- 911 Eye-witnesses
- High Strangeness
Article - The Blair Belief Project
Strike Flash Presentation by a QFS member
Fake President For A Fake Nation
am the commander, see. I do not need to explain why I say things. That's
the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs
to explain to me why they need to say something, but I don't feel like
I owe anybody an explanation." - George W Bush in an interview
with Bob Woodward 2003
has been reappointed "Commander in Chief" of the USA. Whether
their votes mattered or not, this event has occurred with the consent
of many millions of Americans cowed by the illusory fear of "Arab
terrorists". In truth the American people have today cast a vote
present some reports and facts which confirm what all conscious beings
already know - Bush and his entourage are liars and callous murderers
and their war on humanity has only just begun.
We will leave
it to the reader to ponder how we have arrived at this particular depressing
juncture and what, if any, chance there may be for a way out.
A new book by a prominent Washington
psychoanalyst says President George W. Bush is a "paranoid
meglomaniac" as well as a sadist and "untreated alcoholic"
Dr. Justin Frank, writing in Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind
of the President, also says the President has a ""lifelong
streak of sadism, ranging from childhood pranks (using firecrackers
to explode frogs) to insulting journalists, gloating over state
executions ... [and] pumping his fist gleefully before the bombing
Even worse, Dr. Frank concludes, the President's years of heavy
drinking ""may have affected his brain function - and
his decision to quit drinking without the help of a 12-step program
[puts] him at far higher risk of relapse."
Dr. Frank's conclusions appear to confirm a June 4, 2004, Capitol
Hill Blue report that says the President's erratic behavior and
wide mood swings have White House aides concerned.
Bush shows an inability to grieve - dating back to age 7, when
his sister died. "The family's reaction - no funeral and no
mourning - set in motion his life-long pattern of turning away from
pain [and hiding] behind antic behavior," says Frank, who says
Bush may suffer from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
Other findings by Dr. Frank:
* His mother, Barbara Bush - tabbed by some family friends as
"the one who instills fear" - had trouble connecting emotionally
with her son, Frank argues.
* George H.W. Bush's "emotional and physical absence during
his son's youth triggered feelings of both adoration and revenge
in George W."
* The President suffers from "character pathology," including
"grandiosity" and "megalomania" -- viewing himself,
America and God as interchangeable.
Dr. Frank has been a psychiatrist for 35 years and is on staff
at George Washington University. A Democrat, he once headed the
Washington Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
In an interview with The Washington Post's Richard Leiby, Dr. Frank
said he began to be concerned about Bush's behavior in 2002.
"I was really very unsettled by him and I started watching
everything he did and reading what he wrote, and watching him on
videotape. I felt he was disturbed," Dr. Frank told Leiby.
Bush, he said, "fits the profile of a former drinker whose
alcoholism has been arrested but not treated."
Dr. Frank's expert recommendation? "Our
sole treatment option -- for his benefit and for ours -- is to remove
President Bush from office . . . before it is too late."
A former US intelligence official
who served under the Bush administration in the build-up to the
Iraq war accused the White House yesterday of lying about the threat
posed by Saddam Hussein.
The claims came as the Bush administration was fighting to shore
up its credibility among a series of anonymous government leaks
over its distortion of US intelligence to manufacture a case against
This was the first time an administration official has put his
name to specific claims. The whistleblower, Gregory Thielmann, served
as a director in the state department's bureau of intelligence until
his retirement in September, and had access to the classified reports
which formed the basis for the US case against Saddam, spelled out
by President Bush and his aides.
Mr Thielmannn said yesterday: "I believe the Bush administration
did not provide an accurate picture to the American people of the
military threat posed by Iraq."
He conceded that part of the problem lay with US intelligence,
but added: "Most of it lies with the
way senior officials misused the information they were provided."
As Democrats demanded a congressional enquiry, the administration
sharply changed tack. The defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, told
the Senate the US had not gone to war against Iraq because of fresh
evidence of weapons of mass destruction but because Washington saw
what evidence there was prior to 2001 "in a dramatic new light"
after September 11.
At a press conference yesterday, Mr Thielmann said that, as of
March 2003, when the US began military operations, "Iraq posed
no imminent threat to either its neighbours or to the United States".
In one example, Mr Thielmann said a fierce debate inside the White
House about the purpose of aluminium tubes bought by Baghdad had
been "cloaked in ambiguity".
While some CIA analysts thought they could be used for gas centrifuges
to enrich uranium, the best experts at the energy department disagreed.
But the national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, said publicly
that they could only be used for centrifuges.
Mr Thielmann also said there was no significant pattern of cooperation
between Iraq and al-Qaida. He added: "This
administration has had a faith-based intelligence attitude ... 'We
know the answers - give us the intelligence to support those answers'."
