he got
Here Bush is described as "a reputable businessman."
FBI agents were sent to interrogate Parrott's mother, and later
James Milton Parrott himself.
Parrott had been discharged from the US Air Force for psychiatric
reasons in 1959. Parrott had an alibi for the time of the Dallas
shootings; he had been in the company of another Republican activist.
According to press accounts, Parrott was a member of the right-wing
faction of the Houston GOP which was oriented towards the John
Birch Society and which opposed Bush's chairmanship.
According to the San Francisco Examiner, Bush's press office
in August, 1988 first said that Bush had not made any such call,
and challenged the authenticity of the FBI documents. Several
days later Bush's spokesman said that the candidate "does
not recall" placing the call.
One day later after he reported Parrott to the FBI, Bush received
a highly sensitive, high-level briefing from the Bureau:
Date: November 29, 1963
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State
From: John Edgar Hoover, Director
Subject: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY NOVEMBER 22,
Our Miami, Florida, Office on November 23, 1963 advised that
the Office of Coordinator of Cuban Affairs in Miami advised that
the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group
might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized
raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy might herald a change in US policy, which is not
Our sources and informants familiar with Cuban matters in the
Miami area advise that the general feeling in the anti-Castro
Cuban community is one of stunned disbelief and, even among those
who did not entirely agree with the President's policy concerning
Cuba, the feeling is that the President's death represents a great
loss not only to the US but to all Latin America. These sources
know of no plans for unauthorized action against Cuba.
An informant who has furnished reliable information in the past
and who is close to a small pro-Castro group in Miami has advised
that those individuals are afraid that the assassination of the
President may result in strong repressive measures being taken
against them and, although pro-Castro in their feelings, regret
The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished
to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain
William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November
23, 1963, by Mr. W.T. Forsyth of this Bureau.
William T. Forsyth, since deceased, was an official of the FBI's
Washington headquarters; during the time he was attached to the
Bureau's subversive control section, he ran the investigation
of Rev. Martin Luther King. Was he also a part of the FBI's harassment
of Dr. King? The efforts of journalists to locate Captain Edwards
have not been successful.
This FBI document identifying George Bush as a CIA agent in
November, 1963 was first published by Joseph McBride in The Nation
in July, 1988, just before Bush received the Republican nomination
for president. McBride's source observed: "I know [Bush]
was involved in the Caribbean. I know he was involved in the suppression
of things after the Kennedy assassination. There was a very definite
worry that some Cuban groups were going to move against Castro
and attempt to blame it on the CIA."
When pressed for confirmation or denial, Bush's spokesman Stephen
Hart commented: "Must be another George Bush."
Within a short time the CIA itself would peddle the same damage
control line. On July 19, 1988 in the wake of wide public attention
to the report published in The Nation, CIA spokeswoman Sharron
Basso departed from the normal CIA policy of refusing to confirm
or deny reports that any person is or was a CIA employee. CIA
spokeswoman Basso told the Associated press that the CIA believed
that "the record should be clarified." She said that
the FBI document "apparently" referred to a George William
Bush who had worked in 1963 on the night shift at CIA headquarters,
and that "would have been the appropriate place to have received
such an FBI report." According to her account, the George
William Bush in question had left the CIA to join the Defense
Intelligence Agency in 1964.
For the CIA to volunteer the name of one of its former employees
to the press was a shocking violation of traditional methods,
which are supposedly designed to keep such names a closely guarded
secret. This revelation may have constituted a violation of federal
law. But no exertions were too great when it came to damage control
for George Bush.
George William Bush had indeed worked for the CIA, the DIA,
and the Alexandria, Virginia Department of Public Welfare before
joining the Social Security Administration, in whose Arlington,
Virginia office he was employed as a claims representative in
1988. George William Bush told The Nation that while at the CIA
he was "just a lowly researcher and analyst" who worked
with documents and photos and never received interagency briefings.
He had never met Forsyth of the FBI or Captain Edwards of the
DIA. "So it wasn't me," said George William Bush.
Later, George William Bush formalized his denial in a sworn
statement to a federal court in Washington, DC. The affidavit
acknowledges that while working at CIA headquarters between September
1963 and February 1964, George William Bush was the junior person
on a three to four man watch shift which was on duty when Kennedy
was shot. But, as George William Bush goes on to say,
I have carefully reviewed the FBI memorandum to the Director,
Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State dated
November 29, 1963 which mentions a Mr. George Bush of the Central
Intelligence Agency....I do not recognize the contents of the
memorandum as information furnished to me orally or otherwise
during the time I was at the CIA. In fact, during my time at the
CIA. I did not receive any oral communications from any government
agency of any nature whatsoever. I did not receive any information
relating to the Kennedy assassination during my time at the CIA
from the FBI.
Based on the above, it is my conclusion that I am not the Mr.
George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency referred to in
So we are left with the strong suspicion that the "Mr.
George Bush of the CIA" referred to by the FBI is our own
George Herbert Walker Bush, who, in addition to his possible contact
with Lee Harvey Oswald's controller, may thus also join the ranks
of the Kennedy assassination cover-up.
It makes perfect sense for George Bush to be called in on a
matter involving the Cuban community in Miami, since that is a
place where George has traditionally had a constituency. George
inherited it from his father, Prescott Bush of Jupiter Island,
and later passed it on to his own son, Jeb.
It will be seen that at the beginning of Bush's tenure at the
CIA, the Congressional committees were on the offensive against
the intelligence agencies. By the time that Bush departed Langley,
the tables were turned, and it was the Congress which was the
focus of scandals, including Koreagate. Soon thereafter, the Congress
would undergo the assault of Abscam.
Preparation for what was to become the Halloween massacre
began in the Ford White House during the summer of 1975. The Ford
Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan preserves a memo from Donald Rumsfeld
to Ford dated July 10, 1975, which deals with an array of possible
choices for CIA Director. Rumsfeld had polled a number
of White House and administration officials and asked them to
express preferences among "outsiders to the CIA."
Among the officials polled by Cheney was Henry Kissinger, who
suggested C. Douglas Dillon, Howard Baker, Galvin, and Robert
Roosa. Dick Cheney of the White House staff
proposed Robert Bork, followed by Bush and Lee Iacocca.
Nelson Rockefeller was also for C. Douglas Dillon, followed by
Howard Baker, Conner, and James R. Schlesinger. Rumsfeld himself
listed Bork, Dillon, Iacoca, Stanley Resor, and Walter Wriston,
but not Bush. The only officials putting Bush on their "possible"
lists other than Cheney were Jack O. Marsh, a White House counselor
to Ford, and David Packard. When it came time for Rumsfeld to
sum up the aggregate number of times each person was mentioned,
minus one point for each time a person had been recommended against,
the list was as follows:
Robert Bork [rejected in 1987 for the Supreme Court] White McGee
Foster [John S. Foster of PFIAB, formerly of the Department of
Defense] Dillon Resor Roosa Hauge
It will be seen that Bush was not among the leading candidates,
perhaps because his networks were convinced that he was going
to make another attempt for the vice-presidency and that therefore
the Commerce Department or some similar post would be more suitable.
The summary profile of Bush sent to Ford by Rumsfeld found that
Bush had "experience in government and diplomacy" and
was "generally familiar with components of the intelligence
community and their missions" while having management experience."
Under "Cons" Rumsfeld noted: "RNC post lends undesirable
As we have seen, the CIA post was finally offered by Ford to
Edward Bennett Williams, perhaps with an eye on building a bipartisan
bridge towards a powerful faction of the intelligence community.
But Williams did not want the job. Bush, originally slated for
the Department of Commerce, was given the CIA appointment.
"On April 27, 1976 "The New York Times" published
a story on the Senate Intelligence Committee revelation that
the CIA would be keeping twenty-five journalist agents within
the news media.
The Committee disclosed that George Bush planned to keep these
people in the media positions that they had occupied for a long
The significant point about the story was a statement by a
Committee staff member that many of the individuals were in
executive positions at American news organizations. Bush had
directed that the CIA stop hiring correspondents "accredited"
by American publications and other news organizations. The "Times"
recognized that the pivotal word in Bush's directive was "accredited."
"Executives who do not work as correspondents are apparently
not covered by Mr. Bush's directive, nor are freelance writers
who are not affiliated with a specific employer." The article
also said that in most cases the media organization was not
aware of the individual's CIA connection.
This was yet the best confirmation that the CIA had its Secret
Team members planted at the top of the media. Only one executive
is required at the top of a media organization to control it
when needed. Since the CIA had twenty-five executives planted,
that figure is more than enough to control the fifteen media
organizations mentioned in this chapter."
