As many of you know,
Signs of the Times is not supported by major funding like
many other news sites, and is not affiliated with any
government, political group, corporation, or news agency.
SOTT is financed by any donations we receive as well as
money out of our own pockets. The benefit of this setup
is that we do not have any sponsors that might introduce
unwanted bias into our work. The
obvious and major drawback is that we do not have the
funding to do all the things we would like to do for our
readers.
Almost one year ago, SOTT created the P3nt4gon Str!ke presentation, which has now been viewed by
well over 300,000,000 people worldwide, and is available
in nine different languages. Recently, we wrote and produced
the song You
Lied, performed by Away
With the Fairys. We also recorded our first ever podcast,
beginning a project which we had been trying to get off
the ground for over a year.
A
SOTT editor poses next to his computer
To produce the Signs page, we work very long days (often
upwards of 14-16 hours) without pay. We do it because
we love it, and because our readers often write to tell
us how they have benefited from our work. In order to
continue expanding our work and deepen our analysis and
understanding of our world, we need to enlarge our library.
There are many books we would like to have that we cannot
afford. With our increasing use of sound files and our
future projects that include video, we have and will continue
to incur higher bandwidth costs. As well, the Signs page
and related projects are created on several computers
which are each upwards of five years old. They are very
slow, increasingly unreliable, and won't support regular
podcasts and videos.
Unfortunately, we do not have the financial means to
purchase the books we need, much less new equipment. Current
donations only support our basic needs and living expenses.
In order to continue producing the Signs page, the podcast,
Flash presentations, and expand our operations further,
we need your support.
At the moment, we are preparing six Signs of the
Times Commentary books. These books are collections
of SOTT commentary grouped according to theme. They will
be available for sale soon, and any proceeds will go towards
helping to cover our increasing operating costs.
Our target, based on estimated costs for all the necessary
materials, upgrades, and operating costs for the coming
year is 28,000 euros.
--
Here's How You Can Help Signs of the Times --
Any donation you
can make will help us to continue to produce and improve
the Signs page.
If you donate 50 euros
(approximately US$60; click
here for current exchange rate), you will be a Bronze
Supporter.
Bronze
Supporters will receive a complementary
copy of the 911 Conspiracy Signs
Commentary book.
If you donate 100
euros, you will be a Silver
Supporter.
Silver
Supporters will receive a complementary copy
of 911 Conspiracy, US Freedom, and The
Media.
Donations
of 175 euros will qualify you as a Gold
Supporter.
Gold
Supporters will receive the entire set of
six commentary books: 911 Conspiracy, The
Human Condition, The Media, Religion,
US Freedom, and The Work.
Donations of 250 euros will
qualify you as a Platinum Supporter.
Platinum
Supporters will receive the entire set of
six commentary books: 911 Conspiracy, The
Human Condition, The Media, Religion,
US Freedom, and The Work. In addition,
they will receive one other book of their choice free
from our bookstore.
We have more projects like our podcast in
the works - but we need your
help to make them a reality!
Thank
you in advance from the editors and the rest of the team
at Signs of the Times!
Earlier this month, the sixth season
of CBS' Big Brother premiered with the subtitle "Summer
of Secrets." The reality show, premised on the
hypervisibility of a tightly controlled domestic space,
must've realized that voyeuristic pleasure in total
surveillance was no longer satisfying. Consequently,
they distributed a variety of "zones of imperceptibility"
into their game: hidden rooms, clandestine pacts, and
covert operations/rules. Little did the producers of
the show know just how prescient they were in capturing
the zeitgeist of Summer 2005.
Take, for instance, the "Secret Group of Al-Qaeda
in Europe" (the "organization" that originally
claimed responsibility for the London bombings). The
name speaks volumes. Why call it the "secret"
group - is it opposed to the "public" group?
If it were more in tune with the times, it whould be
called the Super-Secret Group. The
moniker sounds like an unintended effect of Western
cultural imperialism; namely, too many comic book-inspired
movies. What next, "The Fantastic 4 Allah"?It all sounds like a continuation
of 2003's Legion of Doom-named Iraqi villains, "Chemical
Ali" and "Dr. Germ". It makes one wonder
if Stan Lee is now working for the Rendon Group!
Downing the Rabbit Hole
One of the biggest mysteries of the early summer was
eventually lost amid the shuffle of other major stories.
The Downing Street Memo (DSM) was remarkable not for
its content but for the fact that so little attention
was paid to it by mainstream media. Pundits spent more
time dismissing the memo than following up on it. Christopher
Hitchens, that neo-centrist perception manager, added
to his portfolio on dissent-bashing with a piece on
the DSM as "conspiracy theory."
It should come as no surprise that
mainstream journalism didn't set the agenda with the
DSM. Looking back on the past year of state/press relations,
how could corporate journalism do anything but? Oh,
Bush Administration, you want to consistently lie to
us humble journalists in order to start a war? Well
we just might have to write an indignant all-too-late
op-ed piece and then come back for some more abuse!
Tightly control press conferences with pre-selected
questions? Well, we appreciate any access, so I guess
that's the best we can get right now. Manipulate our
reporters with anonymous leaks and dirty tricks? Ok,
we forgive you, but you watch out next time, ya big
lug! Plant a fake journalist among our ranks? Naughty,
naughty, but thanks for giving us a diversionary homoerotic
titillation!
How many more mea culpas can we tolerate from these
lapdogs? When our own friends end up repeating self-destructive
behaviors (going in and out of addictive drug-hazes,
returning to a toxic and abusive partner) we will draw
a line. Why do we allow these guests, who are supposed
to be working in our name, to get away with more? We've
been extremely patient during their bouts of recovery.
It's about time we recognize the decades-long exodus
of journalistic consumers not as "apathy"
but as the self-affirming popular decision to stop sticking
around a user. No need here for a collective intervention:
professional journalism should be shown some tough love
and the door.
Embedded journalism, from this bitter-medicine perspective,
was corporate journalism's last gasp to purify itself.
This may seem counterintuitive at first, but I'm just
updating Jean Baudrillard's insights on Disney: embedded
journalism exists to make us think that the rest of
mainstream journalism is not embedded. So
let's not look to these dependent dinosaurs for our
hope or moral edification. We should begin with the
assumption that all mainstream journalism is embedded
journalism until it can prove otherwise. Without
this symbolic dependency, we can begin candidly assessing
journalism's relationship with secrecy.
The Plame Game
Calls for Karl Rove's firing for leaking Valerie Plame's
name have been met with Republican Party line retorts
that no "clear evidence" can be found. After
much evasion and prevarication by press secretary Scott
McLellan, Bush finally announced that the threshold
of Rove tolerance would be juridical: Rove would have
to have committed a crime in order to be axed. Drawing
a distinction between legal and ethical standards seemed
not to matter.
More than Rove's actual legal status, we can begin
asking questions about the nature of evidence in the
court of public opinion. What is the status of evidence
in a context of epistemological uncertainty? What can
count as proof, and what effects does proof have? The
Downing Street Memo shows that proof is itself contestable
- what is evidence of evidence?
Crime and evidence have taken
on new cultural functions. The US is rife with anti-lawyer
sentiments, from the rise in lawyer jokes to the smearing
of John Edwards' vice-presidential campaign with charges
that he was an "ambulance chaser."Interestingly, these sentiments
are primarily targeted at criminal defense attorneys
or civil prosecutors, while overzealous criminal prosecutors
rarely get scapegoated. The notable recent exception
here is Michael Jackson's legion of supporters, who
themselves became the target of derision and insult.
More than humor, rightwing pundits now have taken on
Defense Attorney status with the Bush administration
in the court of public opinion. The party line on Rove
was delivered with univocality, making the old Soviet
Politburo seem like a teeming marketplace of ideas.
As virtual defense lawyers, the rightwing apparatchiks
may know their client's guilt, but will act as apologists
at all costs. Any criticism of their client, then, must
be founded on prosecutorial evidential standards.
