|
P
I C T U R E O F T H E D
A Y
Note that "America" is shown coming from the sea.
So who really owns the USA?
Larry Anthony Franklin,
58, a Pentagon analyst whose specialty is Iran, was arrested
by federal agents today when he turned himself. He is
scheduled to appear in U.S. District Court in Alexandria,
Va., later today.
Franklin was observed last year by federal agents revealing
top secret information to two employees of the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), longtime foreign
policy director Steve Rosen, and his deputy Keith Weissman,
at a restaurant in Arlington, Virginia. A raid on his
home turned
up 83 classified U.S. government documents [.pdf].
According to the indictment, "approximately 38 were classified
'Top Secret.' 37 were classified 'Secret,'" and "approximately
8" were marked "Confidential."
The real stunner: "The dates of these documents spanned
three decades."
This, I think, gives us some indication that Franklin's
arrest is about to dredge up something much larger than
anyone now imagines. Remember, the FBI counterintelligence
stumbled on Franklin in the course of a much more extensive
investigation that has been going on for at
least two years. According to the Washington Post:
"The counterintelligence probe, which is different
from a criminal investigation, focuses on a possible transfer
of intelligence more extensive than whether Franklin passed
on a draft presidential directive on U.S. policy toward
Iran, the sources said. The FBI is examining whether highly
classified material from the National Security Agency,
which conducts electronic intercepts of communications,
was also forwarded to Israel, they said."
So much for the preemptive attempts by Israel's amen corner
to deride the charges as much ado about nothing: a draft
presidential directive, as David
Frum claimed in National Review, that anyone
who had the 35 cents to pay for a copy of the Washington
Post could have access to. NSA intercepts are the
crown jewels of our intelligence hoard, which could not
only reveal specific and very sensitive information, but
might also indicate U.S. sources and methods of intelligence-gathering.
I have written about this case extensively,
and will surely be writing more. The trial should be interesting,
to say the least. Suffice to say now that Franklin's treason
is just the tip of the iceberg: what we are looking at
is a longstanding conspiracy by Israeli agents inside
the U.S. government to not only funnel classified materials
to Tel Aviv, but to manipulate and bend U.S. foreign policy
to serve Israeli interests.
The indictment also states that Franklin handed over classified
materials to "a foreign official and to members of the
news media on other occasions."
Which "foreign official"? Gee, I wonder if anyone in the
Israeli embassy is packing his or her bags and hightailing
it back home.
Guess which "members of the news media" -- now that's
a fun game to play.
This is one trial that is going to be very interesting.
Get out the popcorn, and the dip-and-chips: maybe they'll
run it on Court TV....
CORRECTION: Franklin has not been indicted. The arrest
warrant was generated by the complaint, which was backed
up by an affidavit setting forth probable cause. |
Once again, Israel
has been caught with spies at the highest levels of the
US Government.
At the heart of the investigation are two people who
work at The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC),
a powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington. The FBI investigation,
headed up by Dave Szady, has involved wiretaps, undercover
surveillance and photography that CBS News was told document
the passing of classified information from the mole, to
the men at AIPAC, and on to the Israelis.
CBS sources say that last year the suspected spy, described
as a trusted analyst at the Pentagon, turned over a presidential
directive on U.S. policy toward Iran while it was, "in
the draft phase when U.S. policy-makers were still debating
the policy." This put the Israelis, according to
one source, "inside the decision-making loop"
so they could "try to influence the outcome."
[CBS News]
Once again Israel denies wrongdoing, or faced with incontrovertible
evidence (in this case one of the spies has reportedly
cooperated with the FBI) dismisses the spying with the
claim that such spying is harmless, because Israel and
the United States are such good friends.
Well, let us take a closer look at that idea of “harmless
espionage” by recalling Israel’s most famous
failed spy, Jonathan Pollard.
Jonathan Pollard is an American of Jewish descent, born
in Galveston Texas, who established a career as an intelligence
analyst for the US Navy. There have been many theories
offered as to why Pollard decided to betray his country
of birth to the Jewish state, but that Pollard did betray
his country of birth to Israel is beyond all doubt. Pollard’s
defense was that he did not spy so much against the United
States, only that he spied for Israel, sending them documents
that in his opinion the US should have shared with Israel
anyway.
That it was never Pollards job to decide what documents
Israel should have was apparently irrelevant. Pollard
arrogated that authority to himself. From his position
of trust within the US Navy, Pollard delivered over 1000
classified documents to Israel for which he was well paid.
Included in those documents were the names of over 150
US agents in the Mideast, who were eventually “turned”
into agents for Israel.
But by far the most egregious damage done by Pollard
was to steal classified documents relating to the US Nuclear
Deterrent relative to the USSR and send them to Israel.
According to sources in the US State Department, Israel
then turned around and traded those stolen nuclear secrets
to the USSR in exchange for increased emigration quotas
from the USSR to Israel. Other information that found
its way from the US to Israel to the USSR resulted in
the loss of American agents operating inside the USSR.
Casper Weinberger, in his affidavit opposing a reduced
sentence for Pollard, described the damage done to the
United States thus, "[It is] difficult to conceive
of a greater harm to national security than that caused
by... Pollard's treasonous behavior."
This should end the suggestion that Israel’s spies
are harmless. They are not. The United States’ nuclear
deterrent cost an estimated five trillion taxpayer dollars
during the 50s and 60s to build and maintain, and less
than $100,000 for Pollard to undermine. Israel waited
13 years to admit Pollard had been spying for them, and
now lobbies for his release, having granted him Israeli
citizenship.
Pollard is hardly the only Israeli spy operating in the
United States. He just had the misfortune to get caught.
Here are just a few examples of the Israeli spy operations
that have been detected.
1947. Information collected by the ADL in its spy operations
on US citizens is used by the House Select Committee on
Unamerican Activities. Subcommittee Chair Clare Hoffman
dismisses the ADL’s reports on suspected communists
as “hearsay."
1950 John Davitt, former chief of the Justice Department's
internal security section notes that the Israeli intelligence
service is the second most active in the United States
after the Soviets.
1954 A hidden microphone planted by the Israelis is discovered
in the Office of the US Ambassador in Tel Aviv.
1956 Telephone taps are found connected to two telephones
in the residence of the US military attaché in
Tel Aviv.
1954 "The Lavon Affair". Israeli agents recruit
Egyptian citizens of Jewish descent to bomb Western targets
in Egypt, and plant evidence to frame Arabs, in an apparent
attempt to upset US-Egyptian relations. Israeli defense
minister Pinchas Lavon is eventually removed from office,
though many think real responsibility lay with David Ben-Gurion.
1965 Israel apparently illegally obtains enriched uranium
from NUMEC Corporation. (Washington Post, 6/5/86, Charles
R. Babcock, "US an Intelligence Target of the Israelis,
Officials Say.")
1967 Israel attacks the USS Liberty, an intelligence
gathering vessel flying a US flag, killing 34 crew members.
See "Assault on the Liberty," by James M. Ennes,
Jr. (Random House). In 2004, Captain Ward Boston, Senior
Legal Counsel for the Navy’s Court of Inquiry into
the attack swears under oath that President Lyndon Johnson
ordered the investigation to conclude accident, even though
the evidence indicates the attack was deliberate. Given
the use by Israel of unmarked boats and planes, and the
machine-gunning of USS Liberty’s lifeboats, the
most likely explanation is that USS Liberty was to be
sunk with all hands, with evidence left to frame Egypt
for the sinking. This would have dragged the US into the
war on Israel’s side.
1970 While working for Senator Henry “Scoop”
Jackson, Richard Perle is caught by the FBI giving classified
information to Israel. Nothing is done.
1978, Stephen Bryen, then a Senate Foreign Relations
Committee staffer, is overheard in a DC hotel offering
confidential documents to top Israeli military officials.
Bryen obtains a lawyer, Nathan Lewin, and the case heads
for the grand jury, but is mysteriously dropped. Bryen
later goes to work for Richard Perle.
1979 Shin Beth [the Israeli internal security agency]
tries to penetrate the US Consulate General in Jerusalem
through a “Honey Trap”, using a clerical employee
who was having an affair with a Jerusalem girl.
1985 The New York Times reports the FBI is aware of at
least a dozen incidents in which American officials transferred
classified information to the Israelis, quoting [former
Assistant Director of the F.B.I.] Mr. [Raymond] Wannal.
The Justice Department does not prosecute.
1985 Richard Smyth, the owner of MILCO, is indicted on
charges of smuggling nuclear timing devices to Israel
(Washington Post, 10/31/86).
1987 April 24 Wall Street Journal headline: "Role
of Israel in Iran-Contra Scandal Won't be Explored in
Detail by Panels"
1992 The Wall Street Journal reports that Israeli agents
apparently tried to steal Recon Optical Inc's top-secret
airborne spy-camera system.
1992 Stephen Bryen, caught offering confidential documents
to Israel in 1978, is serving on board of the pro-Israeli
Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs while continuing
as a paid consultant -- with security clearance -- on
exports of sensitive US technology.
1992 "The Samson Option," by Seymour M. Hersh
reports, “Illicitly obtained intelligence was flying
so voluminously from LAKAM into Israeli intelligence that
a special code name, JUMBO, was added to the security
markings already on the documents. There were strict orders,
Ari Ben-Menashe recalled: "Anything marked JUMBO
was not supposed to be discussed with your American counterparts."
1993. The ADL is caught operating a massive spying operation
on critics of Israel, Arab-Americans, the San Francisco
Labor Council, ILWU Local 10, Oakland Educational Association,
NAACP, Irish Northern Aid, International Indian Treaty
Council, the Asian Law Caucus and the San Francisco police.
Data collected was sent to Israel and in some cases to
South Africa. Pressure from Jewish organizations forces
the city to drop the criminal case, but the ADL settles
a civil lawsuit for an undisclosed sum of cash.
1995 The Defense Investigative Service circulates a memo
warning US military contractors that "Israel aggressively
collects [US] military and industrial technology."
The report stated that Israel obtains information using
"ethnic targeting, financial aggrandizement, and
identification and exploitation of individual frailties"
of US citizens.
1996 A General Accounting Office report "Defense
Industrial Security: Weaknesses in US Security Arrangements
With Foreign-Owned Defense Contractors" found that
according to intelligence sources "Country A"
(identified by intelligence sources as Israel, Washington
Times, 2/22/96) "conducts the most aggressive espionage
operation against the United States of any US ally."
The Jerusalem Post (8/30/96) quoted the report, "Classified
military information and sensitive military technologies
are high-priority targets for the intelligence agencies
of this country." The report described "An espionage
operation run by the intelligence organization responsible
for collecting scientific and technologic information
for [Israel] paid a US government employee to obtain US
classified military intelligence documents." The
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (Shawn L. Twing,
April 1996) noted that this was "a reference to the
1985 arrest of Jonathan Pollard, a civilian US naval intelligence
analyst who provided Israel's LAKAM [Office of Special
Tasks] espionage agency an estimated 800,000 pages of
classified US intelligence information."
The GAO report also noted that "Several citizens
of [Israel] were caught in the United States stealing
sensitive technology used in manufacturing artillery gun
tubes."
1996 An Office of Naval Intelligence document, "Worldwide
Challenges to Naval Strike Warfare" reported that
"US technology has been acquired [by China] through
Israel in the form of the Lavi fighter and possibly SAM
[surface-to-air] missile technology." Jane's Defense
Weekly (2/28/96) noted that "until now, the intelligence
community has not openly confirmed the transfer of US
technology [via Israel] to China." The report noted
that this "represents a dramatic step forward for
Chinese military aviation." (Flight International,
3/13/96)
1997 An Army mechanical engineer, David A. Tenenbaum,
"inadvertently" gives classified military information
on missile systems and armored vehicles to Israeli officials
(New York Times, 2/20/97).
1997 The Washington Post reports US intelligence has
intercepted a conversation in which two Israeli officials
had discussed the possibility of getting a confidential
letter that then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher
had written to Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat. One of
the Israelis, identified only as “Dov”, had
commented that they may get the letter from "Mega”,
the code name for Israel’s top agent inside the
United States.
1997 US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, complains
privately to the Israeli government about heavy-handed
surveillance by Israeli intelligence agents.
1997 Israeli agents place a tap on Monica Lewinsky’s
phone at the Watergate and record phone sex sessions between
her and President Bill Clinton. The Ken Starr report confirms
that Clinton warned Lewinsky their conversations were
being taped and ended the affair. At the same time, the
FBI’s hunt for “Mega” is called off.
2001 It is discovered that US drug agents’ communications
have been penetrated. Suspicion falls on two companies,
AMDOCS and Comverse Infosys, both owned by Israelis. AMDOCS
generates billing data for most US phone companies and
is able to provide detailed logs of who is talking to
whom. Comverse Infosys builds the tapping equipment used
by law enforcement to eavesdrop on all American telephone
calls, but suspicion forms that Comverse, which gets half
of its research and development budget from the Israeli
government, has built a back door into the system that
is being exploited by Israeli intelligence and that the
information gleaned on US drug interdiction efforts is
finding its way to drug smugglers. The investigation by
the FBI leads to the exposure of the largest foreign spy
ring ever uncovered inside the United States, operated
by Israel. Half of the suspected spies have been arrested
when 9-11 happens. On 9-11, 5 Israelis are arrested for
dancing and cheering while the World Trade Towers collapse.