Ronald Wilson Reagan
was sworn into in Presidency on January 20, 1981. On his sixty-ninth
day in office, March 30, 1981, Reagan was nearly killed by an
assassin. The person named as the assassin was John Hinkley. His
family ties were to oil. Through that oil connection, Neil Bush
- Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush's son, who worked
in oil [later to steal hundreds of millions through Silverdo in
the Saving and Loan crisis] -- knew Scott Hinkley, (brother of
John) who also worked in oil.
"Scott Hinckley, the brother of John Hinckley
Jr., who is charged with shooting President Reagan and three others,
was to have been a dinner guest Tuesday night [March 31, 1991]
at the home of Neil Bush, son of Vice President George Bush, The
Houston Post has learned."
The two families lived close to each other. They knew each other
socially and financially. When the Hinkley oil company started
to fail in the sixties, Bush's Zapata Oil financially bailed out
Hinkley's company. It went from being Vanderbilt Oil to Vanderbilt
Energy or Vanderbilt Resources in the 60s after Bush intervened.
The Hinkley's had been running an operation with six dead wells
but then they were making several million dollars a year after
the Bush bailout. Was this some sort of a money-pass front where
they were laundering money through on this phony oil operation
but actually operating some type of an intelligence pay-off?
The father in that family, John W. Hinkley Sr., was also the
president of the board for World Vision. World Vision is a far-right
evangelical missionary operation that does missionary and "good
work" operations in countries where there is a political
purpose for it to be there. From its inception, it was rabidly
anti-Communist and it focused on refugee populations of people
running from countries that had been taken over by Communism.
This was from the fifties on.
World Vision had a hand in the movement of the Cubans into the
United States and other refugees of revolutionary regimes. When
you're a refugee you're cut loose, basically, and pretty much
fair game to be manipulated by whoever is willing to give you
a hand because you don't have a home or any place to stay and
somebody has got to accept you.
World Vision was able to recruit out of these mercenary populations,
people who could be politically turned to their intelligence purposes.
World Vision served as a penetration force -- not as visible as
the military actually going in or the CIA going in - but going
in as missionaries and working among the people.
This link between missionary and intelligence for capitalistic
infiltration operations goes way back. It was part of the internationalism
with the Rockefellers. It's talked about in the book, Thy Will
Be Done, about Rockefeller, Venezuela, and Latin American Oil,
the Summer Linguistic Institute, World Vision and others. But
they operated in this way for a long time.
They were paid by the CIA for a long time during the Vietnam
War and went into South East Asia -- Cambodia and Laos. Throughout
Vietnam they were given U.S. military equipment to use. They still
maintain a budget under USAID, (Agency for International Development),
which was just a pass-over in order to give the CIA more cover.
They ran operations through USAID. The current cover replacing
that is the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), which is supposed
to be how we're exporting democracy around the world.
But of course, we're exporting exactly the kind of corrupt democracy
we have here, which is rigged and manipulated elections and press
manipulation in order to keep in power or put in power the people
that we want to be in those countries for the purpose of having
our investments protected and milking what we can out of the resources
and the labor available in any of those countries.
World Vision was part of that scheme and they did some nasty
things. They ran the refugee camp in Sabra-Shatilla where the
fascist Phalange was allowed in to kill the Palestinians. They
ran the Cuban and Thai refugee camps in the United States. The
assassin -- who eventually shot John Lennon -- worked at the Thai
refugee camps out in Arkansas that World Vision operated there.
They ran these camps brutally, forcing people into political education
against Castro, refusing to feed people, beating people -- by
many reports -- and bringing in Alpha 66 and Omega 7 people (the
worst of the killing teams -- or murder squads -- of the anti-Castro
Cubans in the United States) to run the camps in Florida, Fort
Chafey in Arkansas and other places where the Cuban exiles were.
These people came in and there were eventually riots in the Cuban
refugee camps against their treatment there. And the eventual
assassin of John Lennon just happened to work there.
Who Authorized The Assassination Of John Lennon?
It took me almost 22 years to figure out who
most likely authorized the assassination of John Lennon, the greatest
singer songwriter and the most influential political artist of
our time. I believe it could have been the CIA that manipulated
the assassin of John Winston Lennon, but more likely, I believe
a new army of old school CIA, which was let go under President
Carter, manipulated the assassin. I believe the assassin was a
mind-control experiment, like all their old tricks of MKULTRA,
only much more sophisticated. I believe their old boss authorized
it. The person the CIA building in Washington D.C. is named after.
I believe he was the same person who tried to assassinate President
Ronald Wilson Reagan on his sixty-ninth day in office -- March
30, 1981. He is the person with the most to gain from both of
these assassinations. So, who authorized the assassination of
John Lennon? I believe it was the 41st President of the United
States, George Herbert Walker Bush.
New evidence has
surfaced in the 1968 Martin Luther King murder case. It is supplied
by an "insider" who claims to have been part of a "hit
team" that had come out of the "Missouri Mafia"
headquartered in the town of Caruthersville, a small town in the
bootheel section of that state. In a yet-to-be-published book,
former County Deputy Jim Green reveals his assigned role in the
conspiracy, the name of the actual trigger man, and the long-suspected
involvement of J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. Green also believes
that he possesses the actual murder weapon, which he personally
secreted away only hours after the murder.
"Jim Green is telling the truth," says Lyndon Barsten,
an astute researcher of the case over the past decade. "I
have no doubt whatsoever. The pieces he has supplied fit perfectly
and could not have come from someone who was not there."
Indeed they do fit, and it is all backed up by FBI documentation
derived by Barsten through numerous FOIA requests.
On April 4, 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King was gunned down on the
second floor balcony of the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee
by a single shot from a high powered rifle. Several witnesses
said the shot came from the bushes on a slope from across the
street. The FBI concluded that it came from the rear bathroom
window of a cheap hotel, also across the street and higher up
Two weeks later the name of James Earl Ray, a fugitive escapee
from the Missouri State Penitentiary, was announced to the world
as the man who had killed King, escaped to Canada, and was currently
in hiding somewhere across the border. After Ray was identified
as the killer and long before he was captured, the FBI spent little
or no time pursuing any other leads. Two months later the fugitive
was caught changing planes at Heathrow Airport in London, after
having left Canada and spending ten days with persons unknown
in Portugal. He was attempting to board a plane to Brussels.
On March 10, 1969, James Earl Ray, with
his attorney Percy Foreman, pled guilty to the murder before the
court of Judge Preston Battle. He was sentenced to 99 years in
prison. He recanted almost immediately and filed a motion for
a trial only three days later. But before the month was out, Judge
Battle was found dead in his chambers, slumped over his desk.
Beneath his head were the papers of the handwritten motion from
James Earl Ray. The case was closed, and Ray began his sentence
in the Tennessee State Penitentiary. [...]
New Pieces To The Puzzle
Over the years Jim Green's Federal Intelligence connections have
become legendary in his hometown of Caruthersville, Missouri.
"He's untouchable," or "He can't be arrested, the
feds just walk him out of jail, everybody knows that." But
now one must assume that the Untouchable is fast becoming anathema
to his former handlers. Jim has had an attack of conscience and
"I hope to change a lie in history to the truth about that
day in Memphis," says Green, 54, a reformed "bad boy"
who spent the first half of his life as a teenage runaway, moonshine
runner, and car thief. The last half was spent in law enforcement,
raising children, teaching school, and coaching football - along
with occasional undercover work. His only source of income today
is a social security disability check. Since coming forward with
his story, he has refused all offers of any work involving government
covert action, for fear of being "set up" and/or killed.
On December 3, 1998, he spent six hours with MLK's son Dexter
King, Rev. James Lawson, and William Pepper (Ray's attorney and
author of Orders to Kill, a semi-accurate compilation of facts
and conjecture describing the government's involvement in the
"At this meeting, I cleared my soul telling Dexter of my
involvement on the day of his father's death," says Green.
"I knew there would be many more questions to come, and that's
when I decided to put my story in writing." [...]
THE ON-GOING COVER-UP
March 24, 1998: CBS News' 48 HOURS broadcasts "Orders To
Kill," a scathing attack on Dr. William F. Pepper, for eighteen
years the attorney of James Earl Ray. In 1995, Pepper had released
his book by that name, and it is his assertion that his client,
James Earl Ray, was a patsy, manipulated to cover-up the real
events surrounding Dr. King's death. A hit team, Pepper claims,
murdered Dr. King at the request of the Intelligence Agencies
of the Federal government. [...]