At the same time, other much
looser standards are applied to make the case against
official Terror/War enemies. Much ink has been spilled
on the flimsy, fixed, and fabricated evidence of the
need to invade Iraq. Insinuations, when strongly worded,
repeatedly uttered, and widely distributed stand in
as evidence of a "vague connection" or "some
kind of link". Take the scandalous story
of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the newly elected Iranian president.
Ahmadinejad was accused of being one of the hostage
takers during the 1979 siege of the US embassy in Iran.
Four days after his election, a handful of the former
hostages (seemingly spontaneously, but actually with
prompting from the oppositional "news" organization
Iran Focus) reported that he looked exactly like one
of their captors. Even while other former detainees
and forensic experts denied the link, the power of suggestion
was visually anchored through the side-by-side juxtaposition
of two photos for over 24 hours. Ultimately
disproven, the truth mattered little as the flood coverage
secured an image-link.The
effects are yet to be seen but we can speculate that
defining Iran as a terrorist state in need of regime
change just got easier.
An even looser evidential standard comes via the metaphorical
use of the classic incontrovertible identifying trace
of a criminal: the fingerprint.
Immediately after the 7/7 London bombing, we were told
that terror experts were looking for a "signature"
or fingerprints to identify the perpetrators. Perhaps
on a post-binge high after watching a CSI marathon,
these Global Security forensic artists came up with
some doozies. The flimsiest of
details became proof: the targeting of "transportation"
was seen as an Al-Qaeda fingerprint. Never mind that
Europe has known mass transit to be a target at least
since the 1980 bombing of the Bologna railway station
(purportedly by the Red Brigades, but subsequently shown
to have murkier origins).
Simultaneous bombings? "Must
be Al-Qaeda!" sayeth the security sleuths. It's
such an ingenious method that not only could no one
else have invented it, no one else could even mimic
it! Instead of being glued to forensic drama
television, these "trace" theorists would
be wise to review virtually every action thriller film
from the 1960s onwards, paying particular attention
to the phrase "Let's synchronize our watches."
Perhaps the silliest, yet potentially
sinister, bit of proof is occurring around the desperate
search for Al-Qaeda links between 7/7 and the "failed
copycat" bombings of 7/21.Plainclothes
information officers came up with this Eureka: the suspects
used the same brand of bookbag! Consumerist ideology
now influences terrorism investigations, with their
shared assumption that an individual's uniqueness is
expressed through consumer purchases. Are you a budding
bomber but tired of generic rucksacks that easily tear,
exposing your telltale wires? Want to stand out in the
"transit-terror" crowd (but blend in at the
same time)? No fear, Land's End is here! And if you
happen to own one of these for, say, school or travelling,
never mind the "random" searches likely to
come your way. Think of it as a value-added service
(quasi-celebrity attention) associated with wearing
the right label.
Public rhetorical tactics like these (loud insinuation,
forensic metaphors, "expert" dependence) are
effective because they are publicly irrefutable-they
disguise themselves as evidence. What's worse, the fingerprint
metaphor rarely transfers to domestic skullduggery.
False stories, disinformation campaigns, and hoaxes
are perpetrated in US media (e.g. the Dan Rather memo,
Jeff Gannon plant, Iranian president/hostage taker link).
Rarely will anyone in corporate journalism utter the
word "fingerprints" regarding Rove or any
other psy operative. When the praetorian media guard
proclaim "there are no smoking guns here,"
they command top billing. Ultimately,
it's not about producing more evidence, but being able
to determine the situations in which particular standards
of evidence can be applied.
Karl, Kevlar Konsultant
Perhaps the problem is with the overreliance on evidence
itself. Facts on their own have
no necessary effects on an audience. For instance, what
does evidence do for a people lacking will and memory?
The same facts, which in one context are testimony to
wrongdoing, can become evidence of invincibility. Without
the proper circumstances of popular will and/or organizational
channels, power absorbs these attacks as confirmation
of its own unassailability. Rove's mischief in the Plame
Game, rather than being a telltale sign of perfidy,
becomes proof of his ingenious craft of plausible deniability.
Newsweek reporter Dana Milbank exclaimed on MSNBC that
Rove was "too big to fail" (7/11). Other pundits
noted that, good or bad, Rove was 'Bush's Brain', insinuating
that it would be an impossible extrication. To counter
this impossibility, may we kindly recommend Anthony
Hopkins' surgical/culinary treat for Ray Liotta in the
closing scenes of Hannibal.
The scandals that surrounded
the Clinton White House (often coded through naturalizing
terms like "cloud," "climate," or
"fog") were in large part due to incessant
media attention. Not only is this natural haze not enveloping
the Bush White House, thanks to "liberal media"
it has morphed into armor. If Ronald Reagan was
the Teflon President, Rove is the Kevlar Konsultant.
Actually, Kevlar doesn't quite capture the process.
In a world of techno-organic fusion, we might better
look to a sci-fi image: an armor that absorbs and reintegrates
artillery directed at it, leaving a bio-synthetic "scar"
that hardens the material.
Rove's fate is a watershed symptom,
not the least for what it says about totalitarianism's
immune system. If he stays on, his power grows stronger
after a failed attack. Like the staged assassination
attempts of ancient regimes, it will further numb popular
will, at least when it comes to electoral politics.
If Rove is fired, he would likely stick around, withdrawing
even further into "double supersecret background"
where he could secrete influence from the protective
cover of shadows.
Reliance on evidence in the court of public opinion
is important, but excessive faith in it may also limit
our strategies. It narrows our understanding of the
current era to events in the public sphere. Guy Debord,
that premiere analyst of the spectacle and secrecy,
recommended that people "make use of what is hidden"
from them. If we don't expand
our analysis to what might be called the "secret
sphere," we will continue to grope in the dark
while believing everything is illuminated.
Jack Z. Bratich is assistant professor at Rutgers
University. He is currently writing a book on conspiracy
panics, as well as doing research on public secrecy
and popular occulture. His fingerprints are all over
this essay. He can be reached at: jbratich@rci.rutgers.edu
Comment: Here
we come to the crux of the matter: while no one wants
to be accused of being a "conspiracy theorist",
those in power possess and expand their power because
of conspiracy - and therefore secrecy - itself. As Laura
Knight-Jadczyk wrote in her article The
Mossad Happy Dance:
On
this website, we have published literally reams of material
documenting our research into so-called "conspiracy"
theories. The
Wave and Adventures
With Cassiopaea, while containing extracts of our
scientific channeling experiment - superluminal communication
- and discussions of some pretty far-out things, also
contain extensive extracts of what could be called vertical
and horizontal evidence of both hard facts and multiple
witness testimony.
The
bottom line of all this collecting of evidence - vertical
and lateral - and assembling it together in one place,
is that it's pretty clear that conspiracies rule our
world.
In
considering the subject of a "group" that is behind
the machinations of history, we must consider the term
"fifth column." "A clandestine subversive organization
working within a given country to further an invading
enemy's military and political aims" (American Heritage
Dictionary, 1976).
Nearly
all experts of "esoterica," after years and years of
searching and studying, eventually come to the idea
that there is some sort of major conspiracy that has
been running the show on planet earth for a very long
time. The problem is, there are any number of conclusions
as to "who is on first" in this trans-millennial, multi-national,
global ballgame. The thing that raises red flags, however,
is that just about ANY of the many conclusions can be
supported by REAMS of "evidence."
When
I first began my own research in a serious and dedicated
way, I was quite distressed by this factor. The only
thing that I did different from most researchers was
to take this confusion as a "given" fact that was INTENDED.
In other words, I decided to also look at the things
from a "meta-platform."
There
were two things that had been burned into my mind very
early on and I found both of them to be very useful
when applied to the present problem. The first was the
remark attributed to FDR: "Nothing
in politics happens by accident. If it happens, you
can bet it was planned." The other idea was a
remark made to me by a friend who had been trained in
Army Intelligence. He said that the
first rule of Intelligence is to just observe what IS
and understand that it is very likely the way it is
for a reason; someone has engineered it. Once you have
settled that firmly in your mind, you can then begin
to form hypotheses about who might benefit the most
from a given situation, and once such hypotheses
are formed, you can then begin to test them.