Supposedly employed by Urban Moving Systems, the Israelis
are caught with multiple passports and a lot of cash.
Two of them are later revealed to be Mossad. As witness
reports track the activity of the Israelis, it emerges
that they were seen at Liberty Park at the time of the
first impact, suggesting a foreknowledge of what was to
come. The Israelis are interrogated, and then eventually
sent back to Israel. The owner of the moving company used
as a cover by the Mossad agents abandons his business
and flees to Israel. The United States Government then
classifies all of the evidence related to the Israeli
agents and their connections to 9-11. All of this is reported
to the public via a four part story on Fox News by Carl
Cameron. Pressure from Jewish groups, primarily AIPAC,
forces Fox News to remove the story from their website.
Two hours prior to the 9-11 attacks, Odigo, an Israeli
company with offices just a few blocks from the World
Trade Towers, receives an advance warning via the internet.
The manager of the New York Office provides the FBI with
the IP address of the sender of the message, but the FBI
does not follow up.
2001 The FBI is investigating 5 Israeli moving companies
as possible fronts for Israeli intelligence.
2001 JDL’s Irv Rubin arrested for planning to bomb
a US Congressman. He dies before he can be brought to
trial.
2002 The DEA issues a report that Israeli spies, posing
as art students, have been trying to penetrate US Government
offices.
2002 police near the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station
in southern Washington State stop a suspicious truck and
detain two Israelis, one of whom is illegally in the United
States. The two men were driving at high speed in a Ryder
rental truck, which they claimed had been used to "deliver
furniture." The next day, police discovered traces
of TNT and RDX military-grade plastic explosives inside
the passenger cabin and on the steering wheel of the vehicle.
The FBI then announces that the tests that showed explosives
were “false positived” by cigarette smoke,
a claim test experts say is ridiculous. Based on an alibi
provided by a woman, the case is closed and the Israelis
are handed over to INS to be sent back to Israel. One
week later, the woman who provided the alibi vanishes.
2003 The Police Chief of Cloudcroft stops a truck speeding
through a school zone. The drivers turn out to be Israelis
with expired passports. Claiming to be movers, the truck
contains junk furniture and several boxes. The Israelis
are handed over to immigration. The contents of the boxers
are not revealed to the public.
2003 Israel deploys assassination squads into other countries,
including the United States. The US Government does not
protest.
2004 Police near the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in Tennessee
stop a truck after a three mile chase, during which the
driver throws a bottle containing a strange liquid from
the cab. The drivers turn out to be Israelis using fake
Ids. The FBI refuses to investigate and the Israelis are
released.
2004 Two Israelis try to enter Kings Bay Naval Submarine
Base, home to eight Trident submarines. The truck tests
positive for explosives.
This brings us to the present scandal. Two years into
an investigation of AIPAC’s possible role as a spy
front for Israel, Larry Franklin, a mid-level Pentagon
Analyst is observed by the FBI giving classified information
to two officials of AIPAC suspected of being Israeli spies.
AIPAC hires lawyer Nathan Lewin to handle their legal
defense, the same lawyer who defended suspected Israeli
spy Stephen Bryen in 1978.
Larry Franklin worked in the Pentagon Office of Special
Plans, run by Richard Perle, at the time Perle (who was
caught giving classified information to Israel back in
1970) was insisting that Iraq was crawling with weapons
of mass destruction requiring the United States to invade
and conquer Iraq. There were no WMDs, of course, and Perle
has dumped the blame for the “bad intelligence”
on George Tenet. But what is known is that the Pentagon
Office of Special Plans was coordinating with a similar
group in Israel, in Ariel Sharon’s office.
With two suspected Israeli spies (at least) inside the
office from which the lies that launched the war in Iraq
originated, it appears that the people of the United States
are the victims of a deadly hoax, a hoax that started
a war.
The leaking of the investigation of AIPAC to the media
on August 28th, 2004 gave advance warning to other spies
working with Franklin. The damage to the FBI’s investigation
was completed when United States Attorney General John
Ashcroft ordered the FBI to stop all arrests in the case.
Like the Stephen Bryen case and the hunt for “Mega”,
this latest spy scandal seems destined by officials who
have their own secret allegiances to protect, barring
a massive public outcry.
The organization at the heart of the latest spy investigation,
AIPAC, wields tremendous influence over the US Congress.
Through its members and affiliated PACs, AIPAC directs
a huge flow of campaign cash in favor of, and occasionally
against, Senators and Representatives solely on the basis
of their willingness to support Israel. As an example,
in 2002, U.S. Rep. Artur Davis, D-Birmingham received
so much help from pro-Israeli pacs that 76% of his campaign
budget came from OUTSIDE the state of Alabama, mostly
from New York.
Let me repeat that. A Congressman AIPAC wanted elected
received more money from pro-Israel groups outside his
state than from his own constituents inside his state.
Who is that Congressman going to be thinking of when he
votes in Congress?
So here is the mother of all scandals.
For two years, the FBI has suspected AIPAC of spying
for a foreign country, and for those two years (and for
decades before) that group suspected of spying for Israel
has been reshaping the US Congress for the benefit of
a foreign government.
And THAT is the mother of all scandals.
Think about that as billions of your tax dollars flow
to Israel while your roads and schools crumble and decay
and services are cut.
Think about that as the coffins come home with your loved
ones inside.
Think about that when you and a million of your fellow
citizens march down the streets of America opposing wars
built on lies and deceptions and wonder why the government
just doesn’t want to listen to you any more. |
Author Patrick Seale
wrote:
Abu Nidal was undoubtedly a Mossad agent. Practically
every job he did benefited Israel.
Confirming Seale's theory are top Middle East terrorism
experts, including intelligence officers in Arab countries,
and even within Abu Nidal's own organization.
All the European and Mid-East terror experts agree that
Nidal was Mossad.
He was a protégé of Menacham Begins ...
ran free for 30 yrs ...used to kill unwanted Palestinians
Seale pointed out the senseless and extremely brutal
attacks only benefited Israel. Nidal had two thrusts ....
He killed Palestinians that were a threat to Israel, and
hijacked American and European jets. [...]
The 1972 Munich Olympic massacre
Abu's organization, Black September, invaded the Munich's
Olympic village, and took the Israeli Olympics team hostage.
There was a standoff, and the Germans agreed to let the
Nidal's operatives escape. They go to an airport were
they are ambushed, and some of the terrorists were killed
as well as 11 Israelis .
Israel has the Mossad assassinate the 11 Arabs connected,
but don't touch Abu Nidal.
The odd part --- Abu Nidal killed from 1972 till 2002,
and the Mossad never retaliated and killed him?[...]
The Abu Nidal Organization had operated for over 30
years, and was responsible for over 900 deaths. Targets
included hijackings, bombings, and assassination of troublesome
Palestinian leaders.
Abu Nidal AKA Sabri al-Banna, was was born in 1937,
and there are various versions of his history.
One version has his family losing everything, in 1948,
to the Jews, and he drifted from refugee camp to camp.
He finally wound up in Saudi Arabia, where he started
his terror organization, - Black September.
Another version has him as a son of an Arab mother and
a Jewish father. He was outcast by his 1/2 brothers, and
sisters, and was educated in Israel, and then Cairo.
He worked out of Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Lebanon. He
died in August of 2002. |
April
18th, 2005 - Public Advisory
New information
and threats,
including this
commercial video (available from the Iran
Freedom Foundation home page) and other neoconservative
rants regarding an "Iranian" nuclear threat have
prompted an essential update to this piece regarding the
extensive record of recently arrested Israeli, not
Iranian operatives, often around nuclear facilities
in America.
This campaign designed to prepare the
American people to blame Iran for a possible upcoming
nuclear terrorist attack fits the description of a Mossad
false flag operation, especially because of Israel's numerous,
even flagrant recent violations of American nuclear security.
Israel's long record of using terrorism
and especially "false flag" terrorism - covert military
operations designed to pin blame on an enemy - is extensive
and well documented, beginning with the bombing of
the Hotel
King David by Menachem Begin's Irgun fighters, through
the Lavon
Affair and recently includes the bust
up of a phony al Qaeda cell that was in reality manufactured
by the Mossad.
For those still under the illusion that
Israel has always been a US ally, please note the USS
Liberty Incident , wherein Israeli fighter planes
and torpedo boats nearly sunk an unarmed US intelligence
vessel in international waters, and also the US Army War
College's assesment of the Mossad: "Wildcard. Ruthless
and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and make
it look like a Palestinian/Arab act." - Washington
Times . Even the US army acknowledges that Israel
can and does engineer "false flag" attacks.
Here's why they say history repeats itself.
America, doesn't this sound a bit too familiar: "As during
the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, the neocons
have embarked on another inane search for monarchic exile
groups to prop up as future leaders of a "free and
democratic" Iran. This effort, according to the Financial
Times, is led by a gruesome twosome -- Iran-Contra
scumlord, Michael
Ledeen, and Swift Boat washup, Jerome
Corsi -- along with AIPAC
and a laundry list of wingers in congress." - Max
Blumenthal
"A prominent backer of the Alliance [for "Democracy"
in Iran - forerunner to the Iran Freedom Foundation] is
Jerome
Corsi, well known for his role in the Swift Boat Veterans
and POWs for Truth campaign against John Kerry, the
Democratic presidential candidate... The Alliance says
it is in partnership with the rightwing Hudson Institute.
Alliance members are also inspired by Michael Ledeen of
the American Enterprise
Institute, an influential neoconservative policy group,
who is a veteran campaigner for regime change. " - Financial
Times
The Hudson Institute,
the ultraconservative, organic food bashing home of neocon
all star Meyrav Wurmser, co- author of the famous Project
for a New Pearl Harbor, I mean Project
for a New American Century document, Rebuilding
America's Defenses provides insitutional cover for
this poorly disguised covert intelligence operation. Hudson
Institute features the Bilderberger
criminal, "Lord" Conrad
Black as one of its trustees. Here's what New World
Order genius-in-chief Henry Kissinger has to say about
the Hudson Institute:
“Hudson Institute is today one of America's foremost
policy research centers, in the forefront of study and
debate on important domestic and international policy
issues, known and respected around the globe, a leader
in innovative thinking and creative solutions to the challenges
of the present and the future.” - Henry A. Kissinger
This recent propaganda
effort streaming through wild-eyed right-wing rags
like World Net
Daily is well-organized and may perhaps indicate that
the "provocation" designed to legitimate the planned
June 2005 war with Iran, is about to occur. Neocon
bullhorn World Net Daily blares: "NUCLEAR
WAR-FEAR: Iran nuke commercial hits TV markets. Spot depicting
atomic terror attack in NYC to be seen in 20 cities."
Citizens can afford
to waste no time informing the President, the Pentagon,
Congress, State Officials, FBI Counter Intelligence and
the press that we are aware of the intent of this propaganda
campaign and are not fooled. Recent Israeli and US efforts
to publicly distance themselves from war plans for Iran
may be part of a campaign to appear peaceful, such that
a terrorist attack falsely blamed on Iran with the full
force of the international media will look all the more
brutal and undeserved.
We have seen these
types of "terrorist attacks" both real and imagined
used to legitimate foreign military adventures that are
deceptively sold to an unwitting public as if they were
in our "National Interest," or "Promote Democracy." No,
no, as Major General Smedley Butler put it in 1935: War
is a Racket.When was the last time this Administration
warned us about mushroom clouds over US cities? Where
are those weapons of mass destruction today?
Read on for the details of the Israeli agents
arrested near US nuclear facilities or in other suspicious
circumstances. All instances documented in mainstream
press. [...] |
"Over and above the
direct contribution to straight news or intelligence,
enemy propaganda in times of war or crisis affords a clue
to enemy strategy. If the co-ordination is not present
the propaganda may do the enemy himself harm. But the
moment co-ordination is present, and one end of the co-ordinate
is handed over to us, we can start figuring what the co-ordination
is for. Sometimes propaganda is sacrificed for weightier
considerations of security; German propaganda gave little
advance warning of a war with the USSR, and Soviet propaganda
gave none. In other instances, the co-ordination does
give the show away.
"In 1941-42 the Japanese radio began to show an
unwholesome interest in Christmas Island in its broadcasts
to Japanese at home and abroad. Christmas Island, below
Sumatra, was pointed out as a really important place,
and tremendously important to Naval strategy. Subsequently
the Japanese armed forces went to and took Christmas Island.
The home public was delighted that this vital spot had
been secured. Of course Christmas Island was not as important
as Japanese radio said it was, but the significant thing
was that radio talked about it AHEAD OF TIME. For what
little it was worth the Japanese had given us warning......"
"A nation getting ready to strike à la Pearl
Harbour may prepare by alleging American aggresion. A
nation preparing to break the peace frequently gets out
peace propaganda of the most blatant sort, trying to make
sure that its own audience (as well as the world) will
believe the real responsibility to lie in the victim he
attacks. Hitler protested his love of Norwegian neutrality;
then he hit, claiming that he was protecting it from the
British. No hard and fast rules can be made up
for all wars or all beligerents. The Germans behaved according
to one pattern; the Japanese another."