Responding to claims of deliberate distortions, Mr Bush accused
his critics of "trying to rewrite history" and insisted
"there is no doubt in my mind" that Saddam "was a
threat to world peace".
Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in
Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition
forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll
from Iraqi and US public health experts.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon says the U.S. war on terror shouldn't end with Iraq.
Iran is just as dangerous and a top priority for a regime change,
Sharon said this week. He argued that although Iraq is an "insane"
regime, Iran is a "center of world terror."
In an exclusive interview with the New York Post, Sharon said that
as soon as Iraq is dealt with, he "will push for Iran to be
at the top of the 'to do' list." [...]
Anti-terrorism provisions build
on precedents of the drug war to weaken the Fourth Amendment
Protecting its people is Job One of any government -- keeping them
safe from an external enemy or lawless elements of its own society.
But not by any means necessary.
The Founders of the American republic recognized the temptation
of a government concerned with maintaining order to trend toward
an all-powerful police state. That's why it wrote a set of rules
-- the Bill of Rights and Constitution -- to keep everyone honest.
But the Bush administration is throwing the rule book on the trash
heap in the name of fighting terrorism. It has already weakened
nearly every procedural safeguard guaranteed by the Constitution
at every stage of the legal process -- detection, prosecution and
And now it is seeking to marginalize due process even further.
Last week, President George W. Bush asked for additional powers
to fight terrorism, including bypassing judicial oversight in obtaining
warrants; the ability to hold terrorist suspects without bail; and
the death penalty for terrorists regardless, presumably, of whether
or not their actions actually killed or were intended to kill --
a major affront to the principle of proportional punishment. [...]
Expanding secret courts
The Patriot Act is an appalling assault on civil liberties almost
from top to bottom. But a couple of examples highlight why it is
particularly offensive to due process.
The act tinkers mightily with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act. This law, Dahlia Lithwick of Slate magazine explains, was a
constitutional "bargain" struck between Congress and the
executive branch in 1978.
Congress, acknowledging that law enforcement authorities needed
special leeway in foreign intelligence investigations, carved out
a small exception to the Fourth Amendment's probable cause standard.
Under this standard, police have to show evidence of a crime before
getting the go-ahead from a court to conduct physical searches or
subpoena business records.
The surveillance act relaxed that standard, so no evidence of a
crime is necessary. Instead, intelligence authorities can go to
a secret court and obtain a search warrant simply by demonstrating
that the primary purpose of their investigation is to gather foreign
intelligence and the person in question is a proven agent of a foreign
Few people would likely find that egregious. But once the door
is cracked for a due process exception, kicking it wide open becomes
And that's exactly what the Patriot Act does. Its Section 218 expands
on the surveillance act standard to allow the same secret courts
to grant warrants if federal law enforcement agents can certify
-- not prove by hard evidence -- that the person to be searched
is a suspected terrorist or a suspected foreign agent. No longer
does terrorism or foreign intelligence need to be the "primary"
purpose of the investigation; it is sufficient if it is a "significant"
"This may seem like a trivial change, but it isn't,"
says Robert Levy of the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington,
D.C. It will turn the foreign surveillance court, which already
has no authority to second guess government evidence, into even
more of a rubber-stamp, Levy says, further limiting judicial review.
Worse, it will allow law enforcement to piggy back ordinary criminal
investigations on to the espionage or terror warrant.
"The new rules would open the door to the major circumvention
of the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirements," Levy maintains.
The foreign surveillance court recognized the danger and initially
refused to implement the expanded powers, but it was overruled by
a never-before-convened three-judge panel.
Perhaps even worse are the Patriot Act's "sneak-and-peek"
These provisions, which the House overwhelmingly voted to repeal,
extend the Justice Department's ability to conduct secret searches
of the homes and businesses of individuals -- citizens and noncitizens
alike -- not just in terrorism or espionage cases, but for all criminal
Certainly, the Justice Department has to meet the higher probable
cause standard to conduct the searches. Still, authorities do not
have to notify homeowners of the searches as long as the Justice
Department can show that notification would in any way jeopardize
Since notification would in almost every case undermine an investigation,
this could effectively spell the end of the "knock and announce"
requirement on police executing searches, a major abrogation of
The Fourth Amendment was added to the Constitution because of the
Founders' deep-seated revulsion against the practices of their former
English masters, who had wide-ranging powers to ransack homes in
search of any evidence of tax evasion or other crimes.
The search powers were used to enforce the Stamp Act, the pivotal
event leading to the Declaration of Independence.
And yet here Americans are again, supposedly in the name of preserving
liberty, returning to the onerous abridgements of freedom the nation
was founded to reject.