You may have to discard any number of ideas when you
find the flaw, but unless you begin with this process,
you will be duped over and over again.
In
considering the problem before us, we can see that there
are "tracks" throughout history of some pretty mysterious
goings on that do, indeed, suggest a "conspiracy." If
we take that as an observation of what IS, we immediately
face the second big question: is it a conspiracy of
"good guys" or "bad guys?" It is at this point that
all the various conspiracy experts begin to diverge
into their assorted rants about Zionists or Masons,
Great White Brotherhoods, Benevolent aliens and all
the many variations thereof.
But
what if, instead of asking that question and beginning
to argue, we just settle back and observe what is and
try to find the answer based on observation?
Richard
Dolan has written about "conspiracy" in
the following way:
[Conspiracy
Theory.] The very label serves
as an automatic dismissal, as though no one ever acts
in secret. Let us bring some perspective and
common sense to this issue.
The
United States comprises large organizations - corporations,
bureaucracies, "interest groups," and the
like - which are conspiratorial by nature. That is,
they are hierarchical, their important decisions
are made in secret by a few key decision-makers,
and they are not above lying about their activities.
Such is the nature of organizational behavior. "Conspiracy,"
in this key sense, is a way of life around the
globe.
Within
the world's military and intelligence apparatuses,
this tendency is magnified to the greatest extreme.
During the 1940s, [...] the military and its scientists
developed the world's most awesome weapons in complete
secrecy... [...]
Anyone
who has lived in a repressive society knows that official
manipulation of the truth occurs daily. But societies
have their many and their few. In all times and all
places, it is the few who rule, and the few who exert
dominant influence over what we may call official
culture. All elites take care to manipulate
public information to maintain existing structures
of power. It's an old game.
America
is nominally a republic and free society, but in reality
an empire and oligarchy, vaguely aware of its own
oppression, within and without. I have used the term
"national security state" to describe its
structures of power. It is a convenient way to express
the military and intelligence communities, as well
as the worlds that feed upon them, such as defense
contractors and other underground, nebulous entities.
Its fundamental traits are secrecy, wealth, independence,
power, and duplicity.
Nearly
everything of significance undertaken by America's
military and intelligence community in the past half-century
has occured in secrecy. The
undertaking to build an atomic weapon, better known
as the Manhattan Project, remains the great model
for all subsequent activities. For
more than two years, not a single member of Congress
even knew about it although its final cost exceeded
two billion dollars.
Think about that.
One of the greatest American "achievements"
was kept secret for over two years despite
the expenditure of more than two billion dollars
on the project - and yet many people find it hard to
believe that elements of the US government and intelligence
organizations couldn't have had a hand in 9/11 because
they wouldn't have been able to keep it a secret?! Keep
in mind that the Manhattan Project occurred over 50
years ago, so "they" have had decades to perfect
their secrecy techniques...
During
and after the Second World War, other important projects,
such as the development of biological weapons, the
importation of Nazi scientists, terminal mind-control
experiments, nationwide interception of mail and cable
transmissions of an unwitting populace, infiltration
of the media and universities, secret coups, secret
wars, and assassinations all took place far removed
not only from the American public, but from most members
of Congress and a few presidents. Indeed,
several of the most powerful intelligence agencies
were themselves established in secrecy, unknown by
the public or Congress for many years.
Since
the 1940s, the US Defense and Intelligence establishment
has had more money at its disposal than most nations.
In addition to official dollars, much of the money
is undocumented. From its beginning, the CIA was engaged
in a variety of off-the-record "business"
activities that generated large sums of cash. The
connections of the CIA with global organized crime
(and thus de facto with the international narcotics
trade) has been well established and documented for
many years. - Much of the original money to run the
American intelligence community came from very wealthy
and established American families, who have long maintained
an interest in funding national security operations
important to their interests.
In
theory, civilian oversight exists over the US national
security establishment. The president is the military
commander-in-chief. Congress has official oversight
over the CIA. The FBI must answer to the Justice Department.
In practice, little of this applies. One reason has
to do with secrecy. [...]
A
chilling example of such independence occurred during
the 1950s, when President Eisenhower effectively lost
control of the US nuclear arsenal. The situation deteriorated
so much that during his final two years in office,
Eisenhower asked repeatedly for an audience with the
head of Strategic Air Command to learn what America's
nuclear retaliatory plan was. What he finally learned
in 1960, his final year in office, horrified him:
half of the Northern Hemisphere would be obliterated.
If
a revered military hero such as Eisenhower could not
control America's nuclear arsenal, nor get a straight
answer from the Pentagon, how on earth could Presidents
Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, or Nixon regarding comparable
matters?
It seems that some
US presidents had access to more secrets than others.
While most US leaders seem to have been aware to varying
degrees of the secret activities of various agencies,
those agencies would certainly not give up all their
secrets. To do so would be to relinquish their power,
authority, and control. As such, it is highly likely
that Bush is just another puppet. Nevertheless, we often
point out Bush's lies since he is still responsible
for his words and actions even if they are directed
by someone else. The same applies to the people who
believe Bush's lies and go along with the "war
on terror".
Secrecy,
wealth and independence add up to power. Through
the years, the national security state has gained
access to the world's most sophisticated technology,
sealed off millions of acres of land from public access
or scrutiny, acquired unlimited snooping ability within
US borders and beyond, conducted overt or clandestine
actions against other nations, and prosecuted wars
without serious media scrutiny. Domestically, it maintains
influence over elected officials and communities hoping
for some of the billions of defense dollars. [including
scientists, universities, etc.]
Deception
is the key element of warfare, and when winning
is all that matters, the conventional morality held
by ordinary people becomes an impediment.
When taken together, the examples of official duplicity
form a nearly single totality. They include such choice
morsels as the phony war crisis of 1948, the fabricated
missile gap claimed by the air force during the 1950s,
the carefully managed events leading to the Gulf of
Tonkin resolution... [...]
The
secrecy stems from a pervasive and fundamental element
of life in our world, that those who are at the
top of the heap will always take whatever steps are
necessary to maintain the status quo.
[S]keptics
often ask, "Do you really think the government
could hide [anything] for so long?"
The
question itself reflects ignorance of the reality
that secrecy is a way of life in the National Security
State. Actually
though, the answer is yes, and no.
Yes,
in that cover-ups are standard operating procedure,
frequently unknown to the public for decades, becoming
public knowledge by a mere roll of the dice. But
also no, in that ... information has leaked out from
the very beginning. It is impossible to shut the lid
completely. The key lies in neutralizing and discrediting
unwelcomed information, sometimes through official
denial, other times through proxies in the media.
Indeed, information
about the truth of 9/11 has also leaked out since the
very beginning. It is this leaked information along
with a whole lot of digging and careful analysis that
has led to our work on this site. As for the neutralization
of unwelcome information, we note the response to our
P3nt4gon Str!ke flash was a series of articles in the likes
of the Washington
Post and Popular Science, coupled with a new
direction in the "9/11 Truth Movement"
that attempts to steer people away from the
idea that the Pentagon strike is the "weak point"
in the official version of events.
[E]vidence
[of conspiracy] derived from a grass roots level is
unlikely to survive its inevitable conflict with official
culture.
And acknowledgement about the reality of [conspiracies]
will only occur when the official culture deems it
worthwhile or necessary to make it. Don't hold your
breath.
This
is a widespread phenomenon affecting many people,
generating high levels of interest, taking place in
near-complete secrecy, for purposes unknown, by agencies
unknown, with access to incredible resources and technology.
A sobering thought and cause for reflection. [Richard
Dolan, UFOs
and The National Security State]
What
does it mean that "evidence of conspiracy ... is
unlikely to survive its inevitable conflict with official
culture?"
We
have documented on our Timeline
pages facts, data, observations, testimony, all
of which - taken together - provide the evidence that
we do, indeed, live in a controlled and manipulated
reality. This evidence is not hidden, as Dolan points
out, but it is neutralized and discredited both through
official denial AND through a long term Counter Intelligence
Program - COINTELPRO. We have discussed this at some
length here on the site, most particularly in the Adventures
Series.