"For example, the German High Command sought to
avoid bragging about anything they could not accomplish.
They often struck blows without warning but they never
said they would strike a blow when they knew or believed
they could not do it. The British and Americans made a
timetable of this, and were able to guess how fast the
Germans thought they were going to advance in Russia.
Knowing this, the British and Americans planned their
propaganda to counter the German boasts; they tried to
pin the Germans down to objectives they knew the Germans
would not take, in order to demonstrate to the peoples
of Europe that Nazi Germany had finally bitten off more
than it could chew."
"Later the Allies remembered this German habit when
the Nazis on the radio began talking about their own secret
weapons. When the British bombed the V-1 ramps on the
French coast, the German radio stopped that talk. The
British had additional grounds for supposing that the
ramps thay had bombed were part of the secret weapons
that the Germans bragged about. The British further knew
that the Germans would try to counter the psychologigal
effect of the annouoncement of Allied D Day with some
pretty vivid news of their own. When the German radio
began mentioning secret weapons again, the British suspected
the Germans had got around damage done to the ramps. D-Day
came; the Germans, in one single broadcast designed to
impress the Japanese and Chinese, announced the secret
German weapon was about to be turned loose, and that more
such weapons would follow. One day later the first V-1
hit London."
"For peacetime purposes, it is to be rermembered
that tough enemies may hide their scientists, their launching
ramps, or their rockets, they cannot hide their occasion
for war, nor their own readiness measures. No government
can afford to seem the plain unqualified aggressor. Propanal
[Propaganda Analysis] may prove to be one of the soundest
war-forecasting systems available to usin a period of
ultra destructive weapons. Psychological mobilization
may be disguised; it cannot be concealed." |
I'm sure all of my regular
readers have heard about Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin
surrendering to the FBI today to face charges of illegal
disclosure of classified information to AIPAC. This post
is some background for members of the media, since I'm starting
to get a decent amount of traffic from media-linked domains
via Google, and want to clue you in to the questions you
should be asking to get to the bottom of this story and
not fall victim to AIPAC's attempts to "spin" this.
Here's what you should be aware of, and some questions you
should be asking over the next few weeks:
1) The charges made public today are just the tip of the
iceberg. Franklin was only charged with one count of improper
disclosure of classified information, apparently related
to potential dangers to U.S. forces in Iraq. A much larger
issue relates to Iran, since it's already come out that
Franklin also gave senior AIPAC officials Steve
Rosen and Keith Weissman a draft presidential decision
directive which would have (if approved) made regime change
rather than negotiation official U.S. policy toward Iran.
2) The "big picture" in this case is much more about what
intelligence types call an "agents of influence" operation
rather than just espionage. The reason Franklin (and possibly
whoever at a higher level sent him) wanted AIPAC to know
about the draft directive was to coordinate pressure on
Congress and the Bush Administration to back military strikes
on Iran, a major policy goal of the Israeli government.
3) The draft presidential directive was written by Michael
Rubin, a former mid-level Pentagon official in Doug
Feith's office who is now at the American Enterprise Institute,
a neoconservative think-tank. One of the big questions is:
Did anyone "send" Franklin to leak this, or did he just
do it on his own?
4) Franklin was cooperating with the FBI's investigation
in mid-2004, then stopped, and retained the services of
Washington superlawyer Plato Cacheris. The obvious question
is who approached Franklin to get him to stop cooperating?
And who is paying for his legal defense? Franklin has been
working for a government salary his entire life, and he's
not a rich man. Did pro-Israel interests or donors offer
to finance his defense in order to secure his non-cooperation
with the FBI?
5) Apart from the charges, what else does the FBI have on
AIPAC? If they have wiretaps of years of conversations,
they probably know a lot about what the pro-Israel lobby
did to help support the push
for war in Iraq. After all, the Office
of Special Plans at the Pentagon was very heavily staffed
with political appointees with very close personal ties
to Israel. (This is the truth that dare not speak its name,
but it's critical to understanding how the U.S. got snookered
into invading Iraq.) AIPAC never had an overt policy of
pushing for a U.S. invasion of Iraq, but anyone with friends
on Capitol Hill knows that AIPAC's members were buttonholing
congressmen in 2002 to secure their votes for the war resulution
"unofficially." If the wiretrap transcripts become available
in the trial, that should shed some light on this. AIPAC
is going to try to spin this as being about two individuals,
that's why Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman were fired in
April. Don't buy it. Steve Rosen is one of the main people
who built the lobbyibg powerhouse into what it is. Their
Board of Directors dumped him in a last ditch attempt to
avoid the storm that is coming, adopting the "couple of
bad apples" defense for the organization.
6) Larry Franklin also was on the trip
to Europe in December 2001 that included Harold Rhode
and Michael Ledeen, the purpose of which was to meet with
Manucher
Ghorbanifar about the sales pitch for a war with Iran.
This trip also just happens to have happened at the same
time the Italian military intelligence service (SISMI) started
circulating the bogus
Niger uranium document which was instrumental in misleading
the U.S. into war in Iraq. Clearly, that document came from
somewhere. Who was trying to feed disinformation to us?
Does Larry Franklin know?
I know that these questions lead in directions where the
media generally doesn't go -- did we really invade Iraq
at least in part as a result of the influence of the Israel
lobby? Are we being pushed into a confrontation with Iran
the same way? That's the real question raised by this case.
AIPAC and its defenders are going to try to spin this investigation
as motivated
by antisemitism. I would urge you not to buy into that
without carefully evaluating such charges yourself. They've
been caught receiving classified information illegally so
that they could lobby for war with Iran, and now they're
trying to change
the subject. |
A boycott decision,
like that passed by Britain’s Association of University
Teachers to boycott two Israeli universities, naturally
raises a hue and cry among Israelis. Why us? And why now,
“just when negotiations with the Palestinians might
be renewed”?
It may be worthwhile, however,
to consider how the world perceives us. In July 2004,
the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled
that Israel must immediately dismantle those parts of
the wall that were built on Palestinian lands. We disregarded
the ruling. We are turning the West Bank into a
prison for Palestinians, as we have already done in Gaza
in the course of 38 years of occupation, every one of
which is a violation of UN resolutions. Since 1993 we
have been engaged in negotiations with the Palestinians,
and in the meantime we continued expanding settlements.
In its judgement, the Court recommended to the UN that
sanctions be imposed on Israel if its ruling is not obeyed.
The Israeli reply - no need to worry! As long as
the United States is behind us, the UN will do nothing.
In the eyes of the world, the question
is what can be done when the relevant institutions do
not succeed in enforcing international law? The
boycott model is drawn from the past: South Africa also
disregarded UN resolutions. At that time as well, the
UN (under U.S. pressure), was reluctant to impose immediate
sanctions. The South African boycott
began as a grass roots movement initiated by individuals
and independent organizations. It grew slowly but steadily
until it finally became an absolute boycott of products,
sport, culture, academia and tourism. South Africa was
gradually forced to abrogate apartheid.
The international community is
beginning to apply the same model to Israel in all domains,
from the Caterpillar bulldozers that demolish Palestinian
homes, to sports and culture. In the eyes of the international
community, the relevant question is whether the Israeli
Academy is entitled, on the basis of its actions, to be
exempt from this general boycott. Many in the Israeli
Academy oppose the occupation as individuals. But in practice,
no Israeli university senate has ever passed a resolution
condemning, for example, the closure of Palestinian universities.
Even now, when the wall cuts off students and lecturers
from their universities, the protest of the Academy is
not heard. The British boycott is selective two universities
were selected to signal to the Israeli Academy that it
is being watched. But the Israeli Academy still has the
option of removing itself from the cycle of passive support
of the occupation.
One puzzle still remains Why just us? Why is Israel being
singled out? What about Russia in Chechnya? What about
the United States? What the U.S. did in Falluja, no Israeli
general has yet dared to try. Indeed, the logic behind
a boycott of Israel dictates that a boycott of the great
powers is fully justified. It is only because at the moment
there is a greater likelihood of success in stopping a
small state, that Israel became the focus.
Still, if an effort is made to save first the Palestinians
and at least stop the wall, can we condemn that effort
as unethical? Is it more ethical to refrain from trying
to save anyone until it is possible to save everyone?
As usual, we believe that the solution lies in the realm
of force. When the Valencia basketball team tried to boycott
Israel in March 2004, and announced that it would not
participate in the League Championship if it took place
in Israel, the steamroller was set in motion; there were
threats, there were mutterings about contracts, until
Valencia was forced to relent and play here. Similarly,
in the case of the academic boycott, the global Israeli
lobby has tracked down, one by one, those who have declared
support of the boycott, and have tried to make their lives
miserable. The attempt by Haifa University to dismiss
Dr.Ilan Pappe in 2002 was not instigated because of the
Teddy Katz affair, but because Dr. Pappe openly supported
the boycott and signed the original British petition calling
for it.
It is possible that the bulldozer, which has come to
symbolize Israel, will succeed in reversing the decision
of the AUT in England. But will this prevent researchers
from boycotting us quietly, without involving the media?
Perhaps it would be more worthwhile for the Israeli Academy
to direct its anger at the government and demand that
it finally put a stop to this wall. |
A proposal by a small
shareholder to withhold approval from the Board of Directors
for failure to investigate signs of insurance fraud
on 9/11 has been published on the website of the Allianz
Group, one of the world’s largest insurers, in
preparation for its May 4th annual meeting.
Allianz Group published a shareholder proposal on April
20th faulting management for ignoring signs of insurance
fraud on 9/11/2001. Allianz carried a significant portion
of the insurance coverage on the WTC, and stands to
pay a corresponding portion of the $3.5 billion payout
currently being litigated in New York. In his proposal,
shareholder John Leonard, a California native and a
publisher of books on 9/11, pointed to reports that
building WTC 7 apparently collapsed by demolition, and
for no plausible reason related to the 9/11 attacks.
Management replied that it relied on official US government
reports which made no mention of such evidence.
The Allianz Group is incorporated in Germany and has
approximately 570,000 shareholders. Under German Stock
Companies law, publicly held companies are required
to publish shareholder proposals that meet certain criteria.
|
Sex, Lies and "Sexing Up" |
SOTT Comment |
Today the British people
go to the polls in a general election that will decide
if Tony Blair will be returned as head of the British
government. The election carries all the weight of last
year's US election, where the main bone of contention
was the US invasion of Iraq and the reasons for it and
its legality, if any. Of course, spin master general
Karl Rove did his best to distract everyone from Iraq
by making gay marriages and (Christian) "morality"
the central issue. In any case, based on the many reports
of voting irregularities that were never addressed by
the US government or the US media, it seems that Bush's
re-election was never in doubt. As Stalin said, it is
not the voters, but the ones who count the votes that
matter.
Since last week's release of the details of exactly
what the British Attorney General actually told Blair
about the legality (or otherwise) of sending British
troops to support the US invasion of Iraq, Blair has
been forced onto his back foot, going so far as to make
the wholly unbelievable claim that he has "never
told a lie", (presumably about anything never mind
something as important as the justification for sending
British troops to war).
Yet for almost two years before the latest accusations
that he actually DID LIE to the British public, Blair
has also been accused of having "sexed up"
the threat from Saddam that led to the Iraq invasion;
Lord Hutton's whitewashed report that exonerated Blair
and his propagandist spin doctor Alistair Campbell notwithstanding.
Indeed, in light of the latest revelations of the Attorney
General's case for the illegality of war, it would seem
that if anyone should be exonerated it is ex-BBC Chief
Greg Dyke and BBC reporter Andrew Gillligan who made
the initial claims of wrongdoing and who, along with
murdered Microbiologist Dr David Kelly, were used as
scapegoats when the whole "sexing up" question
was first raised back in May 2003.
Getting to the point: much like the Bush administration's
bogus claims (complete with dubious badly drawn pictures)
about Iraqi "WMD laboratories" that were presented
to the UN, the simple fact is that a Sept. 2002 British
government-approved dossier on the status of the Iraq's
WMDs stated that Iraq could deploy weapons of mass destruction
within 45 minutes, a claim that was wholly false and
deliberately inserted to "sex up" the dossier.
This much is beyond doubt. Even though, for two years,
Blair has been accused of "sexing up" a dossier,
it is only now, just before a general election, that
the word "lie" has surfaced.
But what exactly is "sexing up"? In essence,
Blair was being accused of making the argument for Saddam's
WMDs more convincing to the British public, an act that
was instinctively associated with the idea of sex by
the mainstream media. While the bogus dossier itself
made no reference to sex, clearly it was the manipulative
and fear-enducing EFFECT that the false claims had on
the British public and the similarity to the effects
of that other great enticer of humanity - sex - that
led to the association being made.
In the murky world of intelligence operations and operatives,
a tactic called the "honey trap" is renowned
for its high success rate. The idea is simple: a target
(usually male) is enticed with an apparently genuine
promise of a sexual encounter by a female intelligence
operative for the purpose of intelligence gathering,
blackmail, or murder. Basically, the target is fooled,
conned, or in other words, lied to.