- Twenty years after releasing "Born in the U.S.A.,"
Bruce Springsteen returned to the anti-war anthem as he and other
artists kicked off a multistate tour aimed at helping oust President
Springsteen and R.E.M., both vocal critics of Bush and the war
in Iraq, are the headliners for the "Vote for Change"
tour, a 10-day series of shows in battleground states. Friday
night's performance at the Wachovia Center in Philadelphia was
one of six across Pennsylvania.
Springsteen and R.E.M. frontman Michael Stipe introduced the
first band, Bright Eyes, and reminded the crowd of the importance
of voting Nov. 2.
"This is a very important moment for every one of us and
for our country," Stipe said.
Springsteen opened his set with a solo version of "The Star
Spangled Banner," followed by "Born in the U.S.A."
"I hope everybody saw the debate (Thursday) night,"
Springsteen said at one point, adding that he thought Democratic
candidate John Kerry did well. "We're on a roll now."
During R.E.M.'s hourlong set, Stipe occasionally offered political
comments. Introducing a song called "Final Straw" that
was released the week the United States declared war on Iraq,
he said: "Did anyone watch the debates last night?"
Thousands in the packed stadium cheered loudly, many raising their
On the other end of the state, the Dixie Chicks and James Taylor
performed in Pittsburgh. Other concerts were held in Erie, State
College, Reading and Wilkes-Barre.
"I think our guy did really pretty good last night,"
Taylor said of Kerry's debate performance. He advised undecided
voters to "take a real close look at both of the candidates
and then vote for the smart one."
Dixie Chicks' Natalie Maines, once criticized for saying she
was ashamed to share her home state of Texas with Bush, noted
that a few people booed Taylor's assessment of Kerry's debate
"We don't feel at home unless we hear some boos, so you're
welcome," she said.
The tour, also featuring Pearl Jam, Jackson Browne, Bonnie Raitt,
John Mellencamp and others, includes 37 shows in 30 cities through
Oct. 11. Proceeds will go to America Coming Together, or ACT,
a group raising money for Democratic candidates. Organizers said
90 percent of the shows, including the one in Philadelphia, were
sold out as of Friday.
The tour will also make stops in Ohio, Michigan, North Carolina,
Florida, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, Washington, Arizona
and Washington, D.C.
Pearl Jam guitarist Stone Gossard said he wants to convince voters
that the Bush administration has been reckless in its foreign
policy since Sept. 11.
"For me, personally, I very much want John Kerry to win,"
Gossard said in an interview. "I think that he's expressed
an interest in re-engaging the world community and saying the
last administration is not representative of the way America wants
to do business with the world."
How bad was it for Bush?
So bad that FOX News' website didn't even run any poll. So bad
that all Matt Drudge could try and boast about on his website
was that some Democrat called it a draw. So bad that even Bush's
people could only try to say, Yeah, he lost, but so what.
Other media outlets have been telling you this election would
be close and that the debates might be even as well.
We hate to say it (not that much) but we told them so.
Bush got shellacked so badly it was astounding. He was like a
wounded animal desperate for a place to hide but not able to find
For the past week the right-wing had been joking about how Kerry
was a sweater, would sweat during the debates. But it was Bush
who the camera saw wiping sweat from his brow. And drinking heavily
from his water glass repeatedly. And fumbling through his papers,
desperate to find something else to say besides the one or two
talking point phrases he could manage to remember.
There was no escaping or hiding the fact that Bush was not even
remotely deserving of being on that stage. He was rambling, incoherent.
His answers wandered not only off topic but out of comprehensibility.
In short, all of the things the President's handlers have been
adeptly hiding from the public - that the emperor truly is butt
naked - got stuck right out there in the bright light.
And now America knows.
Even the Gallup poll, which took its usual heavily Republican
biased sample, said Kerry blew Bush away.
These were supposed to, according to the non-Moderate Independent
media, be Bush's strong points: foreign policy and style. He got
clobbered on both.
He gave answers that were flat out dishonest, huge gaffes that
will certainly be brought back to haunt him.
"The A.Q. Khan network has been brought to justice,"
said President Bush, bragging about his national security record.
(see: Washington Post transcript)
Excuse me? How about reality: US Supports A Q Khan Pardon
As this story reports, "The United States has supported
Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's decision to pardon scientist
Abdul Qadeer Khan, who confessed to leaking nuclear secrets to
Libya, Iran and North Korea."
This man, who gave nuclear secrets to Libya, Iran, and North
Korea, Bush let him get pardoned - and then stood before America
last night and said he, "has been brought to justice."
Bush even said at one point, "I didn't need anyone to tell
me to go to the UN."
President Bush's fantasy world has crumbled right before the
American public. Last election he came across as one of the average
people. This time he showed himself to be one of the "special"
children who ride the little yellow bus.
And President Bush had a Freudian moment from hell, when he was
trying to counter Kerry's charge that Bush confused Saddam with
Osama and incorrectly attacked Iraq for 9/11 instead of just going
Bush replied, "Of course we're after Saddam Hussein -- I
mean bin Laden."
President Bush didn't even come prepared with any zingers, the
usual Republican- fed crack lines.
No, on this night it was Senator Kerry who was calm, forceful,
relaxed, in complete control - and personable and funny.
Kerry brought down the house when he talked about Tora Bora,
saying the President even "outsourced" the job of going
after Bin Laden when we had him cornered..
"Just yesterday," said Kerry, "General Eisenhower's
son, General John Eisenhower, endorsed me; General Admiral William
Crowe; General Tony McPeak, who ran the Air Force war so effectively
for his father -- all believe I would make a stronger commander
in chief. And they believe it because they know I would not take
my eye off of the goal: Osama bin Laden.
"Unfortunately, he escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora.
We had him surrounded. But we didn't use American forces, the
best trained in the world, to go kill him. The president relied
on Afghan warlords and he outsourced that job too. That's wrong."
What happened last night was exactly what we said would happen
way back in May in articles like these (see: Look, We Told You
Months Ago Kerry Would Win By A Landslide and John Kerry, Leader
Or Loser?) The Bush people had been making the horrible mistake
of running against John Kerry as if he were Al Gore or Mike Dukakis,
whiny sort of weak liberal types who let themselves be bullied.
We warned that Kerry wasn't one to let himself get bullied, and
that he had strength, charisma, and charm that the press was underestimating.
No, he was not the smooth-talking southern charmer like Bush or
Clinton, but he was the quiet, cool Northeastern-type charmer.
Last night, the Bushies went up there seemingly without a plan
except to have Bush repeatedly - and we mean repeatedly and repeatedly
and repeatedly, until he began to sound like Rain Man - say that
Kerry, "changes positions." "He sends mixed messages."
"He changes positions." "Mixed messages."
"He changes positions." (We are not exaggerating here
- I am accurately reflecting the number of times Bush mumbled
these phrases in incoherent desperation.) "Mixed messages."
"Mixed messages." "Mixed signals." "Mixed
signals." "Mixed messages." "Mixed messages."
And he only stopped babbling that mantra when he was saying not
one, not two, but seven times, that Kerry had called Iraq, "...the
wrong war at the wrong time at the wrong place," and not
seven, not eight, but eleven times that it is, "hard work,"
fighting terrorist (in addition to pointing out twice people were,
"working hard," at it.
So people are sitting there, seeing Kerry give actual, coherent
answers, and Bush is lost, sweating, pounding water likes it's
JD, fumbling through papers desperately, sneering and looking
miserable and angry, like he wants to leave, and giving answers
that are incoherent rambles laced with flat out lies or misstatements.
Over and over, "This is the wrong war at the wrong time
at the wrong place." "Hard work" "This is
the wrong war at the wrong time at the wrong place." "Hard
work" "Hard work" "This is the wrong war at
the wrong time at the wrong place." "Hard work"
"This is the wrong war at the wrong time at the wrong place."
"Hard work" "This is the wrong war at the wrong
time at the wrong place." "This is the wrong war at
the wrong time at the wrong place." "Hard work"
"This is the wrong war at the wrong time at the wrong place."
"Hard work" "Hard work" "Working hard."
"Hard work" "Hard work" "Working hard."
Only interrupted by, "Changes positions." "He
sends mixed messages." "He changes positions."
"Mixed messages." "He changes positions."
"Mixed messages." "Mixed messages." "Mixed
signals." "Mixed signals." "Mixed messages."
"Mixed messages." "Waver."
Folks, this was only a ninety minute debate - and Bush only got
half of it.
The worst part was seeing the look of the Bush spinners' faces
afterwards. They were, at first, trying desperately to try and
pretend their guy won, but couldn't muster it. Then they tried
to call it a draw. No luck. So in the end they simply admitted
the obvious, that their guy lost - which, coming from the Bushies,
means he really got clobbered. And, desperately, they tried to
sell the spin that Kerry won but it won't affect the voters or
Like we've said, this is not an election, it is a chump check.