What
does COINTELPRO accomplish? Well, quite simply, it is
institutionalized DENIAL.
Denial
is a complex "unconscious defence mechanism for
coping with guilt, anxiety and other disturbing emotions
aroused by reality." Denial can be both deliberate
and intentional, as well as completely subconscious.
An individual who is deliberately and intentionally
denying something is acting from an individual level
of lying, concealment and deception.
Denial
that is subconscious is generally organized and "institutional."
This implies propaganda, misinformation, whitewash,
manipulation, spin, disinformation, etc.
Believing anything that comes down the pike is not the
opposite of denial. "Acknowledgement" of the
probability of a high level of Truth about a given matter
is what should happen when people are actively aroused
by certain information. This information can
be 1) factual or forensic truth; that is to say, legal
or scientific information which is factual, accurate
and objective; it is obtained by impartial procedures;
2) personal and narrative truth including "witness
testimonies."
I should add here that skepticism
and solipsistic arguments - including epistemological
relativism - about the existence of objective truth,
are generally a social construction and might be considered
in the terms of the hypnotized man who has been programmed
to think that there "is no truth."
Denial
occurs for a variety of reasons. There are truths that
are "clearly known," but for many reasons
- personal or political, justifiable or unjustifiable
- are concealed, or it is agreed that they will not
be acknowledged "out loud." There
are "unpleasant truths" and there are truths
that make us tired because if we acknowledge them -
if we do more than give them a tacit nod - we may find
it necessary to make changes in our lives.
All
counter-claims about the denied reality are themselves
only maneuvers in endless truth-games. And
truth, as we know, is inseparable from power. Denial
of truth is, effectively, giving away your power.
Now,
think about the word "conspiracy" one more
time and allow me to emphasize the key point: From
a historical point of view, the ONLY reality is that
of conspiracy. Secrecy, wealth and independence
add up to power. ...Deception is the key element of
warfare, (the tool of power elites), and when winning
is all that matters, the conventional morality held
by ordinary people becomes an impediment. Secrecy stems
from a pervasive and fundamental element of life in
our world, that those who are at the top of the heap
will always take whatever steps are necessary to maintain
the status quo.
It seems that the
search for truth requires a reexamination of literally
everything - ourselves, our world, and even the so-called
"experts" on whom we rely for information
on this or that topic. The easiest way to discredit
someone in this reality is to declare that they are
a conspiracy theorist. The truth seems to be that the
entire reality in which find ourselves is, by its very
nature, a conspiracy. Consider our governments, the
so-called War on Terror, social and military structures,
and so on - all these elements of our world involve
some degree of hierarchy. But hierarchy implies control.
Everyone has a boss; everyone has to answer to some
other person or higher power.
Hierarchy implies control, and control implies
secrecy. If everyone possessed all knowledge,
it would be impossible for a government to lie to its
citizens. Perhaps there would not even be a need for
rulers. If we observe that conspiracy is defined as,
"a secret agreement between two or more people
to perform an unlawful act", then it becomes apparent
that hierarchy, control, and secrecy necessarily involve
conspiracy. One might argue that a government needs
to keep secrets from the people to keep those people
safe from the "bad guys". While this may sound
good, it doesn't make much sense.
We can observe that those groups that restrict the
dispersal of knowledge to others must certainly have
something to hide. It would be useless for the powers
that be to expend copious amounts of energy to hide
knowledge in general, as well as the reasons for their
actions, unless the puppet masters themselves have a
dark secret or two. Obviously, if the powers that run
this world have something to hide, it is most likely
not something that would make the average person too
happy. It does not take a huge leap to suspect that
our leaders are committing "unlawful acts"
in our name. The suspicion is confirmed by the available
facts regarding the actions of Bush, Blair, and their
administrations.
And
maintaining the "status quo" in science HAS
to be one of the main objectives of the Power Elite
since science is, quite literally, the source of their
power in the modern day.
And
how do they do that? By "official
culture." And official culture, understood
this way, from the perspective of elite groups wishing
to maintain the status quo of their power, means only
one thing: COINTELPRO.
The
single biggest argument against historical conspiracy
is the relatively short lifespan of human beings, combined
with the observable psychological make-up of man.
A corollary objection is the fact that, very often,
the domino effect of events that "change history" are
of such a nature that it would be impossible for ordinary
human beings to engineer them. In other words, Time
and Space are barriers to the idea of human beings being
engaged in a global conspiracy.
Well,
of course the diligent researcher has by now tried every
other way to make the puzzle pieces fit ending in repeated
failures to account for everything, including the numerous
views that oppose and contradict one another. So, when
we stop for a moment to think about this initial, observable
fact of the barrier of Time and Space, we then think
of an idea: what if the conspirators are NOT constrained
by Time or Space? Our initial reaction to this thought
is to dismiss it out of hand. But as we pursue our researches,
as we come across repeated "anomalies" and "glitches"
and "tracks" throughout space and time - what we call
"history" - we begin to get the uneasy feeling that
we ought to take another look at this idea.
[Ark's
note: A.T. Fomenko, Russian mathematician, member
of the Russian Academy of Science, author of a dozen
of monographs on differential geometry, applied the
methods of exact sciences to the available historical
data to conlude: history
has been falsified. Of course Fomenko's own proposed
version of the "corrected history" needs
further work and discussion with other independent
researchers, but Fomenko's analysis of the "anomalies"
and "glitches" constitutes a good and solid
piece of work.]
As
it happens, once the possibility of manipulation of
space and time has been added to our hypothesis, things
finally begin to "fall into place." Once
we begin to look at history from this trans-millennial,
trans-spatial perspective, the character of the "conspiracy"
begins to emerge, and only the most gullible - or negative
intentioned - individual could hold onto, or continue
to promote, any idea that this conspiracy is benevolent.
In fact, it becomes abundantly clear that many, if not
most, religions and systems of philosophy, have been
created and introduced by the conspirators in order
to conceal the conspiracy itself. And when you are considering
beings with mastery over space and time, thousands of
years needed to develop any given aspect of the overall
plan is negligible. And so, in consideration of such
beings, we come again to the idea of hyperdimensional
space. This seems to be one of the main objectives of
COINTELPRO - to keep the lid on this one.
[Ark'
note: In my own papers,
and in the monograph
written in collaboration with my French colleague,
we were using the term "multidimensional universe"
rather than "hyperdimensional reality. Of course
the "existence" and even "reality"
of other dimensions does not imply by itself that
some hyperdimensional intelligence is operating. Such
a hypothesis, however, should also be taken into account
if there are no facts and data that would contradict
it and much evidence that would tend to support it.]
Those
of you who have read the Adventures
Series and The
Secret History of the World know how we have
documented the evidence that all points to a concerted
effort to distract attention away from the very idea
of the reality of hyperdimensional space and its possible
denizens by the creation of myths and disinformation
- COINTELPRO. And here we do
not mean the specific FBI program, but the concept of
the program, and the likelihood that this has been the
mode of controlling human beings for possibly millennia.
In fact, I like to call it "Cosmic COINTELPRO"
to suggest that it is almost a mechanical system that
operates based on the psychological nature of human
beings, most of whom LIKE to live in denial. After all,
"if ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise."
[...]
For
more information, don't miss Laura's book The
Secret History of the World - And How to Get Out Alive.
Secret History delves into this very topic
much more deeply and presents a huge amount of startling
evidence to back it all up.
If
you have any questions to ask Laura for our next podcast,
please e-mail
them to us.
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
FOX News
Monday, August 01, 2005
WASHINGTON - The Department of
Defense has developed a new strategy in counterterrorism
that would increase military activities on American
soil, particularly in the area of intelligence gathering.
The move is sparking concern among civil liberties
advocates and those who fear an encroaching military
role in domestic law enforcement.
In an argument that eerily foreshadowed the July London
terror attacks, the Pentagon
in late June announced its "Strategy for Homeland
Defense and Support," which would expand its reach
domestically to prevent "enemy attacks aimed at
Americans here at home."