The British and American public have been lied to over
and over again about the rationale and real reasons
for the invasion of Iraq. Long before now the word "lie"
should have been used to describe the clearly duplicitous
actions of not only Blair, but Bush and the rest of
the corrupt US administration also. Today at the polls,
the British public would be well advised to take this,
perhaps their last, chance to exercise what is left
of their Democratic rights; that is, if it is not already
too late... |
EUROPEAN experts in
electoral fraud are set to investigate the UK’s
"flawed" postal ballot system amid fears thousands
of votes could be stolen on May 5.
The Council of Europe (CoE), which oversees democracy
and human rights across the continent, is poised to
send legal experts to the UK to investigate how easy
the British system is to rig and recommend changes.
The news is a major embarrassment for the UK, which
is a founder member of the CoE, because the organisation
usually investigates the voting systems of countries
with little history of democracy, such as the former
Eastern Bloc nations.
The move comes amid growing evidence of widespread
misuse of the postal ballot system and the setting up
of a new police hotline dedicated to reporting incidents
of voting fraud.
Last week, Scotland on Sunday reported that the major
parties had lobbied to have tough safeguards aimed at
stopping political activists "stealing" votes
scrapped. [...] |
TONY Blair was yesterday
branded a "danger to democracy" by Greg Dyke,
the former director general of the BBC, who accused
the Prime Minister of sexing up the legal advice on
the Iraq war.
The former Labour supporter said he was severing his
40-year link to the party to switch to the Liberal Democrats
because he could not vote for a government that would
be led by Mr Blair.
At a Liberal Democrats news conference in London yesterday,
Mr Dyke said: "I do genuinely
believe that our democracy has been undermined in the
years since the Blair government, and I think another
Blair government would pose further dangers to our democracy."
Mr Dyke, whose yellow shirt embodied the party colours
of the Liberal Democrats, compared the operation run
from Downing Street to the White House under Richard
Nixon, accusing Mr Blair of undermining Cabinet government.
Admitting he had been in favour of
the war when the government warned that Iraq posed a
threat, Mr Dyke said this belief was shattered by the
Butler inquiry into the use of intelligence to make
the case for war.
This was the pivotal point at which
he realised that the controversial BBC story by Andrew
Gilligan was true - the dossier was "sexed up"
and people inside Downing Street knew it was, Mr Dyke
said.
He had been motivated to speak publicly for the Lib
Dems following the publication of the Attorney General’s
caveat-filled advice last week.
"It’s now, I think, very clear that the
Blair government tried to do to the legal opinion [of
the Attorney General on the Iraq war] exactly what they
did to the intelligence," Mr Dyke said. "They
chose the bits they liked and they ignored the rest."
The former BBC chief was one of the "scalps"
claimed by the government after the Hutton inquiry into
the sexed-up dossier claims. However, yesterday, the
millionaire insisted his new-found allegiance to the
Lib Dems had nothing to do with revenge for losing his
job. Rather, it was the positioning of Labour as a "centre-right"
party that had turned him off. [...]
|
Ray McGovern served
27 years as a CIA analyst and is now on the Steering Group
of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. He works
for Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical
Church of the Saviour.
"Intelligence and facts are being
fixed around the policy."
Never in our wildest dreams did we think
we would see those words in
black and white—and beneath a SECRET stamp, no less.
For three years now, we in Veteran Intelligence Professionals
for Sanity (VIPS) have been saying that the CIA and its
British counterpart, MI-6, were ordered by their countries'
leaders to "fix facts" to "justify" an unprovoked war
on Iraq. More often than not, we have been greeted
with stares of incredulity.
It has been a hard learning—that
folks tend to believe what they want to believe.
As long as our evidence, however abundant and persuasive,
remained circumstantial, it could not compel belief.
It simply is much easier on the psyche to assent to the
White House spin machine blaming the Iraq fiasco on bad
intelligence than to entertain the notion that we were
sold a bill of goods.
Well, you can forget circumstantial. Thanks
to an unauthorized disclosure by a courageous whistleblower,
the evidence now leaps from official documents—this time
authentic, not forged. Whether prompted by
the open appeal of the international Truth-Telling
Coalition or not, some brave soul has made the most
explosive "patriotic leak" of the war by giving London's
Sunday Times the official minutes of a briefing
by Richard Dearlove, then head of Britain's CIA equivalent,
MI-6. Fresh back in London from consultations in
Washington, Dearlove briefed Prime Minister Blair and
his top national security officials on July 23, 2002,
on the Bush administration's plans to make war on Iraq.
Blair does not dispute the authenticity
of the document, which immortalizes a discussion
that is chillingly amoral. Apparently no one felt
free to ask the obvious questions. Or, worse still,
the obvious questions did not occur.
Juggernaut Before The Horse
In emotionless English, Dearlove tells
Blair and the others that President Bush has decided to
remove Saddam Hussein by launching a war that is to be
"justified by the conjunction of terrorism and weapons
of mass destruction." Period. What about the
intelligence? Dearlove adds matter-of-factly, "The
intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy."
At this point, Foreign Secretary Jack
Straw confirms that Bush has decided on war, but notes
that stitching together justification would be a challenge,
since "the case was thin." Straw noted that Saddam
was not threatening his neighbors and his WMD capability
was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.
In the following months, "the case" would be buttressed
by a well-honed U.S.-U.K. intelligence-turned-propaganda-machine.
The argument would be made "solid" enough to win endorsement
from Congress and Parliament by conjuring up:
-
Aluminum artillery tubes misdiagnosed as nuclear
related;
-
Forgeries alleging Iraqi attempts to obtain uranium
in Africa;
-
Tall tales from a drunken defector about mobile
biological weapons laboratories;
-
Bogus warnings that Iraqi forces could fire WMD-tipped
missiles within 45 minutes of an order to do so;
-
Dodgy dossiers fabricated in London; and
-
A U.S. National Intelligence Estimate thrown in
for good measure.
All this, as Dearlove notes dryly, despite the fact that
"there was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath
after military action." Another nugget from Dearlove's
briefing is his bloodless comment that one of the U.S.
military options under discussion involved "a continuous
air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli"—the clear
implication being that planners of the air campaign would
also see to it that an appropriate casus belli was orchestrated.
The discussion at 10 Downing St.
on July 23, 2002 calls to mind the first meeting of George
W. Bush's National Security Council (NSC) on Jan. 30,
2001, at which the president made it clear that toppling
Saddam Hussein sat atop his to-do list, according to then-Treasury
Secretary Paul O'Neil, who was there. O'Neil was
taken aback that there was no discussion of why it was
necessary to "take out" Saddam. Rather, after CIA
Director George Tenet showed a grainy photo of a building
in Iraq that he said might be involved in producing chemical
or biological agents, the discussion proceeded immediately
to which Iraqi targets might be best to bomb. Again,
neither O'Neil nor the other participants asked the obvious
questions. Another NSC meeting two days later included
planning for dividing up Iraq's oil wealth.
Obedience School
As for the briefing of Blair, the minutes provide further
grist for those who describe the U.K. prime minister as
Bush's "poodle." The tone of the conversation bespeaks
a foregone conclusion that Blair will wag his tail cheerfully
and obey the learned commands. At one point he ventures
the thought that, "If the political context were right,
people would support regime change." This, after
Attorney General Peter Goldsmith has already warned that
the desire for regime change "was not a legal base for
military action,"—a point Goldsmith made again just 12
days before the attack on Iraq until he was persuaded
by a phalanx of Bush administration lawyers to change
his mind 10 days later.
The meeting concludes with a directive to "work on the
assumption that the UK would take part in any military
action."
I cannot quite fathom why I find the account of this
meeting so jarring. Surely it is what one might
expect, given all else we know. Yet seeing it in
bloodless black and white somehow gives it more impact.
And the implications are no less jarring.
One of Dearlove's primary interlocutors in Washington
was his American counterpart, CIA director George Tenet.
(And there is no closer relationship between two intelligence
services than the privileged one between the CIA and MI-6.)
Tenet, of course, knew at least as much as Dearlove, but
nonetheless played the role of accomplice in serving up
to Bush the kind of "slam-dunk intelligence" that he knew
would be welcome. If there is one unpardonable sin
in intelligence work, it is that kind of politicization.
But Tenet decided to be a "team player" and set the tone.
Politicization: Big Time
Actually, politicization is far
too mild a word for what happened. The intelligence
was not simply mistaken; it was manufactured, with the
president of the United States awarding foreman George
Tenet the Medal of Freedom for his role in helping supervise
the deceit. The British documents make clear that
this was not a mere case of "leaning forward" in analyzing
the intelligence, but rather mass deception—an order of
magnitude more serious. No other conclusion
is now possible.
Small wonder, then, to learn from CIA insiders like former
case officer Lindsay Moran that Tenet's malleable managers
told their minions, "Let's face
it. The president wants us to go to war, and our
job is to give him a reason to do it."
Small wonder that, when the only U.S. analyst who met
with the alcoholic Iraqi defector appropriately codenamed
"Curveball" raised strong doubt about Curveball's reliability
before then-Secretary of State Colin Powell used the fabrication
about "mobile biological weapons trailers" before the
United Nations, the analyst got this e-mail reply from
his CIA supervisor:
"Let's keep in mind the fact that this
war's going to happen regardless of what Curveball said
or didn't say, and the powers that be probably aren't
terribly interested in whether Curveball knows what
he's talking about."
When Tenet's successor, Porter Goss, took over as director
late last year, he immediately wrote a memo to all employees
explaining the "rules of the road"—first and foremost,
"We support the administration and its policies."
So much for objective intelligence insulated from policy
pressure.
Tenet and Goss, creatures of the intensely politicized
environment of Congress, brought with them a radically
new ethos—one much more akin to that of Blair's courtiers
than to that of earlier CIA directors who had the courage
to speak truth to power.
Seldom does one have documentary evidence that intelligence
chiefs chose to cooperate in both fabricating and "sexing
up" (as the British press puts it) intelligence to justify
a prior decision for war. There is no word to describe
the reaction of honest intelligence professionals to the
corruption of our profession on a matter of such consequence.
"Outrage" does not come close.
Hope In Unauthorized Disclosures
Those of us who care about unprovoked wars owe the patriot
who gave this latest British government document to The
Sunday Times a debt of gratitude. Unauthorized
disclosures are gathering steam. They need to increase
quickly on this side of the Atlantic as well—the more
so, inasmuch as Congress-controlled by the president's
party-cannot be counted on to discharge its constitutional
prerogative for oversight.
In its formal appeal of Sept. 9, 2004 to current U.S.
government officials, the Truth-Telling Coalition said
this:
We know how misplaced loyalty to bosses, agencies,
and careers can obscure the higher allegiance all government
officials owe the Constitution, the sovereign public,
and the young men and women put in harm's way.
We urge you to act on those higher loyalties...Truth-telling
is a patriotic and effective way to serve the nation.
The time for speaking out is now.
If persons with access to wrongly concealed facts and
analyses bring them to light, the chances become less
that a president could launch another unprovoked war—against, say, Iran. |
Here
it is. The smoking gun. The memo that has, "IMPEACH
HIM" written all over it.
The top-level government memo marked
"SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL," dated eight
months before Bush sent us into Iraq, following a closed
meeting with the President, reads, "Military action
was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam
through military action justified by the conjunction of
terrorism and WDM. But the intelligence and facts were
being fixed around the policy."
Read that again: "The intelligence
and facts were being fixed...."
For years, after each damning report on BBC TV, "Isn't
this grounds for impeachment?" Vote rigging, a blind
eye to terror and the bin Ladens before 9-11, and so on.
Evil, stupidity and self-dealing are shameful but not
impeachable. What's needed is a "high crime or misdemeanor."
And if this ain't it, nothing is.
The memo, uncovered this week by the
Times, goes on to describe an elaborate plan
by George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair to
hoodwink the planet into supporting an attack on Iraq
knowing full well the evidence for war was a phony.
A conspiracy to commit serial fraud is,
under federal law, racketeering. However, the Mob's schemes
never cost so many lives.
Here's more. "Bush had made up his mind to take
military action. But the case was thin. Saddam was not
threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was
less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran."
Really? But Mr. Bush told us, "Intelligence gathered
by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the
Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the
most lethal weapons ever devised."
A month ago, the Silberman-Robb Commission issued its
report on WMD intelligence before the war, dismissing
claims that Bush fixed the facts with this snotty, condescending
conclusion written directly to the President, "After
a thorough review, the Commission found no indication
that the Intelligence Community distorted the evidence
regarding Iraq's weapons."
We now know the report was a bogus 618
pages of thick whitewash aimed to let Bush off the hook
for his murderous mendacity.
Read on: The invasion build-up was then
set, says the memo, "beginning 30 days before the
US Congressional elections." Mission accomplished.
You should parse the entire memo and see if you can make
it through its three pages without losing your lunch.
Now sharp readers may note they didn't
see this memo, in fact, printed in the New York Times.
It wasn't. Rather, it was splashed across the front pages
of the Times of LONDON on Monday.
It has effectively finished the last, sorry remnants
of Tony Blair's political career. (While his Labor Party
will most assuredly win the elections today, Prime Minister
Blair is expected, possibly within months, to be shoved
overboard in favor of his Chancellor of the Exchequer,
a political execution which requires only a vote of the
Labour party's members in Parliament.)