One candidate is not even considerable. And America saw that clearly
And they saw that the other candidate, Kerry, is no Al Gore.
They had been told he was not warm, aloof, unable to connect,
a flip-flopaholic. As our John Ashton said, all Kerry had to do
was pass the, "I'm not a pushover" test. And there is
no question he did so with flying colors.
He nailed points, like about how Bush let Osama get away at Tora
Bora, that the President had been given a free ride on until that
point. And he made important, clear distinctions about Iraq policy.
The press said it wasn't clear what the difference was between
Kerry's and Bush's positions on Iraq. Kerry made it clear again
and again: It's the how, stupid.
He said clearly and concisely, "I've had one position, one
consistent position, that Saddam Hussein was a threat. There was
a right way to disarm him and a wrong way. And the president chose
the wrong way."
And he was very specific in pointing out what the wrong way meant,
and what the right way would be: to win peace, the people over
there must trust we are not there to occupy their country and
take their oil.
"I think a critical component of success in Iraq is being
able to convince the Iraqis and the Arab world that the United
States doesn't have long-term designs on it. As I understand it,
we're building some 14 military bases there now, and some people
say they've got a rather permanent concept to them. When you guard
the oil ministry, but you don't guard the nuclear facilities,
the message to a lot of people is maybe, "Wow, maybe they're
interested in our oil."
When, "The only building that was guarded when the troops
went into Baghdad was the oil ministry," we created an insurgency,
said Kerry. When Bush, "didn't guard the nuclear facilities...
didn't guard the foreign office, where you might have found information
about weapons of mass destruction... didn't guard the borders,"
Bush created the mess that exists there now; he wouldn't have
made such a mess and will correct mistakes like these now.
And, again clearly pointing out how he would fix the situation
in Iraq, correcting the mistakes Bush has made, he said, "I
will make a flat statement: The United States of America has no
long-term designs on staying in Iraq."
It would be nice to show some area or moment where Bush shined
and Kerry could use some improvement, but there was none. Tonight
was ugly, a complete disaster for the Bushies - and so far, unlike
with Gore, the non-M/I media hasn't even been able to cover for
Bush on this one.
No, tonight America saw that the emperor clearly has no clothes,
and they all realized, as they gazed upon him standing naked before
them for ninety painful, tortured minutes, that the naked truth
is, the emperor really doesn't have much there.
TEL AVIV — Once upon a time, an assistant
to Levy Eshkol, our late prime minister, rushed up to him and
cried: "Levy, a disaster! A drought has set in!"
"Where?" the prime minister asked anxiously, "in
"No, here in Israel!" the man replied.
"Then there's nothing to worry about," Eshkol said
Right from the beginning, the state of Israel has been critically
affected by events in the United States. "If
America sneezes, Israel catches cold," is the local version
of the universal saying.
This is particularly true in the run-up to American elections.
They can be as important for Israel as our own, since the occupant
of the White House can influence the fate of Israel in many significant
ways. But they have an additional significance:
The months before the American elections are a kind of open season
The basic assumption is that no candidate for the White House
would dare to provoke the American Jewish voters at election times.
They are an extremely well organized and highly motivated political
bloc, ready to donate heaps of money, which gives them political
clout well beyond their numbers.
Actually, there are now more Muslims than Jews in the United
States, but they are not organized, their motivation is weak,
their willingness to donate large amounts of money near zero.
Their adherence to the Palestinian cause, for example, cannot
match the fierce loyalty of most of the Jews to Israel. Moreover,
in this the Jews are now joined by tens of millions of Christian
Israeli governments naturally time their most controversial moves
to coincide with the American elections. The more closely fought
the elections, the more attractive it is for Israeli planners
The state of Israel unilaterally declared its independence in
May 1948 , when Harry Truman's reelection campaign was in a critical
condition. David Ben Gurion made the decision against the advice
of some of his wisest colleagues, who warned him that the United
States would oppose the move with all its might. He bet on the
inability of the American system to do that during an election
At the time, Truman was desperately in need of money. Some Jewish
millionaires provided it. To show his gratitude, and against the
express advice of his Secretary of State (George Marshall) and
especially his Secretary of Defense (James Forrestal), Truman
immediately accorded the new state de facto recognition. (Stalin
trumped him and recognized Israel de jure.)
Since then, this has been a repeating pattern. The Israeli government
ordered the army to attack in 1967 (starting the Six Day War)
after receiving an OK from President Lyndon Johnson, who at the
time was still hoping to be reelected in 1968 .
The critical first year after that war, when America failed to
induce Israel to withdraw from the territories its army had conquered,
was, of course, an election year. Most of our present troubles
stem from that.
Only once did the calculation fail.
In 1956 Ben Gurion colluded with France and Britain against Egypt's
Gamal Abdel Nasser. After conquering the Sinai peninsula, Ben
Gurion declared the "Third Israeli Kingdom". He was
convinced that the Americans were preoccupied with their election
and would not interfere. He was wrong.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was standing for re-election,
was assured of a landslide majority. He did not need the Jewish
vote. He was also a man of principle. So he presented Ben Gurion
with what amounted to an ultimatum: Evacuate the Sinai or else.
Four days after setting up his "kingdom" Ben Gurion
announced its demise. But this was an exception.
Ariel Sharon, who considers himself a personal disciple of Ben
Gurion (as does Shimon Peres), is basing his present policy on
the same calculation. President George W. Bush is fighting for
his political life. He will not dare to provoke a quarrel with
Israel at this juncture. So from now until November, Sharon can
do much as he pleases.
President Bush's famous road map is dead. (I can hear him exclaiming:
"Road map? What road map? The only map I need is of the road
to the White House!") His demand for a freeze on all building
activity in the settlements, "even for the natural increase",
is becoming a joke. Sharon has just openly flouted this by announcing
plans for 600 new houses in the Ma'aleh Adumim settlement.
Emissaries of the Security Council and the State Department are
practically begging Sharon on their knees to dismantle dozens
of new settlements (referred to as outposts") put up since
he assumed power in 2001 . Sharon has promised this to Bush many
times, in return for reversals of long-standing US policy. Sharon
must be hard put not to laugh in their faces.
However, Sharon does have a vital interest in Bush's re-election.
He is afraid of John Kerry, even if he says exactly the same as
Bush on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, and his grandfather's name
Experience has shown that there is no necessary
correlation between what politicians say before elections and
what they do after them. That is the other side of the election
So Sharon may be induced to do something - anything at all -
that will allow Bush to claim the credit for a "historical
breakthrough" in the Middle East. Perhaps — who knows?
- a week before the elections, three mobile homes may be dismantled
on some godforsaken hilltop in Samaria. Wow!
The selection of Sen. John Edwards as John
Kerry's running mate has raised concerns inside the FBI and among
civil-liberties groups that the North Carolina senator will use
the campaign to promote his controversial proposal to create a
new domestic spy agency.
For the past 18 months, Edwards has been perhaps
the Senate's foremost champion of a much-debated proposal to strip
the bureau of its intelligence-gathering functions and turn them
over to a new domestic spy agency patterned after Britain's M.I.5.
Edwards's promotion of the idea has created friction between
him and FBI Director Robert Mueller who, along with other bureau
officials, has warned that such a move would spark renewed turmoil
within the U.S. intelligence community that would hinder the war
on terrorism. It also has stirred the fears of civil-liberties
groups, who believe such an agency would inevitably end up spying
on political dissidents and religious groups.
But Edwards has refused to back down—and there are signs
that Kerry himself may be warm to the idea. "He thinks it's
still the way to go," said Mike Briggs, Edwards's Senate
press secretary on Wednesday when asked about the M.I.5 proposal.
Indeed, in an op-ed article for a North Carolina newspaper as
recently as two months ago, Edwards wrote "that the FBI has
failed as an intelligence agency." He also dismissed Mueller's
own efforts to reform the FBI to make it more attentive to intelligence
gathering, as opposed to strict law enforcement.
Despite receiving numerous briefings from the FBI director on
the subject, which Edwards would have received as a member of
both the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate Intelligence Committee,
"I have heard nothing that gives me confidence that the proposed
changes will enable the FBI to more effectively collect intelligence
on the plans and intentions of terrorists," Edwards wrote
in a May 2, 2004, op-ed in the Raleigh News and Observer.
Although Kerry himself has talked more vaguely about reforming
intelligence in his major campaign speeches, a little noticed
"Defending the American Homeland" plan on his campaign
Web site seems to reach a similar conclusion as Edwards on the
"Many of the examinations of 9/11 have raised serious questions
about whether the FBI is the right agency to conduct domestic
intelligence collection and analysis," the Kerry plan states
in a section entitled "Reforming Domestic Intelligence."