The strategy, approved by Deputy Defense Secretary
Gordon England on June 24, argues that the government
needs a multi-layered, preventive approach to national
defense in order to combat an unconventional enemy that
will attack from anywhere, anytime and by any conceivable
means.
"Transnational terrorist groups view the world
as an integrated, global battlespace in which to exploit
perceived U.S vulnerabilities, wherever they may be,"
reads the 40-page document that outlines the new plans.
"Terrorists seek to attack the United States and
its centers of gravity at home and abroad and will use
asymmetric means to achieve their ends, such as simultaneous
mass casualty attacks," it said.
Critics say the fears raised by the Pentagon are being
used as a justification for the military to conduct
wider, more intrusive surveillance on American citizens.
"Do we want, as a free people,
with the notion of privacy enshrined in the Constitution
and based on the very clear limits and defined role
of government, to be in a society where not just the
police, but the military are on the street corners gathering
intelligence on citizens, sharing that data, manipulating
that data?" asked former Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga.,
a constitutional law expert and civil libertarian.
"This document provides a blueprint
for doing just that."
Barr said the new strategy is a back-door
means of following through with a 2002 plan to create
a massive, centralized information database using public
and private records of individuals, called "Total
Information Awareness." Congress killed TIA in
2003 because of civil liberties and privacy concerns.
Critics say they believe much of TIA lives on in some
form through smaller, undisclosed military contracts.
This latest plan, they say, is one way of jump-starting
TIA's initial goals.
"This is TIA back with a vengeance,"
said Barr. "What they have come up with here is
a much vaguer and much broader concept that sounds more
innocuous. [The Pentagon] is getting much smarter in
how to sell these things."
The Defense Department report says its increased surveillance
capabilities at home will adhere to constitutional and
privacy protections, even though it emphasizes enhancing
current "data mining" capabilities.
"Specifically, the department will… develop
automated tools to improve data fusion, analysis, and
management, to track systematically large amounts of
data and to detect, fuse and analyze aberrant patterns
of activity, consistent with U.S. privacy protections,"
the report reads.
It will also develop "a cadre of specialized terrorism
intelligence analysts within the defense intelligence
community and deploy a number of these analysts to interagency
centers for homeland defense and counter-terrorism analysis
and operations," states the report.
Some national security experts agree
that emboldened surveillance on domestic soil is necessary
in the global War on Terror, and that such intelligence
could prevent the kind of attacks perpetuated by homegrown
terrorists in England on July 7 and 21.
"The Defense Department has always done intelligence
operations in the United States. They have the legal
right to do that. There is nothing new here," James
Carafano, a homeland security analyst with The Heritage
Foundation, told FOXNews.com. "There are no new
threats to privacy or constitutionality. I just think
it's about doing [intelligence] more efficiently and
effectively."
But John Pike, founder of GlobalSecurity.org , a clearinghouse
of available intelligence and national security information,
says it's not so clear how much data the Pentagon will
be collecting on citizens and whether it will be retaining,
sharing and building individual dossiers. So far, the
lack of detail leaves as many question as answers, he
said.
"The bad news is there is certainly
the possibility of a return to the sort of domestic
surveillance that we saw in the 1950s and 1960s,"
Pike said.
Pentagon officials declined to comment on the variety
of data it would gather and share, or how long it would
retain files on individuals under the new homeland defense
plan.
The Washington Post reported
recently that among the databases being built by the
Pentagon is a military recruitment list of individual
high school and college students culled from commercial
data brokers and other sources. The military is planning
to share the database with federal and state law enforcement
agencies if necessary, the Post reports.
A Defense Department spokesman said the military's
domestic role in homeland security will remain a supportive
one, and the Pentagon will only provide resources when
local, state and federal resources and capabilities
"have been exceeded or do not exist."
"We have expanded activities in order to better
execute support missions, but we are extremely sensitive
to the historically restricted, limited role of the
Defense Department," the spokesman told FOXNews.com
in an e-mailed response to questions.
The Pentagon's new strategy appears to dovetail with
a recent report by The New York Times, that said the
upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review, which outlines
the future vision of the military and is due to Congress
in February, will reflect a new approach in which the
Defense Department will prepare to fight in one war
theater at a time while putting the bulk of its resources
into homeland defense.
The strategy approved by military officials in June
also increases joint training exercises with first responders
and other agencies as well as the creation of National
Guard-staffed teams in case of a catastrophic attack.
The president would have to
authorize the actual use of troops on military soil
in order to adhere to the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act,
which prohibits military involvement in domestic law
enforcement. Pentagon officials
say the new strategy won't require that authorization.
But the strategy does includes
more collaboration with law enforcement in "support"
roles on all levels of counter-terrorism efforts
as well as the monitoring of terrorist threats along
the borders, in the air and on water.
"If they find information in the course of their
business that might help other agencies, then they can
share it. If other agencies in their own intelligence
gathering find information that can help the Defense
Department, they can share that," said Carafano.
"I really don't see any legal or constitutional
issues here."
Comment: The
alleged threat of "homegrown terrorists" like
in England, domestic surveillance by the military, the
irrelevancy of the Posse Comitatus Act, the subjugation
of traditional law enforcement officers into a supporting
role, and the recent renewal of most of the Patriot
Act for another ten years - you do the math.
WHENEVER you surf the
web, send emails or download music, an unseen force
is at work in the background, making sure you connect
to the sites, inboxes and databases you want. The name
of this brooding presence? The US government.
Some 35 years after the US military
invented the internet, the US Department of Commerce
retains overall control of the master computers that
direct traffic to and from every web and email address
on the planet.
But a group convened by the UN last week to thrash
out the future of the net is calling for an end to US
domination of the net, proposing that instead a multinational
forum of governments, companies and civilian organisations
is created to run it.
The UN's Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG)
says US control hinders many developments that might
improve it. These range from efforts to give the developing
world more affordable net access to coming up with globally
agreed and enforceable measures to boost net privacy
and fight cybercrime.
US control also means that any changes to the way the
net works, including the addition of new domain names
such as .mobi for cellphone-accessed sites, have to
be agreed by the US, whatever experts in the rest of
the world think. The flipside is that the US could make
changes without the agreement of the rest of the world.
In a report issued in Geneva in Switzerland on 14 July,
the WGIG seeks to overcome US hegemony. "The internet
should be run multilaterally, transparently and democratically.
And it must involve all stakeholders," says Markus
Kummer, a Swiss diplomat who is executive coordinator
of the WGIG.[...]
Today the internet has 13 vast computers dotted around
the world that translate text-based email and web addresses
into numerical internet protocol (IP) node addresses
that computers understand. In effect a massive look-up
table, the 13 computers are collectively known as the
Domain Name System (DNS). But the DNS master computer,
called the master root server, is based in the US and
is ultimately controlled by the Department of Commerce.
Because the data it contains is propagated to all the
other DNS servers around the world, access to the master
root server file is a political hot potato.
Currently, only the US can make
changes to that master file. And that has some WGIG
members very worried indeed. "It's about who has
ultimate authority," says Kummer. "In theory,
the US could decide to delete a country from the master
root server. Some people expect this to happen one day...
[...]
The WGIG put forward a number of options for change,
all of which include enhancing the roles of ICANN and
the GAC or the formation of a new all-embracing internet
policy body that would be in charge of ICANN instead
of the US. The WGIG's proposals will now go to the vote
at the International Telecommunication Union's World
Summit on the Information Society in Tunisia this November.
Whatever the WGIG decides, it will have a tough time
changing the US government's opinion. Only last month,
US assistant secretary of commerce Michael Gallagher
reasserted America's claim to the heart of the net.
"The US is committed to taking no action that would
have the potential to adversely impact the effective
and efficient operation of the DNS and will therefore
maintain its historic role in authorising changes or
modifications to the authoritative root zone file."
WASHINGTON - The US military has
kept two ethnic Uighur Muslims from a troubled Chinese
region at its Guantanamo 'war on terror' detention camp
even though they have been found not to be "enemy
combatants," a rights group said.
Lawyers for Abu Bakker Qassim and Adel Abdu al-Hakim
went before a federal court in Washington on Monday
to seek the release of the pair.