But in the US, barely a word. The
New York Times covers this hard evidence of Bush's
fabrication of a causus belli as some "British"
elections story. Apparently, our President's fraud isn't
"news fit to print."
My colleagues in the UK press have skewered Blair, digging
out more incriminating memos, challenging the official
government factoids and fibs. But
in the US press ...nada, bubkiss, zilch. Bush fixed the
facts and somehow that's a story for "over there."
The Republicans impeached Bill Clinton
over his cigar and Monica's affections. And the US media
could print nothing else.
Now, we have the stone, cold evidence of bending intelligence
to sell us on death by the thousands, and neither a Republican
Congress nor what is laughably called US journalism thought
it not worth a second look.
My friend Daniel Ellsberg once said that what's good
about the American people is that you have to lie to them.
What's bad about Americans is that it's so easy to do. |
The US Marine Corps
has ruled that no charges will be filed against a Marine
in the fatal shooting of a wounded
and unarmed Iraqi in a Falluja mosque last November
in an incident shown in a television pool report, a spokesman
has said.
After a five-month investigation, the
Marine Corps determined that the Marine corporal fired
in self-defense and will not face court-martial,
spokesman Lieutenant Colonel T.V. Johnson said.
"The commanding general of the First Marine Division
determined that the action of the Marine involved in the
incident was pretty much consistent with the established
rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict,"
Johnson told CBS Radio.
NBC News reported earlier that the decision
was based partly on the fact that Marines had been warned
fighters were feigning death and booby-trapping bodies
and that the corporal apparently feared for his life when
he fired the shots.
Second incident investigated
The Marine was seen in images on the dramatic videotape
that was shared with other news organizations. NBC said
a second Marine remains under investigation for shooting
another unarmed man in the mosque.
The US military opened the investigation into possible
war crimes after the incident was recorded by an NBC television
crew embedded with the Marines.
The Iraqi was one of five wounded left in the mosque
after the Marines fought their way into the formerly rebel-held
city of Falluja. |
FORT HOOD, Texas - A
military judge Wednesday threw out Pfc. Lynndie England's
guilty plea to abusing Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib
prison, saying he was not convinced the Army reservist
who appeared in some of the most notorious photos in
the scandal knew her actions were wrong at the time.
The mistrial marks a stunning turn in the case and
sends it back to square one.
The case will be reviewed again
by Fort Hood's commander, Lt. Gen. Thomas Metz, who
will decide what charges, if any, England should face.
If she is charged, the case would go back to a military
equivalent of a grand jury hearing, an Article 32 proceeding,
prosecution spokesman Capt. Cullen Sheppard said.
The military judge, Col. James Pohl, entered a plea
of not guilty for England on a charge of conspiring
with Pvt. Charles Graner Jr. to maltreat detainees at
the Baghdad-area prison and a related charge.
The mistrial came after Graner, the
reputed ringleader of the abuse, testified as a defense
witness at England's sentencing hearing that pictures
he took of England holding a naked prisoner on a leash
at Abu Ghraib were meant to be used as a legitimate
training aid for other guards.
Other photos showed England smiling while standing
next to nude prisoners stacked in a pyramid and pointing
at a prisoner's genitals.
England maintained the same stoic look she has had
throughout the proceeding. During a recess before the
plea deal was thrown out, England peeked at a sketch
artist's drawing of Graner on the stand. "Don't
forget the horns and the goatee," she said.
When England pleaded guilty Monday, she told the judge
she knew that the pictures were being taken purely for
the amusement of the guards.
Pohl said her statement and Graner's could not be reconciled.
"You can't have a one-person conspiracy,"
the judge said before he declared the mistrial and dismissed
the sentencing jury.
Under military law, the judge could formally accept
her guilty plea only if he was convinced that she knew
at the time that what she was doing was illegal.
By rejecting the plea to the conspiracy charge, Pohl
canceled the entire plea agreement. The agreement had
carried a maximum sentence of 11 years in prison, but
the prosecution and defense had a deal that capped the
sentence at a lesser punishment; the length was not
released.
Neither prosecution nor defense lawyers would speak
to reporters after the deal was discarded. England,
shielded by her defense team, would not comment outside
the courtroom.
Allen Rudy, a Dallas attorney, said
Wednesday he could not recall a military plea being
scrapped under such circumstances during his 25 years
as a Navy lawyer and judge.
"That is a shocker," Rudy said. "But
(Pohl) has to protect the defendant in that situation.
... He has to make sure (England) wasn't talked into
it by her lawyer or her parents or someone else."
During defense questioning, Graner
said he looped the leash around the prisoner's shoulders
as a way to coax him out of a cell, and that it slipped
up around his neck. He said he asked England to hold
the strap while he took photos that he could show to
other guards later to teach them this prisoner-handling
technique.
At that point Pohl halted Graner's testimony and admonished
the defense for admitting evidence that ran counter
to England's plea on the conspiracy charge and one count
of maltreating detainees.
The judge did not discuss the other five counts to
which England had pleaded guilty.
Graner, who is said to be the father of England's infant
son, was found guilty in January and is serving a 10-year
prison term for his role in the scandal.
In a handwritten note given to reporters Tuesday, Graner
had said he wanted England to fight the charges.
"Knowing what happened in Iraq, it was very upsetting
to see Lynn plead guilty to her charges," he wrote.
"I would hope that by doing
so she will have a better chance at a good sentence."
Graner maintains that he and the other Abu Ghraib guards
were following orders from higher-ranking interrogators
when they abused the detainees. |
An Israeli army commander
has been suspended after the fatal shooting of two Palestinian
teenagers during a protest against the West Bank barrier.
The boys, aged 14 and 15, were among a group throwing
stones at bulldozers and troops in Beit Lakia, near Ramallah.
Army sources initially said troops
used live fire only because "there was a danger to
their lives". A full inquiry into the incident
will now be held.
A top general called the commander's conduct "unreasonable",
reports say.
"The company commander was suspended in light of
errors - both in the way he conducted himself and in the
way in which he led his force," the army is quoted
as saying.
Barrier building
An initial investigation said the officer - from the
Combat Engineering Corps - decided his men should open
fire at the lower body of one of the ringleaders of Wednesday
night's protest.
Before that, the army said, he had attempted to disperse
the crowd of 300 protestors using tear gas and rubber
bullets.
Some protestors had surrounded troops and were throwing
stones and metal objects, the army says.
"The troops were surrounded and he (the commander)
felt that their life was in danger," an army source
is quoted saying by AFP.
Palestinian activists named the dead teenagers as Jamal
Jaber and Uday Mofeed.
They said the protest began against the destruction of
farmland for the construction of the barrier that Israel
is building - often jutting deep into the occupied West
Bank.
The Stop the Wall group says protestors were chased by
Israeli soldiers using live ammunition.
Crowds of villagers then swarmed onto the streets in
an effort to protect them, but troops followed and continued
shooting, the group says.
'Violation'
The Stop the Wall group says the two boys were evacuated
by ambulance to Ramallah, but both bled to death before
they reached hospital after being held up by Israeli troops
at a permanent checkpoint.
"This is a violation of the
ceasefire. Israel is looking for excuses to raise tensions
and to depart from implementing... understandings,"
Palestinian official Nabil Abu Rdeina told Reuters
news agency.
Israel says its West Bank barrier, a network of fortified
fences and concrete walls, is a defence against Palestinian
suicide bombers.
Palestinians say the barrier is a means of cementing
Israel's hold on occupied Palestinian land. |
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel
on Wednesday froze the planned handover of West Bank towns
to the Palestinians, accusing Palestinian security forces
of failing to honour commitments to disarm militants in
areas already under their control, and two Palestinian
youths were shot dead by Israeli soldiers in the West
Bank.
The developments were the latest signs of trouble for
an already strained ceasefire. Palestinian security and
hospital officials said Israeli soldiers shot and killed
the two 17-year-old cousins after nightfall Wednesday.
[...]
The Palestinian Authority issued a statement calling
the killing a violation of the ceasefire. The truce, declared
Feb. 8, has considerably reduced violence, but isolated
incidents continue.
Palestinian officials called the decision to stop the
handover of towns "unfortunate" and said they
had struck a deal to collect militants' weapons, despite
a top commander's announcement Wednesday that he has no
plans to disarm the gunmen by force.
Under the ceasefire agreement, Israel pledged to pull
its forces out of five West Bank towns, while the Palestinians
promised to disarm militants. But Israel has pulled out
of only two of the towns, Jericho and Tulkarem.
Israel has repeatedly said it is not moving forward because
the Palestinians have failed to crack down on gunmen in
these areas. During Wednesday's meeting of the security
cabinet, a group of senior government ministers, Mofaz
confirmed he has frozen the process, participants said.
"The defence minister said that because the thing
most central to us - that terror activity will not be
launched from any town we hand over - was agreed to but
not implemented (by the Palestinians) ... the defence
minister requested a postponement in the handover,"
Interior Minister Ophir Pines-Paz told Israel TV. [...] |
Italian
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has said the US bears
some blame for the killing of an Italian agent, but it
will not hurt relations.
He told parliament that the US had implicitly
acknowledged some problems at the checkpoint where US
forces shot dead Nicola Calipari in March.
US and Italian reports differed sharply on the events
leading up to the killing, which caused outrage in Italy.
But Mr Berlusconi said Italy remained Washington's close
friend and ally.
He said Italy had no intention of rushing troops out
of Iraq before their job was done.
'Dark areas'
Mr Calipari was killed when his car came under fire by
US troops on 4 March as he escorted a newly freed Italian
hostage, journalist Giuliana Sgrena, to Baghdad airport.
The US insists that its soldiers were not at fault and
followed their rules of engagement.
Mr Berlusconi - whose speeches
to both houses of parliament came a day after US President
George W Bush called him to repeat his regret over the
incident - said that the two inquiries into the
sequence of events differed on several important points.
He said that the absence of intent on the part of the
soldiers did not mean that there was no-one to blame for
the fatal shooting, adding that US forces had changed
procedures at checkpoints since the killing.
"If you change the rules then, implicitly,
you admit that the previous rules were not working,"
he said.
Many "dark areas" in the sequence of events
remained, he said, and pledging full government co-operation
with Italy's own ongoing criminal investigation.
Mr Berlusconi cited a string of mistakes made by US troops
at the checkpoint but dismissed claims that his relationship
with the US had been damaged by the incident.
"The friendship and loyalty of the Italian government
towards the US - based on the immutable foundations of
liberty and freedom - is beyond discussion," he said.
Despite increasing opposition to Italian troop involvement
in Iraq and outrage following Mr Calipari's death, Mr
Berlusconi said that pulling troops out was not an option.
"There is no reason to say 'Let's all go home' -
it would be incomprehensible." |
ROME - US troops bear some responsibility
for the death of an Italian agent in Iraq but the incident
should not affect the Italian troop presence there or
relations between Rome and Washington, Prime Minister
Silvio Berlusconi told parliament.
He stressed ties between the United States and Italy
had not been hurt by the row over the fatal shooting
of Nicola Calipari last March, which sparked outrage
and rekindled calls for Italy to pull out of Iraq.
But he reiterated Italy's view that US soldiers must
shoulder some blame, highlighting "irregularities"
committed by the US patrol "whose mobile checkpoint
was not announced" and "who did not have precise
instructions."
"The absence of intention does not rule out responsibility,"
he said Thursday.
However, he insisted "the friendly ties between
Italy and the United States cannot be called into question."
"And I want to dispel any possible confusion:
there is no link between the killing of Calipari and
our country's mission in Iraq," he added.
Any withdrawal of Italy's 3,000 troops from Iraq will
be done "uniquely in consultation" with the
allies, he said.
Relations between Rome and Washington soured over the
release of sharply differing accounts of Calipari's
shooting at a US checkpoint on March 4 as he was escorting
a freed hostage to Baghdad airport.
The US account exonerated US troops for any blame over
the incident, in which Calipari was killed and the freed
hostage, journalist Giuliana Sgrena, was injured.
But the Italian version released late Monday blamed
the killing on the "inexperience" of US troops
acting under stress and without proper rules of engagement.
Outrage over Calipari's killing, fuelled by a feeling
that the US military has dismissed legitimate Italian
concerns and acted arrogantly to protect its own men,
has led to renewed calls for Rome to withdraw its troops
from Iraq.
On the eve of his appearance in parliament, Berlusconi
received a soothing phone call from US President George
W. Bush who reiterated his regret over the incident.
Berlusconi's office said the two leaders had a "long
and cordial conversation" during which Bush called
Calipari "a heroic servant of Italy" and a
"valued friend" of the United States.
US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, similarly, held
a "long and cordial" phone conversation with
her Italian counterpart Gianfranco Fini a day earlier,
both of them stressing bilateral relations would not
be harmed by the dispute.
According to an Italian government statement, Bush,
in his call, restated his "personal condolences
and those of the administration and people of the United
States."
However White House spokesman Scott McClellan revealed
that Bush and Berlusconi had not directly discussed
the difference between the two accounts of the shooting.
Berlusconi faced down massive street
protests to send Italian troops to southern Iraq in
June 2003 in a gesture to his ally Bush, two months
after the formal overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime.
Parliament voted in March to prolong the mission in
Iraq for another six months, and Berlusconi has already
said Italy could begin withdrawing its troops in September,
if Italy's allies agreed.