"America needs an independent intelligence
capability that focuses explicitly on domestic intelligence."
A senior Kerry campaign official said that language—taken
from a fact sheet handed out after a Kerry speech to a firefighters'
group in March 2003—was not intended to specifically endorse
an M.I.5 over a beefed up intelligence function within the FBI.
"We've been back and forth on this issue—and it's still
not determined," the campaign official said.
The idea of creating a new domestic spy agency first received
wide currency in the wake of the September 11 attacks and has
been debated intensely by the 9/11 commission. The panel is due
to make its recommendations for intelligence reform later this
month. But sources inside the commission say the prospect of such
a major overhaul—along with its profound implications for
civil liberties—has caused many panel members to shrink
from such a step and favor less sweeping recommendations to improve
intelligence gathering inside the country.
Indeed, top FBI officials had until this week concluded that
Mueller's own reform efforts—including a recent proposal
to create a new "intelligence directorate" within the
FBI—had pretty much put the matter to rest. "We're
not too worried about that," said one senior bureau official
about the M.I.5 proposal.
Now, however, the prospect that the Kerry-Edwards ticket might
push the M.I.5 idea could swiftly change the political dynamic.
Since late 2002, in speeches and on the Senate floor, Edwards
has argued that the failures of the FBI to pick up the trail of
the 9/11 hijackers graphically shows the bureau's fundamental
deficiencies in intelligence gathering. As a law-enforcement agency,
the FBI is by culture and practice focused on arresting, prosecuting
and convicting criminals—not collecting fragmentary bits
of intelligence about potential terrorists and then analyzing
the information to make sense of it, he has said.
"Asking a law-enforcement agency to manage intelligence
is like trying to jam a square peg into a round hole," Edwards
said in a December 2002 speech to the Brookings Institution. "The
FBI … builds cases rather than connecting dots, and it keeps
information secret rather than getting it to those who can use
it stop the terrorists."
Edwards's repeated pounding away on the subject early last year
annoyed top FBI officials. Some privately expressed irritation,
suggesting that the politically ambitious first-term senator had
seized on the idea as a vehicle for his presidential campaign.
At one point, Mueller appealed to Edwards to hold off introducing
legislation on the subject until the FBI director could brief
him about what he was doing to correct the problem. Edwards went
ahead and introduced his bill anyway in February 2003—and
then took Mueller up on his offer, a sequence that did not go
down well among some of Mueller's deputies.
Mueller's own reform efforts have revolved around making terrorism
the FBI's top priority, beefing up the bureau's own intelligence
and analytic functions and bringing in fresh managers with backgrounds
in the intelligence community. But bureau officials argue that
creating an entirely new agency dedicated solely to spying inside
the United States would only create new bureaucratic rivalries—especially
because the bureau law-enforcement agents would still be needed
to develop evidence for criminal prosecutions. "You can't
separate criminal prosecutions, terrorism and foreign intelligence,"
said one top FBI manager.
Civil-liberties groups have other concerns
about the Edwards plan. For decades, FBI agents who seek to develop
evidence about potential domestic threats have operated under
tight Justice Department guidelines; those guidelines require
there be grounds to believe targets are engaged in criminal acts.
A new domestic spy agency
would not be so encumbered, the critics say.
In an effort to insulate himself from
such criticism, Edwards had proposed steps to curb potential excesses
by a domestic spying agency, such as requiring approval from the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for infiltrating domestic
political or religious groups. But
some civil-liberties advocates say such steps would be insufficient—the
FISA court has historically acted as a rubber stamp, critics say—and
that a domestic-intelligence agency such as Edwards has advocated
would inevitably be tempted to spy on legitimate dissenters.
Documents newly declassified by the United
States government reveal that a British citizen has been tortured
in Guantanamo Bay, lawyers claimed today.
The papers - being released later this morning - will show that
Moazzam Begg "has been and continues to be abused and tortured
by the United States", the lawyers said.
Begg has been held at the US military base in Cuba for more than
The documents will also reveal "shocking evidence concerning
the US motive in continuing to hold him under inhumane circumstances",
it was claimed.
Begg's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and his US counsel, Clive Stafford
Smith, will unveil full details at a central London press conference.
Five of the nine Britons originally detained
at Guantanamo were released without charge in March.
One detainee - Tarek Dergoul, a 26-year-old former care worker
from east London - said after his release that US guards forced
him to look at pornographic magazines and subjected him to "very
loud" American music during interrogations.
He said he suffered repeated strip searches and sleep deprivation.
During cell searches by guards wearing riot gear the soldiers
"poked their fingers in my eyes, banged my head on the floor
and kicked and punched me and tied me up like a beast," Mr
Dergoul said in a statement released in August.
Four Britons remain at Camp Delta - Begg, Feroz Abbasi, Martin
Mubanga and Richard Belmar.
The British Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith
QC, revealed in June that he was "unable to accept"
President George Bush's proposals for military tribunals at Guantanamo
because they did not meet international standards for fair trials.
Tony Blair went into hospital today for
heart treatment after suffering a health scare while on holiday
The fresh question mark over the Prime Minister's health comes
as The Independent can reveal that he has bought a Georgian house
for about £3.5m in an exclusive part of central London.
It will become his family home when he leaves Downing Street.
Mr Blair signalled last night that he intends to serve at least
another four years as Prime Minister, which would enable him to
match Margaret Thatcher's 11 years in power. However, he announced
that he would quit shortly before the following general election
and would not seek a fourth term.
The Prime Minister, 51, who was admitted to hospital a year ago
with an irregular heart beat, suffered a recurrence during his
month-long summer break. Today he was having a "catheter
ablation", under which a catheter will be fitted to give
off pulses of energy to stop his heart "short-circuiting"
again. Doctors advised Mr Blair to have the medical procedure,
described by No 10 as standard, after his second flutter.
It will not require surgery but he will have a local anaesthetic
and be sedated for a couple of hours. He may stay overnight in
hospital but intends to return to work on Monday and go ahead
with a long-planned visit to Africa next week.
Aides brushed aside suggestions that a second scare would cast
doubt on how long Mr Blair would stay on. They said he would serve
a "full term" if Labour wins the next election but would
stand down "towards the end" of the parliament to allow
time for his successor to establish himself before the election.
"He wants to do at least another four years," said one
close ally. That message will not be welcomed by Gordon Brown,
the front-runner to succeed, who fears he will inherit a Labour
government in its dying days.
Speculation that Mr Blair might leave sooner
rather than later will be fuelled by the revelation that he has
bought a home in Connaught Square, which will be rented out until
he leaves No 10. The Blairs have financed
the purchase partly on the basis of Mr Blair's future earnings
when he is no longer Prime Minister, which include a likely seven-figure
sum from his memoirs.
Close allies insisted yesterday that the Blairs' move reflected
their desire to get back into the property market after a gap
of almost eight years rather than anything about his political
When approached by The Independent last night, Downing Street
confirmed that the Blairs had bought a house in central London.
It is understood that sale was completed recently and that the
house will provide a family home and offices for Mr and Mrs Blair.
Christopher Bollyn of American Free Press
offered United Air Lines (UAL) to view the video "911: In
Plane Site" by Dave von Kleist of The Power Hour, and discuss
the images of what is allegedly UAL Flight 175 hitting the South
Tower at the World Trade Center.
It is not possible that United Air Lines used a windowless plane
with a missile pod on its underside for UAL 175 on Sept. 11, 2001,
therefore, the plane seen in the videos cannot be UAL Flight 175.
Below, UAL categorically refuses to view the video evidence.
Bollyn-United Air Lines Correspondence follows.
From Christopher Bollyn (AFP) to Jeff Green, UAL spokesman:
Jeff Green Media Relations Manager United Airlines World Headquarters
Worldwide Communications Elk Grove, Illinois
Dear Mr. Green,
Thank you for responding to my inquiries. I write for American
Free Press (http://www.americanfreepress.net/) an independent
weekly newspaper based on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.
With all due respect, I'd like to respond to your comments
in today's email and phone conversation.
I was surprised to hear you say that any suggestion that it
was not UAL Flight 175 that hit the South Tower was "offensive."
I am also surprised that you are not interested in viewing the
video images from "911: In Plane Site."
The video images in Dave von Kleist's video come from mainstream
news coverage of the events. They are simply the images that
have been shown countless times on television sets around the
world. In the video, however, they are slowed down and examined
frame by frame. What they reveal when viewed in slow motion
is nothing short of astounding.
You said, "Neither I, nor any of my colleagues or UAL
executives wishes to see the video." Do you speak for all
of the employees at UAL?