According to the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR),
a New York-based legal activist group, a
Guantanamo review panel ruled in March that Qassim and
Hakim should not be considered "enemy combatants"
who would face military tribunals.
But the CCR said the men's lawyers
were never told about the finding. "It was not
until Friday, July 30, 2005 that the government disclosed
that the men had been cleared on March 26 this year,"
said a statement by the group which has been working
on the case of the Uighurs.
"Since (March 26) the government has failed to
notify their attorneys, families or anyone else of the
men's innocence, instead allowing them to remain in
detention for an additional six months."
The Uighurs are among a dozen detainees who have been
declared no longer to be enemy combatants but who continue
to be held at Guantanamo while arrangements are being
made for their release, a US defense official said.
"The United States has made it
clear that it does not expel, return or extradite individuals
to other countries where it believes that it is 'more
likely than not' that they will be tortured or subject
to persecution," said Lieutenant Commander Alvin
Plexico, a Pentagon spokesman.
"This is US policy as well as US law," he
said.
The United States faces a delicate problem over what
to do with Uighurs held at Guantanamo in Cuba.
It has said it wants to resettle a handful of them
in third countries, amid concern they will be persecuted
if returned to China. China has called for them to be
sent back.
The State Department said in October last year that
some Uighur prisoners "have been determined not
to pose a threat any longer to the United States or
its allies" and that the Pentagon had approved
their release.
China has recently renewed a campaign against Muslim
separatists in Xinjiang autonomous region ahead of the
50th anniversary of its annexation.
Turkic-speaking Uighur separatists have been fighting
to re-establish an independent state of East Turkestan
in Xinjiang. They accuse the ruling Chinese of political,
religious and cultural repression.
Comment: It
is interesting how US leaders use the threat of political
persecution as a reason to both prevent returning the
prisoners to their own countries and to mask the fact
that the prisoners were detained illegally by the US
itself. As such, Pentagon spokesman Plexico's statements
couldn't possibly be more hypocritical.
08/01/05 "ABC"
-- -- Leaked emails from two former
prosecutors claim the military commissions set up to try
detainees at Guantanamo Bay are rigged, fraudulent, and
thin on evidence against the accused.
Two emails, which have been obtained by the ABC, were
sent to supervisors in the Office of Military Commissions
in March of last year - three months before Australian
detainee David Hicks was charged and five months before
his trial began.
The first email is from prosecutor Major Robert Preston
to his supervisor.
Maj Preston writes that the process is
perpetrating a fraud on the American people, and that
the cases being pursued are marginal.
"I consider the insistence on pressing
ahead with cases that would be marginal even if properly
prepared to be a severe threat to the reputation of the
military justice system and even a fraud on the American
people," Maj Preston wrote.
"Surely they don't expect that this
fairly half-arsed effort is all that we have been able
to put together after all this time."
Maj Preston says he cannot continue to work on a process
he considers morally, ethically and professionally intolerable.
"I lie awake worrying about this every night,"
he wrote.
"I find it almost impossible to focus on my part
of mission.
"After all, writing a motion saying
that the process will be full and fair when you don't
really believe it is kind of hard, particularly when you
want to call yourself an officer and lawyer."
Maj Preston was transferred out of the Office of Military
Commissions less than a month later.
Rigged?
The second email is written by another prosecutor, Captain
John Carr, who also ended up leaving the department.
Capt Carr says the commissions appear to be rigged.
"When I volunteered to assist with
this process and was assigned to this office, I expected
there would at least be a minimal effort to establish
a fair process and diligently prepare cases against significant
accused," he wrote.
"Instead, I find a half-hearted
and disorganised effort by a skeleton group of relatively
inexperienced attorneys to prosecute fairly low-level
accused in a process that appears to be rigged."
Capt Carr says that the prosecutors have been told by
the chief prosecutor that the panel sitting in judgment
on the cases would be handpicked to ensure convictions.
"You have repeatedly said to the office that the
military panel will be handpicked and will not acquit
these detainees and that we only needed to worry about
building a record for the review panel," he said.
Significant find
David Hicks' defence lawyer, Major Michael Mori, says
the documents are "highly significant".
"For the first time, we're seeing that concerns
about the fairness of the military commissions extend
to the heart of the process," Maj Mori said.
David Hicks's father, Terry, says the latest revelations
confirm what he has suspected all along.
"These commissions weren't set
up to release people," he said.
"These commissions were set up
to make sure they were prosecuted and get the time that
they give them, and the other thing we've said all along,
that we believe that this system has been rigged as they
call it."
But the Pentagon's Brigadier General Thomas Hemingway,
who is a legal advisor to the military commissions, says
an investigation has found the comments are based on miscommunication,
misunderstanding and personality conflicts.
He says changes have been made in the prosecutors' office.
"I think what we did is work on some restructuring
in the office, there was some changes in the way cases
were processed, but we found no evidence of any criminal
misconduct, we found no evidence of any ethical violations,"
he said. [...]
Comment:
The same people who have absolved any high ranking military
or administration official of wrong-doing in the Abu Ghraib
torture cases shouldn't be depended upon to find fault
in the American military's new form of "justice"
for the people incarcerated at Gitmo.
The situation is no doubt much worse that we can imagine.
Prisoners held by the US are sometimes handed over to
third countries whose interrogation techniques are even
further from the scrutiny of the public than the situation
at Gitmo or other US prisons and detention camps. These
prisoners are then subjected to torture by goons who have
been trained by and who are working for, even if indirectly,
the neocon clique, as witness by the following story....
Alleged bomb plotter claims two and a half years of interrogation
under US and UK supervision in 'ghost prisons' abroad
Stephen Grey and Ian Cobain
Tuesday August 2, 2005
The Guardian
A
former London schoolboy accused of being a dedicated al-Qaida
terrorist has given the first full account of the interrogation
and alleged torture endured by so-called ghost detainees
held at secret prisons around the world.
For two and a half years US authorities
moved Benyam Mohammed around a series of prisons in Pakistan,
Morocco and Afghanistan, before he was sent to Guantánamo
Bay in September last year.
Mohammed, 26, who grew up in Notting Hill in west London,
is alleged to be a key figure in terrorist plots intended
to cause far greater loss of life than the suicide bombers
of 7/7. One allegation, which he denies, is of planning
to detonate a "dirty bomb" in a US city; another
is that he and an accomplice planned to collapse a number
of apartment blocks by renting ground-floor flats to seal,
fill with gas from cooking appliances, and blow up with
timed detonators.
In an statement given to his newly appointed
lawyer, Mohammed has given an account of how he was tortured
for more than two years after being questioned by US and
British officials who he believes were from the FBI and
MI6. As well as being beaten and subjected to loud music
for long periods, he claims his genitals were sliced with
scalpels.
He alleges that in Morocco he was shown photos of people
he knew from a west London mosque, and was asked about
information he was told was supplied by MI5. One interrogator,
he says, was a woman who said she was Canadian.
Drawing on his notes, Mohammed's lawyer has compiled
a 28-page diary of his torture. This has been declassified
by the Pentagon, and extracts are published in the Guardian
today.
Recruits to some groups connected to al-Qaida are thought
to be instructed to make allegations of torture after
capture, and most of Mohammed's claims cannot be independently
verified. But his description of
a prison near Rabat closely resembles the Temara torture
centre identified in a report by the US-based Human Rights
Watch last October.
Furthermore, this newspaper has obtained
flight records showing executive jets operated by the
CIA flew in and out of Morocco on July 22 2002 and January
22 2004, the dates he says he was taken to and from the
country.
If true, his account adds weight to concerns that the
US authorities are torturing by proxy. It also highlights
the dilemma of British authorities when they seek information
from detainees overseas who they know, or suspect, are
tortured.
The lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith, says: "This is
outsourcing of torture, plain and simple. America knows
torture is wrong but gets others to do its unconscionable
dirty work.
"It's clear from the evidence that UK officials
knew about this rendition to Morocco before it happened.
Our government's responsibility must be to actively prevent
the torture of our residents."