Even within Berlusconi's ruling right-wing
coalition, calls have mounted for a timetable for withdrawing
Italian troops from Iraq. |
|
This ad was on the CNN site today.
Notice the soldiers, the image of the "yellow
peril". If you didn't know better, you'd actually
believe that North Korea was a real danger to the
United States! |
North Korea may be firing missiles, but when it comes
to nuclear proliferation and eroding international controls,
the biggest bully on the block right now is in Washington.
News that North Korea fired a missile into the Sea of
Japan drove White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card into
high dudgeon: "I think they're
looking to kind of be bullies in the world," he told
Fox News Sunday. It takes one to know one.
World leaders, scientists and citizens from around the
globe were gathering for a month-long meeting at the United
Nations as the North Korean news broke. Their project:
to review world progress on stopping the spread of nuclear
weapons. Specifically, the UN conferees are reviewing
the status of the 35-year-old Non Proliferation Treaty
on Nuclear Weapons.
North Korea's apparent test played right
into White House hands, guaranteeing that as the NPT negotiations
began, all fingers were pointing at Kim Jong Il and his
Axis of Evil fellows in Tehran. But when it comes to nuclear
proliferation and eroding international controls, the
biggest bully on the block right now is in Washington.
In the world of Bush's bully-boys global treaties are
just for girlie men. The North Korean test proves that
the treaty system's limp -- that was the spin being put
on the NPT conference even before anything fell into Sea
of Japan, and it's exactly what W.'s candidate for UN
representative, John "I'm here to stop the vote count"
Bolton has been saying for years, ever since he first
got the job of under secretary of state for arms control.
His preference is for U.S. world control.
"Decades of stillborn plans, of
wishful thinking, of irresponsible passivity." That's
how Bolton once described the '70s and '80s -- the era
of global arms treaties.
"States that sponsor terror and
pursue WMD must stop," he told the Heritage Foundation
back in 2002. "States that renounce terror and abandon
WMD can become part of our effort. But those that do not
can expect to become our targets."
I couldn't agree more. So, who's sponsoring terror? By
the State Department's account, Sudan is. The Islamic
regime that once welcomed Osama bin Laden and that Colin
Powell accused of supporting genocide in Darfur remains
on the most recent U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism.
Yet according to a huge and under-appreciated story by
Ken Silverstein in the Los Angeles Times the
U.S. considers the government of Sudan an ally. Sudan
has been providing access to terrorism suspects and sharing
intelligence data with the United States, reports Silverstein.
Maj. Gen. Yahia Hussein Babiker, a senior official in
Sudan's government tells Silverstein, "American intelligence
considers us to be a friend." Sudan, he says, has
achieved "a complete normalization of our relations
with the CIA."
Then there's Washington's other new-found
friend, the president of Uzbekistan who received a presidential
welcome at the White House. During last week's televised
news conference, President Bush defended sending unconvicted
U.S. detainees abroad for interrogation. Some call it
kidnapping, others "extraordinary rendition."
"We operate within the law, and we send people to
countries where they say they're not going to torture
the people" Bush told the world. He lied.
According to an unnamed intelligence
official speaking to The New York Times, the U.S. has
sent "dozens" of detainees to torture chambers
in Uzbekistan where, according to a February 2001 State
Department report, Uzbek police routinely beat, asphyxiate
and boil prisoners' body parts. What the Times calls Bush's
"rough ally" (!) Uzbekistan has received half
a billion dollars in U.S. aid for its security agencies.
Is a person who terrorizes another person only a terrorist
if he's not wearing the uniform of an allied nation?
As for WMDs, if the UN discussions garner serious public
attention this month, North Korea and Iran -- the Axis
of Evil cheats -- are likely to come in for all the criticism.
But who's doing more to proliferate
nuclear weapons? The have-nots or the haves?
Back in 1973, the officially recognized
nuclear powers -- America, Russia, China, Britain and
France -- agreed to disarm. That was the bargain they
drew up with the rest of the signatories. What's the U.S.
done? George W. refused to support a comprehensive nuclear
test-ban treaty. He scrapped the anti-ballistic missile
treaty with Russia. The members of his administration
routinely cast doubt on the value of negotiating global
treaties at all. At the very same time, this administration's
been seeking more, fancier weapons and new ways to use
the nukes already in our arsenal.
Since his first term, Bush has appropriated money for
studying all sorts of WMDs like the "robust nuclear
earth penetrator" intended to vaporise deeply buried
targets such as stocks of chemical and biological weapons.
And according to press reports this week, the United States
is considering selling 100 so-called "bunker buster"
bombs to Israel -- raising fears that Israel might use
them in a first-strike attack on Iran. As one weapons
analyst put it, "They're designed to destroy deeply
buried high-value assets such as command centers or nuclear
weapons facilities. Draw your own conclusions." A
bunker bomb attack on a nuclear facility -- now that'd
be pretty. No wonder Iran feels nervous.
So what's the problem, the NPT or the
erosion of the NPT? Former President Carter wrote this
week that the U.S. is the biggest culprit: "While
claiming to be protecting the world -- and Americans from
proliferation threats -- American leaders not only have
abandoned existing treaty restraints but also have asserted
plans to test and develop new weapons including antiballistic
missiles earth penetrating bunker busters an perhaps some
new small bombs. They have abandoned past pledges and
now threaten first use of nuclear weapons against non
nuclear states. "
So what do you think -- do you agree with Bolton? "States
that sponsor terror and pursue WMD must stop?" I
think he's right. |
Has journalism become
an ethical cesspool, or just been forced to adopt greater
standards of cleanliness?
In the past month alone, four reporters for major newspapers
have been ousted, and a columnist was suspended, for ethical
missteps. The drip-drip-drip of disclosures about sloppiness,
fabrication and plagiarism have further eroded the media's
reputation, leading to a one-strike-and-you're-out policy
at many outlets.
"There are people in important jobs, well respected
by their colleagues and readers, who've made mistakes
like this, but they made the mistakes 30 years ago and
didn't get their careers destroyed," says New York
Times ombudsman Dan Okrent. In today's climate, he says,
"we're hypersensitive because we have to be hypersensitive."
Julia Wallace, editor of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
says of such cases: "My gut is that we are more aggressive
about pursuing them and more aggressive about talking
about them openly." Wallace recalls how the Chicago
Sun-Times editorial page editor was bounced in 1995 for
plagiarizing from The Washington Post -- and quietly given
a top circulation job. (The executive, Mark Hornung, resigned
last year in a Sun-Times circulation scandal.)
Media bosses are getting tougher on wayward staffers
not just because of a greater sense of professionalism,
but because outsiders -- led by bloggers and other critics
-- have stepped up the pressure. In the Internet age,
there's no rug under which to sweep these problems.
"Because we are self-policing so much better, it
makes it seem like there's a tremendous cascade of ethical
violations," says Thomas Kunkel, dean of the University
of Maryland's journalism school. "There used to be
a lot more in the way of shenanigans and monkey business
that we either didn't know about or, if it was caught,
it was winked at. There was a boys-will-be-boys quality
about it -- they were mostly boys -- and they would get
a slap on the wrist at best."
Last week, the Tampa Tribune accepted the resignation
of Brad Smith after he admitted fabricating a story about
a woman emerging from a night of club-hopping to find
her Jeep towed. The woman was home, having lent the car
to a friend with whom Smith was socializing when the towing
took place.
Also last week, the Journal-Constitution said reporter
Al Levine never spoke to the fans and area residents he
had quoted at the Daytona 500, lifting material in February
from the Daytona Beach News-Journal and last year from
the Orlando Sentinel. Wallace says she had to fire the
23-year veteran, who apologized, because he committed
plagiarism twice.
Earlier, the Los Angeles Times dismissed Eric Slater
over errors in a story about fraternity hazing at California
State University-Chico, though he strongly disputes the
paper's suggestion that he never visited the school. The
Boston Globe dropped freelancer Barbara Stewart for writing
about a scheduled seal hunt as if it had happened, though
she says her only mistake was failing to confirm that
the event, which wound up being delayed, had taken place.
In the highest-profile case, the Detroit Free Press reinstated
its suspended sports columnist, Mitch Albom -- and took
unspecified action against four editors -- after he apologized
for writing about two alumni at a college basketball game
before it took place. The ex-players never showed up.
(Albom wrote yesterday that he "went from sorry,
to shocked, to saddened, to silent," feels "terrible"
at the impact on his newspaper and considered his mistake
"a humbling reminder to slow down.")
In recent weeks, the Boston Herald severed its relationship
with columnist Charles Chieppo, who had contracts with
the Massachusetts governor and a state agency, and Florida
television reporter Mike Vasilinda was reported to have
earned more than $100,000 from contracts with Gov. Jeb
Bush's office and state agencies.
The transgressions take many forms. The Miami Herald
fired a critic last year for plagiarizing his own earlier
work at the San Francisco Chronicle, and the Macon, Ga.,
Telegraph ousted a reporter for attributing information
from a Ringling Bros. Web site to a circus spokesman.
A few decades ago, it was not unusual for journalists
to accept Christmas gifts from sources, take junkets from
organizations they covered or collaborate with government
officials.
In 1945, legendary columnist James Reston helped Sen.
Arthur Vandenberg with a speech on foreign policy. In
1960, then-Washington Post Publisher Philip Graham helped
broker John Kennedy's selection of Lyndon Johnson as his
running mate. In the early 1970s, says Kunkel, he knew
an Indiana sportswriter who routinely made up quotes from
the coaches he covered.
Okrent, who got his Times job in the wake of the Jayson
Blair scandal, says a new era of journalistic aggressiveness
-- inspired, in his view, by the Watergate film "All
the President's Men" -- has spawned corner-cutting
and worse by would-be stars. He also cites what Slate's
Jack Shafer has dubbed "the Romenesko Effect"
-- the immediate publicizing of what would have been purely
local flaps on the Poynter Institute media Web site run
by Jim Romenesko.
Some of the transgressors "wouldn't have gotten
fired five years ago, pre-Romenesko," Okrent says.
Romenesko says new technology enables him to discover
far-flung incidents. By plugging certain search terms
into Google News, the all-computer/no-humans service,
he gets e-mail alerts about journalistic misbehavior --
such as the two staffers for the Kalamazoo, Mich., Gazette
fired last week for drinking while reporting a story on
a game called "beer pong" and other alcohol
use by young people.
"With the Internet and the ability to expose these
scandals, both mini- and maxi-, we just know more about
them," Romenesko says.
When he was at the Milwaukee Journal in the 1970s, "there
was one guy who just fabricated stuff," but "nobody
knew outside the newsroom." As for the overall state
of media ethics, "it may have been worse in those
days, considering half the people in the newsroom were
drunk."
The Gannon File
Jeff Gannon's seamy past leaked out months before he
asked President Bush a loaded question during a news conference.
As a correspondent for the now-defunct Web site Talon
News, says the forthcoming issue of Vanity Fair, Gannon
was hammering Tom Daschle during the South Dakotan's campaign
to hold onto his Senate seat. Daschle aides traced an
e-mail -- ostensibly from a constituent who wanted reaction
to one of Gannon's stories -- to an Internet profile of
Gannon, wearing only dog tags and boxer shorts. "The
Daschle campaign spread the word, but no reporters bit,"
the magazine says.
Gannon doesn't deny advertising online as a $200-an-hour
gay escort, but describes himself as the victim of "a
full-scale jihad" by liberals. Vanity Fair says he
falsely told friends he had been a Marine -- Gannon says
he displayed military paraphernalia and "didn't disabuse
anyone of that notion" -- and owes nearly $21,000
in back taxes. Gannon believes God bestowed a White House
assignment on him so that he could atone for past transgressions,
Vanity Fair says.
In defending his name change, the man born as James Guckert
says Jeff Gannon has a "nice ring to it -- like Wolf
Blitzer, which isn't his real name either." Actually,
Mr. Guckert, it is his real name. [...] |
It seemed, at first,
like nothing more than a novelty item in the news briefs,
the kind of odd, meaningless side-fact thrown off by
most major stories: "New Pope, President's Brother
Had Link in Swiss Group." But a look beneath the
surface of this innocuous connection reveals a vast
web of sinister alliances -- and moral corruption on
a world-shaking scale.
The network links a bewildering line-up of players
-- the Bushes, the Vatican, bin Laden, Saddam Hussein
and China's Communist overlords, among others -- in
a staggering array of crime and turpitude: prostitution,
pedophilia, mass death and war profiteering. Yet this
is not some grand "conspiracy theory," a serpent's
egg hatched in Bilderberg or Bohemian Grove.
It's simply the way the Bush boys do business, trawling
the globe for sweetheart deals and gushers of blood
money from the war and terror they foment.
At the center of this particular
nexus is the unlikely figure of Neil Bush, the feckless,
fraudulent brother of the current president. Neilsy,
as he's known in the family, is most famous for costing
American taxpayers $1 billion to bail out a savings-and-loan
he had ruined with secret insider loans to his own business
partners. For this massive fraud, he was fined -- by
his father's administration -- the princely sum of $50,000,
which was actually paid by one of his dad's political
bagmen, of course.
You see, the Bushes are robber
barons, not capitalists: They never risk any
of their own money in the competition of the marketplace.