Not of terrorists. We can personally plan for the randomness of
terrorism only as much as we can plan for severe weather and personal
protection and as a nation we've survived worse than 9/11.
It's the other stuff I fear, things individuals can't plan for
because they steal from us what we don't even realize is lost until
it's too late.
I'm terrified for our country, for what it stands.
After 9/11 the president said be afraid, but go shopping. Laws
were passed that infringe upon my constitutional rights to freedom
of speech and religion, from search and seizure, to access to public
records and meetings, and more. They are meant to silence me, intimidate
me, keep me unaware of what my government is doing, and prevent
me from defending myself even if I'm wrongly accused.
Total strangers shout at me for expressing anything but blind faith
in the president and his political party because "we're at
war" and for some reason this means we have to swallow any
foolishness that comes out of Washington. I'm told I must accept
a religious political ideology that doesn't match my spiritual beliefs
or religious tradition, and accept the codification of discrimination.
I'm terrified that the freedoms we revere are denied by strident
calls to keep us uninformed and "right thinking."
Osama bin Laden remains free, and terrorist ranks are swelling,
because we invaded a country that posed no imminent danger to America.
It's a basic truth: Attack a sovereign nation and its people will
hate and resist you. If the world suddenly tried to overthrow our
war-mongering regime, wouldn't we all take up arms in our country's
defense? Can we expect less of the Iraqis?
It's not our right to wage war on ideology. That smacks of the
Crusades. Ideological change must take place from within, as it
did in our Revolutionary War and Civil War. If our mission, as the
president now states, is to spread freedom and democracy in the
world, how many more nations will we be invading? The other 60 nations
I'm terrified for my nieces and nephews in their teens and 20s,
and for my own son in grade school. Because a culture of war cannot
sustain itself without the bodies of our young.
The president promises there will be no draft. If he continues
on the path he has already chosen, he will have no choice.
While the president focused on war, my family's meager health coverage
went up more than $150 per month, for fewer benefits, higher deductibles,
and not one cent of pharmacy. The president talks about medical
savings accounts and catastrophic plans that have lifetime caps
on medical coverage. Savings accounts are great if you have the
money to save, and if those accounts aren't being constantly depleted
covering your care.
I'm terrified that I will soon reach a break point where I can
no longer afford to give anything else up to pay for health insurance
I've tried to plan for the future. But the future and all its medical
savings accounts, private Social Security accounts and IRAs rely
on economic performance that ended in 2001.
I'm terrified I won't be able to provide for my retirement or my
While distracting us with orange alerts and Iraq, the government
has used Orwellian language to roll back 40 years of environmental
gains. Under titles like "Clear Skies" and "Healthy
Forests" the president has allowed increased pollution and
destruction of our environment, dismissing science while placing
corporations in charge of the agencies meant to regulate them. Instead
of investing in alternative fuels that could improve profitability
and free us of foreign oil, the president's focus is on drilling
for oil in Alaska and making wilderness accessible to miners and
I'm terrified that we will take this planet too far to recover.
That we will leave for our children a legacy of disease, and a planet
denuded of the beauty and health sustained by its diversity.
I'm terrified by what I'm seeing in this election. Voter registration
scams, "suppress the vote" efforts, outright lies and
distortions of candidate records, attempts to assassinate character
and disparage service, corporate campaigning and media partisanship.
These are agents against democracy. They intend to disenfranchise
we the people, to take away our voice and deny us the opportunity
to make informed choice.
Not one of the nine presidencies I've lived through was perfect,
no matter its achievements. Almost all of them lied, cheated, misled,
spent like drunken sailors or used fear to manipulate us. President
Bush promised he would bring integrity to the office and would not
engage in nation building. He claimed he was a peace president and
a uniter, not a divider. All the while he has pushed an agenda of
corporate payoffs, nepotism, war and evangelic nation building.
He's built a climate of fear and an intolerance of dissent. He has
chosen to take from our future and to erode our freedoms.
Terrorists win when we lose our freedoms.
I'm terrified, almost paralyzed with fear, for the state of democracy
Dreams In The Past
Ouspensky asked Gurdjieff:
"Why, if ancient knowledge has been preserved and if, speaking
in general, there exists a knowledge distinct from our science
and philosophy or even surpassing it, it is so carefully concealed,
why is it not made common property? Why are the men who posses
this knowledge unwilling to let it pass into the general circulation
of life for the sake of a better and more successful struggle
against deceit, evil and ignorance?"
"There are two answers to that. In the first place, this
knowledge is not concealed; and in the second place, it cannot,
from its very nature, become common property. We will consider
the second of these statements first.
"You do not understand this because you do not understand
that knowledge, like everything else in the world, is material
and matter is limited. So that, if knowledge is material, then
it means that there is a definite amount of knowledge available.