Mohammed was born in Ethiopia and came to the UK aged
15 when his father sought asylum. After obtaining five
GCSEs and an engineering diploma at the City of Westminster
College in Paddington, he decided to stay in Britain when
his father returned, and was given indefinite leave to
remain. In his late teens he rediscovered Islam, prayed
regularly at al-Manaar mosque in Notting Hill, and was
a volunteer at its cultural centre. "He is remembered
here as a very nice, quiet person, who never caused any
trouble," says Abdulkarim Khalil, its director.
He enjoyed football, and was thought good enough for
a semi-professional career. "He was a quiet kid,
he seemed deep thinking, although that might have been
because his language skills weren't great," says
Tyrone Forbes, his trainer.
In June 2001 Mohammed left his bedsit off Golborne Road,
Notting Hill, and travelled to Afghanistan, via Pakistan.
He maintains he wanted to see whether it was "a good
Islamic country or not". It appears likely that he
spent time in a paramilitary training camp.
He returned to Pakistan sometime after 9/11, and remained
at liberty until April 2002 - during which time, US authorities
believe, he became involved in the dirty bomb and gas
blast plots. His alleged accomplice,
a Chicago-born convert to Islam, Jose Padilla, is detained
in the US. Mohammed says interrogators repeatedly demanded
he give evidence against him.
Mohammed was arrested in Karachi while
trying to fly to Zurich - and thus entered a "ghost
prison system" in which an unknown number of detainees
are held at unregistered detention centres, and whose
imprisonment is not admitted to the International Committee
of the Red Cross.
His brother and sisters, who live in the US, say the
FBI told them of his arrest in summer 2002, but they were
unable to find out anything else until last February.
In recent days the Bush administration
is reported to have lobbied to block legislation, supported
by some Republican senators, to prohibit the military
engaging in "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment",
and hiding prisoners from the Red Cross.
Mohammed alleges he was held at two prisons in Pakistan
over three months, hung from leather straps, beaten, and
threatened with a firearm by Pakistanis. In repeated questioning
by men he believes were FBI agents, he was told he was
to go to an Arab country because "the Pakistanis
can't do exactly what we want them to".
The torture stopped after a visit by two bearded Britons;
he believes they were MI6 officers. He says they told
him he was to be tortured by Arabs. At one point, he says,
they gave him a cup of tea and told him to take plenty
of sugar because "where you're going you need a lot
of sugar".
He says he was flown on what he believes was a US aircraft
to Morocco, while shackled, blindfolded and wearing earphones.
It was, he says, in a jail near Rabat that his real ordeal
began. After a fortnight of questioning and intimidation,
his captors tortured him with beatings and noise, on and
off, for 18 months. He says his torturers used scalpels
to make shallow, inch-long incisions on his chest and
genitals.
Throughout, he was accused of being a senior al-Qaida
terrorist and accomplice of Padilla. He denies these allegations,
though he says that while tortured he would say whatever
he thought his captors wanted. He signed a statement about
the dirty bomb plot. At one point, he says, interrogators
told him his GCSE grades, and asked about named staff
at the housing association that owns his bedsit and about
a man who taught him kickboxing in Notting Hill.
After 18 months, he says, he was flown to Afghanistan,
escorted by masked US soldiers who were visibly shocked
by his condition and took photos of his wounds.
During five months in a darkened cell in Kabul, he says
he was kept chained, subjected to loud music, and questioned
by Americans. Only after he was moved to Bagram air base
was he shown to the Red Cross. Four months later he was
flown to Guantánamo.
Mr Stafford Smith was first allowed to see him two months
ago. He said there were marks of his injuries, and he
is pressing the US to release the photos taken in Morocco
and Afghanistan.
Asked about the allegations, the Foreign Office said
the UK "unreservedly condemns the use of torture".
After consulting with the Home Office, MI5, and MI6, a
spokesman said: "The British
government, including the security and intelligence services,
never uses torture for any purpose. Nor would HMG instigate
or condone the use of torture by third parties.
"Specific instructions are issued to all personnel
of the UK security and intelligence services who are deployed
to interview detainees, which include guidance on what
to do if they considered that treatment in any way inappropriate."
The FBI, the US justice department, the Moroccan interior
ministry and the Moroccan embassy in London did not return
calls. The CIA declined to comment.
Comment:
Can you believe the denials of the British and the Americans
in spite of the mounting evidence from former "detainees"?
The following article has extracts from Benyam Mohammed's
diaries.
Benyam
Mohammed travelled from London to Afghanistan in July
2001, but after September 11 he fled to Pakistan. He was
arrested at Karachi airport on April 10 2002, and describes
being flown by a US government plane to a prison in Morocco.
These are extracts from his diary.
They cut off my clothes with some kind of doctor's scalpel.
I was naked. I tried to put on a brave face. But maybe
I was going to be raped. Maybe they'd electrocute me.
Maybe castrate me.
They took the scalpel to my right chest. It was only
a small cut. Maybe an inch. At first I just screamed ...
I was just shocked, I wasn't expecting ... Then they cut
my left chest. This time I didn't want to scream because
I knew it was coming.
One of them took my penis in his hand
and began to make cuts. He did it once, and they stood
still for maybe a minute, watching my reaction. I was
in agony. They must have done this 20 to 30 times, in
maybe two hours. There was blood all over. "I told
you I was going to teach you who's the man," [one]
eventually said.
They cut all over my private parts.
One of them said it would be better just to cut it off,
as I would only breed terrorists. I asked for a doctor.
Doctor No 1 carried a briefcase. "You're all right,
aren't you? But I'm going to say a prayer for you."
Doctor No 2 gave me an Alka-Seltzer for the pain. I told
him about my penis. "I need to see it. How did this
happen?" I told him. He looked like it was just another
patient. "Put this cream on it two times a day. Morning
and night." He gave me some kind of antibiotic.
I was in Morocco for 18 months. Once they began this,
they would do it to me about once a month. One time I
asked a guard: "What's the point of this? I've got
nothing I can say to them. I've told them everything I
possibly could."
"As far as I know, it's just to
degrade you. So when you leave here, you'll have these
scars and you'll never forget. So you'll always fear doing
anything but what the US wants."
Later, when a US airplane picked me up the following
January, a female MP took pictures. She was one of the
few Americans who ever showed me any sympathy. When she
saw the injuries I had she gasped. They treated me and
took more photos when I was in Kabul. Someone told me
this was "to show Washington it's healing".
But in Morocco, there were even worse things. Too horrible
to remember, let alone talk about. About once a week or
even once every two weeks I would be taken for interrogation,
where they would tell me what to say. They said if you
say this story as we read it, you will just go to court
as a witness and all this torture will stop. I eventually
repeated what was read out to me.
When I got to Morocco they said some big people in al-Qaida
were talking about me. They talked about Jose Padilla
and they said I was going to testify against him and big
people. They named Khalid Sheikh Mohamed, Abu Zubaidah
and Ibn Sheikh al-Libi [all senior al-Qaida leaders who
are now in US custody]. It was hard to pin down the exact
story because what they wanted changed from Morocco to
when later I was in the Dark Prison [a detention centre
in Kabul with windowless cells and American staff], to
Bagram and again in Guantánamo Bay.
They told me that I must plead guilty.
I'd have to say I was an al-Qaida operations man, an ideas
man. I kept insisting that I had only been in Afghanistan
a short while. "We don't care," was all they'd
say.
I was also questioned about my links with Britain. The
interrogator told me: "We have photos of people given
to us by MI5. Do you know these?" I realised that
the British were sending questions to the Moroccans. I
was at first surprised that the Brits were siding with
the Americans.
On August 6, I thought I was going to be transferred
out of there [the prison]. They came in and cuffed my
hands behind my back.
But then three men came in with black masks. It seemed
to go on for hours. I was in so much pain I'd fall to
my knees. They'd pull me back up and hit me again. They'd
kick me in my thighs as I got up. I vomited within the
first few punches. I really didn't speak at all though.
I didn't have the energy or will to say anything. I just
wanted for it to end. After that, there was to be no more
first-class treatment. No bathroom. No food for a while.
During September-October 2002, I was taken in a car to
another place. The room was bigger, it had its own toilet,
and a window which was opaque.