Nor do they ever pay the price when their deals go belly-up.
Just ask George W., whose first
business was jump-started with secret cash from the
bin Ladens, laundered through their U.S. frontman,
James Bath -- who was also hired by W.'s dad, then-CIA
director George Bush Sr., to set up offshore companies
for shifting CIA money and aircraft between Texas and
Saudi Arabia, the Texas Observer reported.
Neilsy's latest business ventures include a partnership
with one of China's own influence-peddling oligarchs:
Jiang Mianheng, son of former President Jiang Zemin.
He's paying Bush $2 million for "advice" in
a field – the semiconductor industry -- which
Neilsy cheerfully confesses he knows nothing about.
Bush also trousered $1 million for "introductions
and advice" from the CP Group, a Bangkok conglomerate
spreading bipartisan gravy around Washington. In return
for supplying his paymasters with a golden conduit to
the White House, Neilsy received a special perk: free
prostitutes, served up fresh to his hotel room during
business trips to Asia.
But between his sessions of bouncy-bouncy with trafficked
women, Neilsy was also sitting down with hard-line cleric
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the former soldier for Nazi
Germany now translated to glory as Pope Benedict XVI.
The two men were board members of an obscure Swiss institute
ostensibly devoted to "interfaith dialogue."
Although the organization did have some prominent ecumenical
figures on the board, none of them could say exactly
why pimp-daddy Neilsy was invited to join, Newsday reported.
Perhaps there's a clue in the group's incorporation.
Dunn & Bradstreet lists the supposedly nonprofit
foundation as a "management trust," designed
for "purposes other than education, religion, charity
or research." The group's spokesman says this designation
was a "mistake," and anyway, the institute
is hastily being "re-launched" with a "new
focus" on its religious mission. But a cynic --
i.e., anyone with the slightest acquaintance of Bush
business practices -- might think that a "management
trust" masquerading as a religious charity would
be an excellent place to launder money or park assets
away from the taxman's prying eyes.
Meanwhile, Ratzinger spent his
time on the Swiss board trying to bury the Vatican's
massive pedophilia scandal, the London Observer reported
this week. In a secret
2001 letter, he ordered Church officials to prevent
police from learning about abuse allegations
-- a theological innovation more commonly known in the
United States as "obstructing justice." Given
this criminal high-wire act, perhaps the good cardinal
thought it prudent to cultivate some personal ties with
a presidential sibling.
Whatever Neilsy and Das Panzerkardinal were up to in
Switzerland, Ratzinger repaid
their camaraderie with a decisive intervention in brother
George's 2004 election, issuing a fatwa that essentially
condemned any Catholic voting for John Kerry to eternal
hellfire. With the Vatican's iron hand on the
scales, Bush reaped an extra six percent of the Catholic
vote -- a huge boost in a tight race.
But it's Neilsy's long-time partnership with Syrian-born
businessman Jamal Daniel that has provided the true
mother lode: war profiteering. Daniel, also a boardmate
in the Swiss adventure with Ratzinger, is a principal
in New Bridge Strategies, a firm set up by top Bush
insiders to steer corporate clients to the fountains
of blood money flowing from George W.'s conquest of
Iraq. The company makes frequent use of Neilsy's "introductions"
and Middle East connections, The Financial Times reported.
It also operates a profitable sideline in mercenaries.
Daniel brings his own unique connections to the regional
porkfest: His family was instrumental in the creation
of the Baath Party in Syria and Iraq, The Financial
Times noted. And of course, the Bush Family's covert
arm, the CIA -- whose headquarters bears the name of
George Sr. -- assisted not one, but two, Baathist coups
in Iraq, including the bloody upheaval that brought
Saddam Hussein's family faction to power, historian
Roger Morris reported. Still later, the CIA would supply
Osama bin Laden and his fellow extremists with weapons,
money and terrorist training: a shrewd investment whose
long-term consequences -- the current "war on terror"
-- are still paying fat dividends for Bush coffers.
Sure, thousands die and millions suffer
from these dirty deals -- but it's not a "conspiracy."
It's just business -- the Bush way. |
NEW YORK - Two makeshift grenades
exploded outside a building housing the British Consulate
early Thursday, Election Day in Britain, causing slight
damage but injuring no one, officials said.
Officials stressed that it was not clear whether the
consulate itself had been targeted. The midtown Manhattan
office building houses a variety of domestic and foreign
companies.
"We do not at this point have any idea who did
it or a motive," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said,
adding the explosion was caused by "a relatively
unsophisticated explosive device." There were no
threats or phone calls, he said.
Investigators were questioning a foreign
national they said was found loitering near the building
shortly after the explosion. But police said the man
was not considered a suspect.
The grenades had been placed inside a cement flower
box outside the front door of the building.
After piecing together the shrapnel, police determined
the devices were toy grenades that had been filled with
gunpowder. Officers estimated that one was the size
of a pineapple; the other the size of a lemon.
No timing device was used, Police Commissioner Ray
Kelly said.
The blasts, which Kelly said happened around 3:35 a.m.,
shattered a panel of glass in the building's front door
and ripped a one-foot chunk from the planter.
The British consulate is on the 9th and 10th floors
of the building, the mayor said. He said he expected
it would be open for business later in the day.
Offices of other foreign diplomatic representatives
were checked as a precaution and nothing was found,
Kelly said. Security videos in the area were being reviewed,
he said.
In London, a Foreign Office spokeswoman, asked whether
British authorities believed the blast was terror-related,
said only: "Investigations are ongoing."
"We're not speculating about whether it's connected
to the election," she added. Calls to the British
Embassy in Washington were not immediately returned.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair is seeking a third
term in office. With the country's economy doing well,
Blair's Labour Party was widely
expected to win despite anger over his support of the
Iraq war.
The 14-story glass and metal building, on 3rd Avenue
at 51st Street less than a mile from the United Nations
headquarters, has retail shops on the lower level.
The closure of streets around the site caused some
rush hour disruptions. For a few hours, trains on one
subway line skipped the stop close to the site.
In Chicago, police closed a portion of Michigan Avenue
near the British Consulate for about 30 minutes to search
the area as a precaution, police spokeswoman Laura Kubiak
said. |
After three years of rising federal
budget deficits, a surge of April tax receipts brought
unexpected good news to fiscal policymakers -- the tide
of government red ink appears to be receding.
The Treasury Department this week reported there would
be a $54 billion swing from projected deficit to surplus
in the April-to-June quarter, after an unanticipated
gush of tax payments poured into the Treasury before
the April 15 deadline. That prompted
private forecasters to lower their deficit projections
for the fiscal year that ends in September.
Budget analysts inside and outside the government said
the positive turn is likely to be short-lived. Indeed,
after a four-year absence, the Treasury Department announced
yesterday it is considering reissuing its 30-year Treasury
bond to help finance long-term government debt, jolting
the bond markets and pushing down the price of existing
30-year securities.
But in the short term, many forecasters said the budget
deficit appears to have crested.
"I think it has turned the corner,"
said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's,
the credit rating agency. "My guess is 2004 will
have been the worst year."
For that fiscal year, the government recorded a $412
billion deficit, the largest ever in nominal dollar
terms, although not as large as some of the deficits
of the 1980s when measured against the size of the economy.
The 2004 mark was up from 2003's $378 billion deficit,
which topped 2002's $158 billion deficit.
In January, Bush administration officials projected
that the streak would continue, with a deficit of $427
billion for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30. But
that estimate was widely regarded as inflated and many
forecasters believed the total would be more like $400
billion.
April, however, turned out to be a far better month
than anticipated. Taxpayers were
confronted with unexpected tax bills, many from capital
gains and the alternative minimum tax, a parallel income
tax system designed to hit the rich but that is increasingly
pinching the middle class.
The Treasury announced this week that it will
repay $42 billion in federal debt in the third April-to-June
quarter, instead of borrowing $12 billion.
Wall Street analysts reduced their deficit forecasts
this week, from around $400 billion to around $370 billion.
In nominal dollar terms, that
would still be the third-highest deficit on record.
Even measured against the size of the economy, "it's
still a high number," said Brian Bethune, director
of financial economics at Global Insight Inc., a Massachusetts
forecasting firm. "It needs to come down."
[...] |
The National Bureau
of Investigation (NBI) on Thursday said it has arrested
two British nationals with $3
trillion fake US federal bank notes in their
possession, DZMM reported.
NBI Director Reynaldo Wycoco identified the suspects
as Paul Edward John Flavell and Sam Beany. The two listed
their address as Unit 305 CEO Apartments in Jupiter
Street, Makati City.
The suspects were not physically present during the
press conference called by Wycoco at the NBI office
in Taft Avenue, Manila. Only the suspects' photographs
were shown to reporters.
Wycoco said NBI agents have also launched a manhunt
for two other British nationals involved in the syndicate.
The two other suspects are Seki Mehmet Bayram and Peter
Whittkamp.
Flavell and Beany's arrest came following a tip from
international cargo forwarder DHL Philippines Inc. on
April 14, Wycoco said.
The tip was about a shipment consigned to two foreigners,
which was pending at the company warehouse.
The forwarder said the cargo was bound for Zurich,
Switzerland.
The NBI dispatched a team to the DHL office. The agents
were able to chance upon the suspects as they were paying
the airway bill amounting to P53,967.
Company records show the suspects paid using a credit
card.
Wycoco said Flavell and Beany did not resist arrest
after they were made to open the cast-iron boxes containing
bogus federal bank reserve certificates. |
The University of Texas student
arrested after asking an obscenity-filled question of
WorldNetDaily columnist Ann Coulter is a former reporter
for the college's newspaper, and is said to be defending
his actions in more graphic language.
Ajai Raj, 19, a sophomore whose major is English at
the Austin campus, was taken into custody and charged
with disorderly conduct following his vulgar question
and lewd hand gestures following a speech by the conservative
pundit Tuesday night.
"He worked for us for about two weeks, then he
just stopped showing up," Robert Inks, managing
editor of the Daily Texan, told WND. "He was not
acting on behalf of the newspaper [at the Coulter speech].
The guy was speaking completely on his own."
An open letter from Raj posted on DemocratsUnderground.com
suggests no remorse for his actions.
I have no regrets. Was I jackass?
Yes. Oh, Christ, yes. But here's the question people
ought to ask themselves. Did I deserve to be arrested?
Did the cops need to rough me up for saying bad words
at what was at least masquerading as an open dialogue?
Do the people of Texas – hell, of America –
feel that "potty mouth" belongs on the list
of punishable crimes along with "aggravated assault"
and "armed robbery"? ...
I know I didn't slay the insidious evil that is
Ann Coulter, but I did give her pause. She can easily
go to another college or hoedown or whatever and spew
her tired rhetoric without worrying about me. But
I'm not the only one who feels this way. Other
people will call her on her s---.
Online messageboards have been kept busy with reaction
to Raj.
- "Ajai, you're a hero! Coulter is an obnoxious
pig who spreads hatred and stupidity wherever she
goes. It's good to know that there are some smart
people around who don't fall for her B.S."
- "Twerps like this make my day! The more that
Joe Average hears about this type of stupidity from
liberal Democrats, the more they vote Republican.
Keep up the good work, dorkbreath."
- "In a little place called reality,
you would get your head caved in for sport. You are
a waste of human flesh and a wussy to boot."
A search of the Daily Texan's archives indicates three
stories written by Raj between March 9 and March 23,
covering the lack of diversity at UT, the state's attorney
general encouraging open records, and the death of a
UT freshman who was hit by a taxi while walking home
from a party.
In an essay dated April 18 posted on PartyCampus.com,
Raj says he was arrested this spring on marijuana charges.
"When me and the motley members of my cell block
were led in front of a judge, I learned that, according
to our 'justice' system, a straight-A college kid holding
a bag of weed is as bad a criminal as a guy who beats
his wife and kid. ... I learned that every single cop
in this God-forsaken county thinks he's the King of
S--- Mountain, and that they missed their chance to
be comedic wunderkinds. It takes a real man to make
fun of a guy who's in a futile situation and has nothing
to do but take your s---."
Coulter, who was previously attacked with a custard
pie at an October appearance at the University of Arizona,
said last night on Fox News Channel's "Hannity
& Colmes" program that liberal-minded students
have been let down by their instructors.
"They're buffeted along by a liberal media, they
have liberal public schoolteachers, they go to college,
they have liberal professors," Coulter said. "They
don't know how to argue, they can't put together a logical
thought. ... Liberals – they throw food, they
curse."
Coulter, a best-selling author as well as columnist,
says she was defending traditional marriage at the event,
when Raj came to the microphone to ask his question.
"I defended it by pointing out that marriage promotes
civilization. You have a lack of barbarity and savagery
– what you don't see in societies without a marriage
institution. I said nothing about sodomy. I didn't say
it was unnatural or immoral or that he would be struck
down by God. And he stood up and said. 'Well, you say
you respect the sanctity of marriage, well what about
a man who goes home every night and F's his wife in
the A?' So even taking out the obscenities, his question
doesn't make any sense. What does that have to do with
my point? ... Who was he trying to persuade by that?"
According to the police report, Raj then ran back toward
his seat, making a motion with his hand "simulating
masturbation," and was arrested as an officer escorted
him from the library, with Raj's supporters chanting
"Let him go!"