Does that mean that there is a corporate diktat ordering employees
not to view the video, or has a consensus been reached through
a democratic-type process in which all of the executives and
your colleagues voted or expressed their own opinions personally
and told you that they are not interested in seeing the video?
You said it is offensive to suggest that it was not UAL 175
that hit the South Tower at about 9:03 a.m. on 9/11. If it was
UAL 175 that hit the South Tower, then it must be that UAL 175
had an object attached to the under side of the fuselage that
looked and acted like a missile pod when it fired a missile
at the South Tower just before it entered the building.
To maintain that position means that all four videos, taken
by four different cameras in different positions and by four
different networks, are all showing falsified images.
What the video appears to show is a modified Boeing military
tanker plane that has a missile pod attached to the underside.
The video images of the underside of the plane also show what
appears to be the boom port of such a tanker. Witnesses also
reported the plane that hit the second tower had no windows
nor markings like a commercial jet.
In the face of the video evidence and eyewitness testimony
that it was NOT a commercial jet that hit the South Tower, I
would like to ask this question to UAL: What evidence can you
provide that it was UAL 175 that hit the tower?
The evidence available to the public simply does not support
The government has made that claim, the media has repeated
it, and you say it is offensive to challenge it. But what can
you tell the American public to convince them that it was UAL
175 that hit the South Tower? What proof can you offer?
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Christopher Bollyn American Free Press
Jeff Green's earlier e-mail follows:
"Green, Jeffrey [WHQPR]" <Jeff.Green@united.com>
I know that you've been trying to reach me for a few weeks
now regarding questions you have related to flights 93 and 175.
My colleagues inform me that you have a video you would like
to show us regarding Flight 175. I have looked at the site you
suggested, as well as the UK-based site, The Truth Seeker, that
features your writing. Neither I, nor any of my colleagues or
UAL executives wishes to see the video.
I would suggest that you contact the FBI, who is leading the
criminal investigation into the crash of each flight, and arrange
to show them the tape. You may reach their public affairs group
by calling 202-324-3691.
I also know that you've had some other questions, which I think
I can generally answer for you. If you have very specific questions
about the events of 9/11, I'm afraid I have to once again direct
you to the federal authorities as they are the group responsible
for the continuing criminal investigation.
1) The wreckage of Flight 93 recovered from Pennsylvania has
been preserved in a storage facility as it will likely be used
as evidence in pending civil litigation.
2) Flight 93, a Boeing 757, was painted in United's standard
blue and gray livery.
3) Yes, United is certain that Flight 175, a Boeing 767, was
hi-jacked by terrorists and flown into the World Trade Center
on 9/11/01. The flight carried 54 passengers and 11 employees.
Media Relations Manager
United Airlines World Headquarters
Baghdad's three bombs went off as crowds
gathered to celebrate the opening of a new sewage plant. It was
attended by US troops who passed out candy to the crowds of children.
41 people were killed - mostly children.
The first explosion was followed by two more that struck those
who rushed to help the initial victims. Ten U.S. soldiers were
wounded in the attack, two of them seriously, the military said.
Iraq's Health Ministry confirmed 41 dead, 34 of them children,
and 139 wounded.
Someone had to know there would be a ceremony and that US troops
would be there as good will ambassadors. Only the Americans and
Israelis had this information. The press is screaming ' Radical
Muslims' but why would they kill Arab children.
The only ones that benefitted were the Israelis. Only they could
build these sophisticated bombs.
Mossad agents arrested in Gaza recruiting Arabs
They used Hamas to recruit Arabs who have lost families to IDF
killings. Israel has thousands of consultants, interogators and
Mossad roaming all over Iraq. Israel’s style for the last
100 has been using False Flags to incite wars. In Iraq their goal
is the oil but they want the US and the Muslims at each others
Hamas which is controlled by Mossad is supplying the bombers
and Israel the bombs and info.
Phony (Mossad) Al Qaeda Cell in Palestine
Yossef Barkan is not a talkative man. His
son, Ze'ev, is a Mossad agent, on the run after fleeing New Zealand
in the aftermath of the Mossad spy ring collapse last April.
"Stop calling here, you hear me," he said when I called
to speak to Ze'ev. "I've nothing to do with this business.
Goodbye." And he hung up.
Of more than a hundred people contacted in connection with this
Weekend Herald inquiry, only a handful were prepared to talk.
The activities of Israel's intelligence services, whether legal
or not, are a minefield that ordinary Israelis steer clear of,
Ze'ev Barkan, 37, is married to a woman called Irit. They live
in a small village called Shoham, about 15 miles southeast of
When I telephoned for him at his home, the woman who answered
told me she did not know a Ze'ev. But when I asked if I was speaking
to Irit, she said "yes".
Ze'ev was born in the United States as Ze'ev William Brokenstein
in 1967. He later changed his name to the more Israeli-sounding
He has reportedly worked as an Israeli diplomat in Austria and
Belgium. But he is a man of many identities and is believed to
be a long-standing Mossad spy.
Before the arrests of the Mossad men, he was known to have three
passports - American, Israeli and diplomatic - but these proved
insufficient to his needs.
Entering New Zealand on his United States passport, he applied
for a New Zealand passport in the name of a cerebral palsy sufferer.
While he waited for his helpers to do their part, he stayed in
flats in Sandringham and Mt Eden and told people he was on a sailing
One of those helping Barkan in his bid to obtain another passport
was David Tony Resnick, an Auckland paramedic who abruptly left
New Zealand when police swooped.
His uncle, Keith Bookman, says this was not the first time that
Tony Resnick - the name by which he is known in New Zealand -
had left New Zealand for the Middle East. "When [Tony] was
young, he felt a connection to Israel and to the Zionist idea,"
Bookman said from London, where he now lives.
Tony's parents, Gail and Selwyn Resnick, tried to stop him from
going to Israel, but he wouldn't listen.
As a teenager in a strange country, he lived with Bookman and
his ex-wife Dina in Kibbutz Yizrael, near Nazareth in the country's
This kibbutz had several New Zealand families who went to Israel
after the 1967 war. They were affiliated with the Habonim, a Zionist
In those days, Israel seemed to be a small country surrounded
by hostile enemies and every Jew who could migrate to the country
was desperately needed.
"[Tony] saw me as a role model,' said Bookman, who also
left his New Zealand home because of a belief in the Zionist ideal.
Shortly afterwards, Resnick decided to join the Israeli army.
He served as a paramedic and was adopted as a "soldier without
family" by Kibbutz Yizrael.
The Jews who went to Israel from New Zealand are close. In some
ways, they behave like a small family - they know each other intimately,
keep in touch with each other regularly, and every year, meet
up on the grass of Kibbutz Yizrael to catch up.
For David Resnick, the kibbutz and Army service were like a ticket
into Israeli society.
People who knew Resnick described him as someone with two feet
on the ground, who knew what he wanted from life.
After the Army, he worked as an ambulance driver in Haifa. He
rented an apartment there and met and married his wife, Karen.
About four years ago, Resnick and his family moved to Auckland
so he could study to be a paramedic.
But his uncle says Resnick missed Israel.
"It was obvious that his move to Auckland was temporary
and just for studies," he said.
As an ardent Zionist with dual Israeli-New Zealand citizenship,
Resnick fitted the bill of a "sayan", an assistant hired
by Mossad from Jewish communities to help in a supportive role.
Mossad is smaller than most government intelligence agencies,
employing 2000 people.
But from its small office in Herzliyah, just outside Tel Aviv,
Mossad runs global operations using sympathetic contacts among
Mossad does not employ them as such; it gives them small missions
as part of wider intelligence operations.
Uriel 'Uri' Zosha Kelman, who had a Canadian passport and English
as a mother language, was the third man supporting Barkan and
His father was also an Israeli intelligence operative.
Kelman was the right person in the right place - young, brilliant
and highly motivated. He needed only to collect the New Zealand
passport and disappear.
Born to a religious Zionist family in Canada in June 1973, he
was educated in Jerusalem at Nativ Ma'ir, one of the top yeshivas
in the country.
A yeshiva is a religious school that teaches rabbinical practices
as well as ordinary classes. The Israeli Knesset has five members
with degrees from Nativ Ma'ir.
Kelman's friends at the yeshiva remember him as a brilliant and
sharp student, who spoke English fluently.
He passed his final tenth grade mathematics examination two years
before most of his contemporaries took it.
Nativ Ma'ir teaches a nationalistic curriculum and its 300 pupils,
aged between 14 and 18, are exclusively male.
Most of its graduates, like Kalman, finish school with a strong
motivation to serve the country.