Taken in a large quantity in a given place, that is by one man,
let us say, or by a small group of men, it produces very good
results; taken in a small quantity (that is, by every one of a
large number of people), it gives no results at all; or it may
give even negative results, contrary to those expected. Thus if
a certain definite quantity of knowledge is distributed among
millions of people, each individual will receive very little,
and this small amount of knowledge will change nothing either
in his life or in his understanding of things.
"But if, on the contrary, large quantities of knowledge
are concentrated in a small number of people, then this knowledge
will give very great results. From this point of view it is far
more advantageous that knowledge should be preserved among a small
number of people and not dispersed among the masses. If knowledge
is given to all, nobody will get any. If it is preserved among
a few, each will receive not only enough to keep, but to increase,
what he receives.
"At the first glance this theory seems very unjust, since
the position of those who are, so to speak, denied knowledge in
order that others may receive a greater share appears to be very
sad and undeservedly harder than it ought to be. Actually, however,
this is not so at all; and in the distribution of knowledge there
is not the slightest injustice.
The fact is that the enormous majority
of people do not want any knowledge whatever;
they refuse their share of it and do not even take the ration
allotted to them, in the general distribution, for the purpose
"This is particularly evident in
times of mass madness such as wars, revolutions, and so on, when
men suddenly seem to lose even the small amount of common sense
they had and turn into complete automatons, giving themselves
over to wholesale destruction in vast numbers, in other words,
even loosing the instinct of self-preservation.
Owing to this, enormous quantities of knowledge remain, so to
speak, unclaimed and can be distributed
among those who realize its value.
"There is nothing unjust in this, because those who receive
knowledge take nothing that belongs to others, deprive others
of nothing; they take only what others
have rejected as useless and what would in any case be lost if
they did not take it.
"The collecting of knowledge by some depends upon the rejection
of knowledge by others.
"There are periods in the life of
humanity, which generally coincide with the beginning or the fall
of cultures and civilizations, when the masses irretrievably loose
their reason and begin to destroy everything that has been created
by centuries and millenniums of culture. Such periods of mass
madness, often coinciding with geological cataclysms, climatic
changes, and similar phenomena of a planetary character, release
a very great quantity of the matter of knowledge. This, in turn,
necessitates the work of collecting this matter of knowledge which
would otherwise be lost. Thus the
work of collecting scattered matter of knowledge frequently coincides
with the beginning of the destruction and fall of cultures and
"This aspect of the question is clear. The
crowd neither wants nor seeks knowledge, and the leaders of the
crowd, in their own interests, try to strengthen its fear and
dislike of everything new and unknown. The slavery in which
mankind lives is based upon this fear. It is even difficult to
imagine all the horror of this slavery. We do not understand what
people are losing. But in order to understand the cause of this
slavery it is enough to see how people live, what constitutes
the aim of their existence, the object of their desires, passions,
and aspirations, of what they think, of what they talk, what they
serve and what they worship. Consider what the cultured humanity
of our time spends money on; even leaving the war out, what commands
the highest price; where the biggest crowds are. If we think for
a moment about these questions it becomes clear that humanity,
as it is now, with the interests it lives by, cannot expect to
have anything different from what it has."
"Imagine that for the whole of mankind half a pound of knowledge
is allotted a year. If this knowledge is distributed among everyone,
each will receive so little that he will remain the fool he was.
But, thanks to the fact that very few want to have this knowledge,
those who take it are able to get, let us say, a grain each, and
acquire the possibility of becoming more intelligent. All cannot
become intelligent even if they wish. And if they did become intelligent
it would not help matters. There exists a general equilibrium
which cannot be upset.
"That is one aspect. The other, as I have already said,
consists in the fact that no one is concealing anything; there
is no mystery whatever."
"But the acquisition or transmission
of true knowledge demands great labor and great effort both of
him who receives and of him who gives. And those who possess
this knowledge are doing everything they can to transmit and communicate
it to the greatest possible number of people, to facilitate people's
approach to it and enable them to prepare themselves to receive
"He who wants knowledge must himself
make the initial efforts to find the source of knowledge and to
approach it, taking advantage of the help and indications which
are given to all, but which people, as a rule, do not want to
see or recognize. Knowledge cannot
come to people without effort on their own part. And yet
there are theories which affirm that knowledge can come to people
without any effort on their part, that they can acquire it even
in sleep. The very existence of such theories constitutes an additional
explanation of why knowledge cannot come to people."
"Life is religion. Life experiences reflect
how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of
little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation.
Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or
ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the worlds will cease.
They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become
merely a dream in the 'past.' People who pay strict attention
to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the
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.