"Intelligent questions are a
little more fun than someone standing up and engaging
in a Tourette's syndrome at the mic, but that's kind
of funny, too," Coulter said.
She jokingly noted there was another student at the
event who may have been more deserving of arrest, as
he said he supported his fellow Arabs and was very angry
with Coulter.
"I said, 'Which Arabs are you
supporting, the ones who flew planes into the buildings,
or the ones who just voted in Iraq?'" Coulter said.
"He wouldn't answer." |
Flashback:
Ann
Coulter causes stir at KU
Heckling, standing ovations interrupt right-wing commentator |
By Mike Belt, Journal-World
Wednesday, March 30, 2005 |
Conservative columnist and author
Ann Coulter was greeted with a mixture of standing ovations
and heckling after she took center stage Tuesday night
at Kansas University's Lied Center.
As soon as she stepped up to the microphone, Coulter
fired off one zinger after another about liberalism
while promising to answer questions from left-wing members
in the audience who could "thrash their way to
a coherent thought."
"I've come to find I like liberals a lot more,"
Coulter said early in her speech. "They're
kind of cute when they're cold, shivering and afraid."
Coulter spoke as the 37th J.A. Vickers Sr. Memorial
Lecture Series lecturer to a crowd estimated by KU officials
at about 1,800 people. The lectures, which began in
1971, were established through a gift to the Kansas
University Endowment Association by the Vickers family
of Wichita.
Coulter received several standing
ovations during her speech, but she also found herself
interrupted several times by a small, scattered group
of hecklers.
"I think there are some people
in the audience who meant to be at the sexual reorientation
class down the hall," Coulter said, in response
to the heckling.
Moments later Coulter stopped and called for assistance
from students when hecklers started in again and no
one of authority was seen trying to stop them.
"Could 10 of the largest College
Republicans start walking up and down the aisles and
start removing anyone shouting?" Coulter asked.
"Otherwise, this lecture is over."
Several people responded, leaving
their seats to confront the hecklers, and verbal confrontations
erupted in parts of the auditorium. One of those
who answered Coulter's call was Michael Conner, a Shawnee
freshman.
"All I did was say they shouldn't stop her from
speaking," Conner said of confronting some audience
members in the back of the auditorium.
Later, when heckling broke out again,
a couple of uniformed KU Public Safety Department officers
appeared and escorted about six people out of the auditorium.
Coulter resumed her critical remarks, calling Sen.
Ted Kennedy a "human dirigible" and the Democrats'
"spiritual leader." She
also made fun of the Democrats' dalliance with filmmaker
Michael Moore and former presidential candidate John
Kerry, who she said got away with telling "big,
fat, enormous lies."
Despite Kerry's loss, Democrats think their political
stances and ideas just "need new labels for their
bottles," Coulter said.
She also blasted the nation's judicial
system for its handling of the Terri Schiavo case. "We
no longer have a single check on the judiciary,"
she said.
Coulter's appearance spurred
mixed emotions among those who came to see her.
About a dozen protesters stood outside the center before
her speech, carrying signs bearing quotes from her books
and columns. Ron Warman Jr. dressed up in a clown suit
to express his dislike of Coulter.
"I think she's a clown or a witch," the 45-year-old
Lawrence man said.
Some of the protesters, such as Robert Richardson,
said they were members of the Society of Open-Minded
Atheists and Agnostics.
"We're just not open-minded enough
to like Ann Coulter," Richardson, 28, of Lawrence,
said.
Others, such as Mollie Devine, 26, said she was a big
fan of Coulter.
"I love her," the Lawrence woman said. "She
doesn't back down. She's also funnier than the
other (conservative) columnists."
Mary Anne Smith, 38, said she welcomed a chance to
hear a noted right-wing conservative speak.
"We hear so much of the liberal side in Lawrence,"
she said. "I'm excited she came here, and this
is not a very easy place to come."
John Altevogt, a conservative GOP activist from Wyandotte
County, also welcomed Coulter.
"Ann Coulter is logical, rational
and an independent thinker," he said. "In
essence, everything the left hates in their womenfolk."
Unhappy with controversy
Others said they were displeased with the hecklers,
including brothers Richard and Alfred Dyer, who sat
in front of a few hecklers they described as acting
like children.
"I think they did a disservice by heckling her,"
Alfred Dyer, 54, Tonganoxie, said.
"She's got a right to be treated
in a civilized manner," Richard Dyer, 53, Lawrence,
said.
John Hoopes, 46, Lawrence, said the
event reminded him of watching the "Jerry Springer
Show."
Coulter was paid $25,000 for her appearance, which
was paid from the Vickers endowment fund, said Toni
Dixon, director of communications for the KU School
of Business. State and university money were not used,
she said. |
Cisco has come under fire from
privacy groups as it prepares to launch a wireless RFID
server that can track people and equipment using existing
Wi-Fi networks.
The Wireless Location Appliance 2700 is designed to
track RFID tags down to a few metres and display the
location on a central map.
Alarms can be raised if the tag moves out of a predefined
area, allowing companies to track equipment and, more
controversially, personnel.
"This can track your most valuable assets and
people," said Phil Dean, manager of applications
networking for Cisco EMEA.
However, the technology was slammed by privacy group
Liberty. "This latest product undermines employee
privacy even further and reinforces the slur that workers
cannot be trusted," said Dr Caoilfhionn Gallagher,
policy officer at Liberty.
"Using RFID in fixed objects is one thing, using
it in moving objects and embedded in uniforms is another.
This allows employers to track behaviour and movement
during work hours."
The server was developed by AirSpace before the company
was bought by Cisco. It damps down fluctuating levels
of Wi-Fi coverage throughout a walled building to obtain
an accurate fix on the tags.
It will only work with active RFID tags, which carry
a power source, rather than the smaller passive systems
that only activate when scanned. The active tags cost
at least $5 each, which would boost the cost of widescale
deployment.
The server will be available in June and will cost
about £8,000. |
Westminster Council is piloting
a scheme to install microphones on lampposts to augment
CCTV coverage with audio snooping.
Seven microphones are now in place in and around the
Soho area of London. Stage two of the project will see
microphones put up in "noise hotspots" in
the coming months, including the Lissom Grove and Churchill
Gardens housing estates.
"Currently if a resident complains about noise
the offenders could have stopped by the time an official
can get to the scene," said a council spokesman.
"The microphones only activate if noise levels
reach above a certain threshold. There isn't someone
listening in to everyone 24 hours a day."
Both the cameras and microphones can be moved and focused
on any problems. The microphones will use the existing
Wi-Fi network that links the cameras to Westminster's
central monitoring station.
The council insists that there are no plans to introduce
blanket coverage across Westminster.
One of the problems the microphone designers faced
was how to deal with London's pigeons. The spokesman
confirmed that the cameras had been designed "with
London's avian population in mind". |
Malaysia’s National
Registration Department is doubtful that it would be useful
to fingerprint all babies born in the country.
Malaysian police are proposing all new-borns should have
their fingerprint and footprints taken before they leave
hospital, according to the BBC. The National Registration
Department is concerned that prints from such a young
child will be unreliable for identifying the terrible
toddlers.
The NRD is “keeping an open mind” but is
worried that such fingerprints will still be changing
and so won’t be useful for identification, according
to the Malaysian Star. Police believe software could allow
for such changes in the prints.
Malaysians are already required to give fingerprints
at age 12 when they receive their “MyKad”
ID card. Their prints are taken again when they are 18.
Malaysia is aiming to have everyone over the age of 12
carrying a smart ID card by the end of the year.
Civil liberties groups in the country have attacked the
proposal as intimidating and likely to create a climate
of fear.
Newborn kids are already issued a “MyKid”
- similar to an ID card but without fingerprints or photos. |
Not so long ago it
was unthinkable for respectable scientists to talk about
life on Mars. Such talk was best left to X-Files fans.
But no longer.
Evidence is building to suggest biological processes
might be operating on the red planet, and life on Mars,
many scientists believe, is now more a likelihood than
merely a possibility.
Tantalizing evidence is accumulating that suggests
the red planet is alive, but incontrovertible proof
is still lacking. And while the European Space Agency
is keen to send a lander to find it, a history of failed
life-finding missions at NASA makes Americans more cautious.
"The life on Mars issue has recently undergone
a paradigm shift," said Ian Wright, an astrobiologist
at the Planetary and Space Sciences Research Institute
at the Open University in Britain, "to the extent
now that one can talk about the possibility of present
life on Mars without risking scientific suicide."
Much of the excitement is due to the work of Vittorio
Formisano, head of research at Italy's Institute of
Physics and Interplanetary Space.
In February, Formisano presented data at the Mars Express
Science Conference at Noordwijk in the Netherlands.
If scientists had been quietly excited before seeing
Formisano's data, they were frenetic afterward.
Formisano showed evidence of the presence of formaldehyde
in the atmosphere. Formaldehyde is a breakdown product
of methane, which was already known to be present in
the Martian atmosphere, so in itself its presence is
not so surprising. But Formisano measured formaldehyde
at 130 parts per billion.
To astrobiologists it was an incredible claim. It means
huge amounts of methane must be produced on Mars. (While
methane lasts for hundreds of years in the atmosphere,
formaldehyde lasts for only 7.5 hours.) "It requires
that 2.5 million tons of methane are produced a year,"
said Formisano.
"There are three possible scenarios to explain
the quantities: chemistry at the surface, caused by
solar radiation; chemistry deep in the planet, caused
by geothermal or hydrothermal activity; or life,"
he added.
And, with no known geological source of formaldehyde
on Mars, it's clear where Formisano's suspicions lie.
"I believe there is extremely high probability
that microbial subsurface life exists on Mars,"
he said, while acknowledging that although he believes
in Martian life, he can't yet prove it. [...] |
|
Phoebe orbits in the opposite
direction to Saturn's regular moons
|
Saturn's pock-marked moon Phoebe could be a comet that
was captured by the gravity of the ringed planet.
Data from the Cassini spacecraft suggests it originated
in the frozen outer Solar System region called the Kuiper
Belt - a reservoir for comets.
Two studies of Phoebe are carried in this week's issue
of Nature magazine.
The tiny satellite is very different in its chemical
composition to Saturn's larger moons and circles the planet
in the opposite direction to them.
"It could have been a comet," said co-author
Ralf Jaumann of the German Aerospace Center (DLR).
"Phoebe has a long journey behind it. It comes from
the outer Solar System and probably rounded the Sun a
few times before it was captured by Saturn's orbit. But
we really don't know."
Phoebe and the objects that populate the Kuiper Belt
are remnants of primordial objects that served as the
building blocks of planets in our Solar System.
The saturnian satellite could itself be between 4 and
4.4 billion years old.
Icy bodies
During the formation of the planets, gravitational interactions
ejected some so-called icy planetesimals like Phoebe into
distant orbits to join a native population of similar
cosmic bodies.
This process formed the region we know today as the Kuiper
Belt.
Phoebe itself must have migrated inwards and was captured
by Saturn's gravity after the ringed planet formed from
its planetary nebula.
Analysis of Phoebe's surface shows that it is one of
the most complex Solar System objects yet studied.
Scientists have identified water-ice, possible clays,
iron-bearing minerals and organics such as aromatic compounds,
alkanes and nitriles on the 220km-wide Saturnian satellite.
More complex organics also seem to be there, but scientists
are yet to characterise them.
The observations come from Cassini's Visual and Infrared
Mapping Spectrometer (Vims).
Dr Jaumann thinks clays could have formed through heating
if Phoebe came close to the Sun before being captured
by Saturn, forcing water ice to react with silicates.
"When we finally understand Phoebe, we will also
understand the Kuiper Belt objects," Dr Jaumann explained.
Phoebe's surface composition also suggests that chemical
activity in the first half billion years of the Solar
System may have been more complex than previously thought.
"However, we have only seen the surface and this
has probably undergone some alteration. But Phoebe has
probably not had much alteration through high pressure
or heating," Dr Jaumann added.
Cassini collected data on the moon during a close flyby
on 11 June 2004. |
BANDA ACEH, May 5
(Bernama) -- An earthquake measuring 5 on the Richter
scale on Thursday morning rocked Naggroe Aceh Darussalam
(NAD) provincial capital of Banda Aceh and Aceh Besar
district, the Antara News Agency reported.
Head of the Mata'Ie Geophysical office Syahnan said that
the tremor occurred at 8.14am (local time) for several
seconds with its epicenter in the sea about 125 km west
of Meulaboh, capital town of West Aceh district.
There was no immediate report of casualty or damage.
On Wednesday, two tectonic earthquakes, measuring 4.7
and 5.5 on the Richter scale, respectively, also jolted
Banda Aceh.
In addition, head of the Mata Ie Geophysical office Syahnan
earlier said aftershocks were felt on the average of 20
times everyday in Aceh following the 8.9 magnitude earthquake
and subsequent tsunami on Dec 26, 2004. |
Happy
050505 to all readers who have made it this far!
Readers
who wish to know more about who we are and what we do may visit
our portal site Quantum
Future
Remember,
we need your help to collect information on what is going on in
your part of the world!
We also need help to keep
the Signs of the Times online.
Send
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.
|