They tend to serve in the Army together in a unit called Yeshivot
Ha'hesder, which combines military responsibilities with religious
Kelman's military career began in the armoured division, but
because of medical problems he was moved to serve in intelligence.
His education records show he went on to take part in an officer-training
His family owned a three-storeyed house in Harav Berlin St, and
his father still prays in the nearby Haychal Ariel synagogue where
he collects dues from congregants.
Kelman became a member of the "Dror" faction of the
B'nei Akkiva religious Zionist youth movement, which imbues teenagers
with militaristic values and teaches them to build new settlements.
Most of its members use these skills in the West Bank and Gaza.
For a long time, Kelman did not see his father, Israel "Easy"
Kelman, who for most of his son's childhood was abroad on missions
with Israeli intelligence agencies.
It was a natural progression for Kelman to follow his father's
footsteps into Israeli intelligence.
His friends knew that he had been involved in a 'secret project'
but none knew he was working for Mossad.
They reacted with shock when a photograph of him in a courtroom
was published by the Herald and then appeared around the world.
The fourth man in the Mossad spy ring was Elisha "Eli"
He has been in New Zealand 24 times in the past four years.
Cara, 50, like Barkan, lived in a small community, Kohav Ya'ir,
populated by ex-soldiers and security service officials.
His neighbours included the head of Israel's National Security
Council, Uzi Dayan, Israeli Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz and,
until recently, former Prime Minister Ehud Barak.
Married with five children, Cara nominally worked for a travel
agency called Eastward Bound. This enabled him to travel the world
with no questions asked.
An employee of Eastward Bound's Haifa office said a man named
Eli worked in the agency's Sydney branch.
Inquiries by the Herald indicate that office does not exist -
or if it does, it is operating illegally.
GUWAHATI, India (Reuters) - A series of
bomb blasts killed 19 people and wounded more than 50 in northeastern
India Saturday in the deadliest attack since a cease-fire with
the main separatist group in Nagaland began seven years ago.
Another bomb exploded in the neighboring state of Assam killing
one man at about the same time.
Police said the two attacks appeared to be unrelated.
Two bombs exploded in a marketplace in Nagaland's commercial
center, Dimapur, and one at a crowded railway station, an officer
at the local police station said.
The Hong Kong market that sells mainly Chinese goods was open
despite a holiday across India to mark the anniversary on Saturday
of the birth of independence leader Mahatma Gandhi.
"There are pieces of flesh and torn human limbs lying on
the platform. There are people wailing," Yanger Thakkar,
a journalist in Dimapur, told Reuters.
"It was a powerful blast, the tin roof of the railway platform
has been blown," railway official Robin Kalita said.
Twelve people died at the railway station and seven were killed
at the market.
The blasts in Christian-majority Nagaland could have been set
off by any of several smaller separatist groups that are not part
of the truce with the Indian government, officials said.
The biggest group, the National Socialist Council of Nagaland
(Isaac-Muivah), which has fought for a separate Naga nation for
more than half a century, has held several rounds of talks with
government officials but with no breakthrough.
Police said the blast in Assam was likely the work of Bodo tribals
who are fighting for a separate nation. The bomb went off in a
market in Kokrajhar district, 150 km (90 miles) west of the state's
main city of Guwahati.
India's mountainous northeast is home to dozens of underground
groups, some fighting for greater autonomy, or statehood and others
for secession. The groups accuse the federal government of plundering
the region's rich resources and neglecting the local economy.
Security analysts say successive Indian governments have largely
ignored the northeast, focusing almost entirely on the rebellion
in the disputed region of Kashmir.
MOUNT ST. HELENS, Wash. (AP) - Mount St.
Helens quieted down after spewing a plume of steam and ash - but
only briefly. Within hours of the eruption
Friday, seismic readings suggested pressure was building again
inside the volcano, which had been dormant for 18 years.
It began rumbling last week, set off by small earthquakes occurring
as often as three or four times a minutes, and scientists said
there could be more steam eruptions soon.
Friday's eruption, described by government scientist Jeff Wynn
as a "throat-clearing," was the sleeping giant's first
since 1986. On May 18, 1980, Mount St. Helens blew its top with
such force that 57 people lost their lives.
The volcanic burp cast a haze across the horizon as the roiling
plume rose from the nearly 1,000-foot-tall dome. After about 20
minutes, the mountain calmed and the plume dissipated.
"It was such a thrill!" said Faye Ray, a retired school
teacher who watched from an observatory near the mountain. "I
just felt we would see something today and we did."
The ash appeared to pose no threat to anyone, but scientists
warned that people living southwest of the mountain might notice
a dusting on their cars. There was no sign of lava.
The earthquakes started Sept. 23 and grew steadily stronger,
finally reaching a magnitude of 3.3 Thursday and Friday. After
the eruption, they stopped for several hours, said Wynn, of the
U.S. Geological Survey.
Then, the tremors resumed, hitting a one-per-minute
pace, said Bill Steele at the University of Washington seismic
laboratory. A couple exceeded magnitude 2.
A few more steam explosions are likely, Steele
said, "until enough debris is cleared, and then there is
a significant chance that lava could be extruded at the surface."
Tom Pierson, a USGS geologist, said officials will monitor the
site "on a very intense scale until we can determine that
the thing has really gone back to sleep." [...]
-- Western Mexico's "Volcano of Fire" unleashed a towering
column of smoke and ash Friday, after ropes of burning, orange
lava poured from its peak overnight.
A light coating of ash dusted nearby communities that are home
to about 600 people. Authorities were on heightened alert but
said they had no plans to order evacuations.
"The volcano is very active but has not yet reached a risk
level that would prompt an evacuation," said Melchor Urzua,
director of emergency response teams for Colima state.
Known in Spanish as "Volcan del Fuego," the 12,533-foot-high
mountain straddles the border of Colima and Jalisco states, 300
miles west of Mexico City.
Earthquakes and explosions of hot rock within the volcano began
Wednesday, provoked by the collapse of a dome that formed recently
in its center. Small landslides tumbled down the volcano's northern
and western slopes. Lava flowed Thursday night and early Friday
"The incandescent material won't affect nearby communities
because it's running off into valleys," said Jorge Sapien,
a spokesman for Jalisco emergency teams.
A major eruption in 1999 sent glowing rock three miles down its
slopes and fired a plume of ash more than 5 miles high.
In 1913, an explosion created a crater 1,650 feet deep, blasted
fast-moving flows of hot ash down the volcano's slopes and rained
ash on Guadalajara, 75 miles to the north.
Vulcanologists consider the Colima volcano to be one of the most
active and potentially the most destructive in central Mexico.
It has erupted violently dozens of times since its first recorded
eruption in 1560.
Note - Thanks for George Paxinos for
sending this in. It came from one Brian Justice. If anyone has
any knowledge of what these three LARGE explosions were caused
by... each resulting in a huge mushroom cloud... please let us
know right away. Something is going on underground in Utah. -ed
On our way back home from a family drive on 8-29-04, my wife and
I noticed a peculiar mushroom cloud just east of our home in Wellington,
We ran into the house and brought our both of our digital cameras
and started snapping pictures. Within 2
hours there were three different "explosions" resulting
in mushroom clouds.
We emailed a local news station; they looked into the pictures
but to no avail. There were truck drivers parked at the gas station
just down from our home, the drivers did not dare drive the road
for fear of whatever was happening out there.
Pretty scary afternoon, especially during this time of heightened
alert in our nation.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A trio of powerful
explosions emanating from three different regions in space could
mean astronomers might see stars blowing up within days, scientists
said on Friday.
Astronomers believe the blasts -- which took place on September
12, 16 and 24 and lasted only a few seconds each -- may be precursors
to stellar explosions called supernovae. If this turns out to
be true, astronomers would have a new tool to predict these explosions,
and researchers could watch the blasts from start to finish.
The first two space explosions were X-ray flashes, while the
third was a more powerful blast called a gamma ray burst, the
scientists said in a statement.
The explosions occurred in the constellations Aquarius, Pisces
and Aries, and all are more than 1 billion light-years from Earth,
and also far away from each other, said George Ricker of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, whose team detected the explosions with
NASA's High-Energy Transient Explorer (HETE-2) satellite.
The two in Aquarius and Pisces were the less powerful X-ray flashes,
and may range from 1 billion to 3 billion light-years' distance
from Earth, Ricker said in a telephone interview. The gamma ray
burst was located in Aries could range from 1 billion to 8 billion
light-years distance, he said.
A light-year is about 6 trillion miles, the distance light travels
in a year.
Theoretically, within 10 to 20 days of these blasts, observers
might see supernovae in these three locations, Ricker said.
"Astronomers now have three places that they can look ...
If they're looking at the right spot at the right time, they'll
see a supernova turn on, and that would be the first time that's
happened for an X-ray flash," Ricker said. It happened last
year for a gamma ray burst, he said.
Gamma ray bursts are the most powerful explosions known other
than the theoretical Big Bang that many astronomers believe gave
birth to the universe. Previous research with the same HETE-2
satellite showed a connection between gamma ray bursts and supernovae.
The lower-energy X-ray flashes might be gamma ray bursts viewed
slightly off-angle, somewhat similar to how a flashlight is less
blinding when viewed at an angle.
These three recent blasts could help determine whether X-ray
flashes, like gamma ray bursts, are related to supernovae. If
they are, that would be good news for scientists who study exploding
stars: X-ray flashes are somewhat closer to Earth than gamma ray
bursts and the supernovae could be easier to observe.
Washington - The United States on Thursday
stood firm in rejecting the Kyoto Protocol on global warming despite
renewed pressure to yield after Russia ended years of hesitation
by moving to ratify the treaty.
The State Department had no comment on the decision by the Russian
cabinet to submit the document to the Duma for approval but said
Washington remained committed in its own way to battling climate
"The United States' position on the Kyoto Protocol has not
changed," spokesman Richard Boucher said. "We thought
at this point it wasn't the right thing for the United States,
but it's up to other nations to independently evaluate whether
ratification is in their national interest."
Russia's ratification is vital for transforming Kyoto from a
draft 1997 agreement into a working international treaty. Moscow
had for years hedged on whether it would approve the pact.
The protocol requires industrialized signatories to trim output
of six "greenhouse" gases by 2008-2012 compared with
their 1990 levels. To achieve that, they will have to cut the
burning of oil, coal and gas, the carbon-bearing sources that
sparked the Industrial Revolution, and remain the foundation for
economic life today.
Those changes carry an economic tab to consumers, a threat to
vested interests and a challenge to lifestyles. Kyoto has run
into fierce crossfire from the oil lobby and from conservatives
like US President George W. Bush.
The United States, which by itself accounts
for a quarter of global carbon pollution, walked away from Kyoto
in 2001, saying the pact was too costly and unfair because
developing countries are not bound to make specific pollution
Without the United States on board, the overall reduction in
emissions is likely to be 0.6 percent if Kyoto is honoured, well
below the initial target of 5.2 percent, according to the US-based
environment group World Resources Institute. [...]
A study showing the link between country
music and suicide has taken one of the top prizes in this year's
Ig-Nobel awards - the humorous alternative to the Nobel prizes.
Other winners include the inventor of the karaoke machine, the
man who patented the "comb-over" for covering the head
of bald men and a student who investigated the danger of eating
food that has fallen on the floor. The 10 winners of the 2004
Ig-Nobel prizes - which celebrate the bizarre, weird, funny and
improbable elements of genuine scientific inquiry - received their
awards last night at a ceremony at Harvard University in Boston.
Marc Abrahams, who conceived the awards 14 years ago, said that
the "Igs" are given to studies or inventions judged
to have done most in making people laugh and then think. Mr Abrahams,
who publishes the Journal of Improbable Research, said the prizes
honour the "whipped cream of humanity", or those thinkers
who are either eccentrically brilliant or brilliantly eccentric.
The medicine prize was won by Steven Stack of Wayne State University
in Detroit, Michigan, and James Gundlach of Auburn University
in Alabama, who published an investigation into the effect of
country music on suicide. The study found that country music,
with its emphasis on marital discord, alcoholism and social alienation,
can be linked with an increased suicide rate.
"The results of a multiple regression analysis of 49 metropolitan
areas show that the greater the airtime devoted to country music,
the greater the white suicide rate," the two researchers
The physics prize went to Ramesh Balasubramaniam of Ottawa University
in Canada and Michael Turvey of Connecticut University, who carried
out an exhaustive mathematical study of hula hooping. They worked
out how movements of the hip and lower limbs keep the hula hoop
from falling. "These modes might stabilise the hoop's angular
momentum by controlling respectively its vertical and horizontal
components," they said.
A Chicago high school student, Jillian Clarke, became the youngest
person to win an Ig-Nobel when she won the public health award
for investigating the "five-second rule" about whether
it is safe to eat food that has dropped on the floor. "We
first surveyed 100 people to see if they were familiar with the
five- second rule, and if so, have they ever applied it and if
they ever applied it what foods would they feel comfortable eating
after floor contact," she said. Further work revealed what
type of food - sticky or dry - and floor coverings - smooth or
rough -were most likely to contaminate dropped food.
The psychology prize went to Daniel Simons of Illinois University
and Christopher Chabris of Harvard, who demonstrated that when
people paid close attention to one thing they can be made to overlook
anything going on nearby, including a man dressed in a gorilla
The Coca-Cola company takes the chemistry prize for using advanced
technology to convert liquid from the river Thames into Dasani,
the "mineral" water that had to be withdrawn for precautionary
The American Nudist Research Library at Kissimmee in Florida
wins the literature prize for preserving a cheeky slice of history
so that everyone can enjoy seeing it
The biology prize goes to a team including Robert Batty of Dunstaffnage
Marine Laboratory in Oban who demonstrated the ability of herrings
to communicate by releasing bubbles of gas from their intestines
Inventor of the Karaoke
Daisuke Inoue, of Hyogo in Japan, won the peace prize for inventing
the Karaoke sing-along machine which provides an entirely new
way for people to learn to tolerate each other
Donald Smith and his late father, Frank, from Florida, win the
engineering prize for patenting the "comb-over", the
clever technique of covering a bald spot by pulling hair over
it from the side of the head, as practised by Bobby Charlton and
Several weeks ago
while watching Satellite T.V., I was maliciously accosted by a
Spanish dubbed Seinfeld-a-Thon. My exact words at the moment I
realised the horror of the situation were;"This is the worst
thing I have ever seen." Now, I am sure most people would
agree with such a statement, and I really thought I knew what
I was talking about, but not one hour ago, and to my great dismay,
I was enticed into following a link to a web site that topped
even "Seinfeld en Español" for retardedness.
Those long time readers, and certainly fans, of the Signs Page
know of my utter disdain for intellectually inferior people who
insist on proclaiming that they know something. The web site in
question was owned by two such people. Sadly it seems that as
more and more retired couples learn about computers, a large percent
of them discover 'Frontpage' and proceed to pollute the web with
their senile delusions of having something worthwhile to say.
I have been using the Internet for many years and believe me,
aside from my collective works there is really nothing to see.The
Internet is in fact a cyber gathering place for pubescent males
and lonely college geeks in search of porn. Those who are unfortunate
enough to have parents with the required two brain cells to rub
together while Windows installs Cyberpatrol or Netnanny, search
for the only other thing uselessly abundant on the web. Retarded
Anytime, anywhere you see something in print, it is an opinion.
Open the dictionary, look up the word "Gullible" and
you will be privy to Mr Webster's opinion of what that word means.
It just so happens that a lot of people agree that Webster's opinion
is good. The opinions of senile old couples are not. Neither are
the opinions of iconoclast english whipper-snappers.
Where was I? Oh yeah, retired old couples and why they shouldn't
have internet access. So this web site I visit starts off on the
wrong foot by visually molesting me with a horrible Windows Me
content arrangement. As I scrolled down the page I half expected
these people to claim that Bush had a measurable I.Q., Dick Cheney
was human (Possibly Male), and that Condoleezza Rice invented
the Question Mark and Fried Chicken Wings. To be honest I could
barely stomach five minutes on the site before having to lay down
nursing a stitch in my side from all the laughter.
Urban Legends aren't supposed to be believed, and they sure as
hell shouldn't be disproved. They are stories, yarns, there for
entertainment, a chuckle, a laff, you know...for sh**s n' giggles.
These are the type of people who will rudely interject during
a humorous anecdote from Grand Pa' to point out some mindless
error, or erroneous statement. They do it to draw attention to
themselves, and for no other purpose.
At this point I know what you are thinking.
My answer to you is this...Hypocrisy is not a crime...it's a
way of life!
[Ed: We would have offered a link to the self-styled debunking
odd-couple's web site in question, but Jay objected, saying our
readers come here to learn, not to be tortured.]
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.
out the Signs of the Times Archives
your comments and article suggestions to us
Fair Use Policy
Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org
Cassiopaean materials Copyright ©1994-2014 Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk. All rights reserved. "Cassiopaea, Cassiopaean, Cassiopaeans," is a registered trademark of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk.
Letters addressed to Cassiopaea, Quantum Future School, Ark or Laura, become the property of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura Knight-Jadczyk
Republication and re-dissemination of our copyrighted material in any manner is expressly prohibited without prior written consent.