They gave me a toothbrush and Colgate toothpaste. I was
allowed to recover from the scalpel for about two weeks,
and the guards said nothing about it.
Then they cuffed me and put earphones on my head. They
played hip-hop and rock music, very loud. I remember they
played Meat Loaf and Aerosmith over and over. A couple
of days later they did the same thing. Same music.
For 18 months, there was not one night when I could sleep
well. Sometimes I would go 48 hours without sleep. At
night, they would bang the metal doors, bang the flap
on the door, or just come right in.
They continued with two or three interrogations a month.
They weren't really interrogations, more like training
me what to say. The interrogator told me what was going
on. "We're going to change your brain," he said.
I suffered the razor treatment about once a month for
the remaining time I was in Morocco, even after I'd agreed
to confess to whatever they wanted to hear. It became
like a routine. They'd come in, tie me up, spend maybe
an hour doing it. They never spoke to me. Then they'd
tip some kind of liquid on me - the burning was like grasping
a hot coal. The cutting, that was one kind of pain. The
burning, that was another.
In all the 18 months I was there, I never went outside.
I never saw the sun, not even once. I never saw any human
being except the guards and my tormentors, unless you
count the pictures they showed me.
Comment:
Welcome to the true face of American freedom. Is it any
wonder the American government is hated by more and more
people around the world?
By Jo Twist
BBC News science and technology reporter
Tuesday, 2 August, 2005, 11:41 GMT 12:41 UK
Unmanned surveillance vehicles
are increasingly omnipresent in a world which relies
on knowing what people and places are doing.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) patrol innocuous-looking
skies and silently report back streams of strategically-important
data, video, and images from locations around the world.
They are the ultimate Earth watchers.
It is believed that up to 800 remotely piloted aircraft
are in operation in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But observing Earth from afar is not just about battlefields
and spy missions, the type usually done by expensive
and heavy craft like the US's Predator drone. UAVs are
increasingly being recruited to carry out more humanitarian
missions, from the stratosphere. [...]
"A UAV will be able to keep up over a particular
part of the world for months at a time, whereas satellites
have to continue travelling in orbit."
Precise, high quality images and data can be sent back
in under 30 minutes to a mobile ground station which
can then disseminate images online. [...]
Comment: Strangely
enough, the article fails to mention that UAV's are
not being used primarily to to watch over the environment,
but rather to watch over all of us as a result of the
war on terror. The author only mentions in passing that
upwards of 800 UAV's are in operation over Iraq and
Afghanistan.
U.S. Intelligence Review Contrasts With Administration
Statements
By Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; A01
A major U.S. intelligence review
has projected that Iran is about a decade away from
manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon,
roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years,
according to government sources with firsthand knowledge
of the new analysis.
The carefully hedged assessments,
which represent consensus among U.S. intelligence agencies,
contrast with forceful public statements by the White
House.Administration officials
have asserted, but have not offered proof, that Tehran
is moving determinedly toward a nuclear arsenal.
The new estimate could provide more time for diplomacy
with Iran over its nuclear ambitions. President Bush
has said that he wants the crisis resolved diplomatically
but that "all options are on the table."
The new National Intelligence Estimate includes what
the intelligence community views as credible indicators
that Iran's military is conducting clandestine work.
But the sources said there is
no information linking those projects directly to a
nuclear weapons program. What is clear is that
Iran, mostly through its energy program, is acquiring
and mastering technologies that could be diverted to
bombmaking.
The estimate expresses uncertainty about whether Iran's
ruling clerics have made a decision to build a nuclear
arsenal, three U.S. sources said. Still, a senior intelligence
official familiar with the findings said that "it
is the judgment of the intelligence community that,
left to its own devices, Iran is determined to build
nuclear weapons."
At no time in the past three years
has the White House attributed its assertions about
Iran to U.S. intelligence, as it did about Iraq in the
run-up to the March 2003 invasion. Instead, it has pointed
to years of Iranian concealment and questioned why a
country with as much oil as Iran would require a large-scale
nuclear energy program.
The NIE addresses those assertions and offers alternative
views supporting and challenging the assumptions they
are based on. Those familiar with the new judgments,
which have not been previously detailed, would discuss
only limited elements of the estimate and only on the
condition of anonymity, because the report is classified,
as is some of the evidence on which it is based.
Top policymakers are scrutinizing the review, several
administration officials said, as the White House formulates
the next steps of an Iran policy long riven by infighting
and competing strategies. For three years, the administration
has tried, with limited success, to increase pressure
on Iran by focusing attention on its nuclear program.
Those efforts have been driven as much by international
diplomacy as by the intelligence. [...]
Last month, U.S. officials shared some data on the
missile program with U.N. nuclear inspectors, based
on drawings obtained last November. The documents include
design modifications for Iran's Shahab-3 missile to
make the room required for a nuclear warhead, U.S. and
foreign officials said.
"If someone has a good idea for a missile program,
and he has really good connections, he'll get that program
through," said Gordon Oehler, who ran the CIA's
nonproliferation center and served as deputy director
of the presidential commission on weapons of mass destruction.
"But that doesn't mean there is a master plan for
a nuclear weapon."
The commission found earlier
this year that U.S. intelligence knows "disturbingly
little" about Iran, and about North Korea.
[...]
Assessed as plausible, but unverifiable, is Iran's
public explanation that it built the program in secret,
over 18 years, because it feared attack by the United
States or Israel if the work was exposed.
In January, before the review, Vice
President Cheney suggested Iranian nuclear advances
were so pressing that Israel may be forced to attack
facilities, as it had done 23 years earlier in Iraq.
In an April 2004 speech, John
R. Bolton -- then the administration's point
man on weapons of mass destruction and now Bush's temporarily
appointed U.N. ambassador -- said:
"If we permit Iran's deception to go on much longer,
it will be too late. Iran will have nuclear weapons."
But the level of certainty, influenced
by diplomacy and intelligence, appears to have shifted.
Asked in June, after the NIE was done, whether Iran
had a nuclear effort underway, Bolton's successor, Robert
G. Joseph, undersecretary of state for arms control,
said: "I don't know quite
how to answer that because we don't have perfect information
or perfect understanding. But the Iranian record, plus
what the Iranian leaders have said . . . lead us to
conclude that we have to be highly skeptical."
Comment: The
Bush administration, having failed miserably to find
the nonexistent WMD's in Iraq, is now hoping that the
world will simply take everything they claim as true
without any "evidence" at all. Even though
it doesn't seem to be working, the shift in the level
of certainty about Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions
is nevertheless somewhat disturbing. An "Iranian
attack" on Israel would be all it would take to
turn the tables again - and the Bush administration
could say, "See? We were right."
Last Updated Mon, 01 Aug 2005
13:41:22 EDT
CBC News
Egyptian police killed
a suspect in the bombings of a Red Sea resort in a gunfight,
the country's interior ministry said on Monday.
Mohamed Fulayfel was shot about 18 kilometres from the
town of Suez, the statement said. It did not specify when.
At least 64 people died when three bombs exploded in
Sharm el-Sheikh on July 23.
Police received a tip about Fulayfel's location. They
were shot at as they approached, and fired back, according
to Egyptian officials.
"The police forces immediately dealt with the source
of fire and it became clear that Mohamed Ahmed Saleh Fulayfel
had been killed. He was in the company of his wife, who
was wounded and taken to hospital for treatment,"
the statement said.
His wife later died and the couple's four-year-old daughter
was injured, a security source told the Reuters news service.
Fulayfel is also accused of a role in bombings at three
resorts last year. He has been in hiding.
Fulayfel's brother Suleiman was killed in one of the
October attacks after a timing device failed, police said.
Jamie Wilson in Washington
Tuesday August 2, 2005
The Guardian
President George Bush
yesterday sidestepped the Senate and installed John Bolton
as US ambassador to the UN, despite protests from Democrats
that the controversial neo-conservative will undermine
America's credibility.
Mr Bolton's appointment has been blocked
for more than five months by Senate Democrats who have
been demanding the Bush administration release classified
information they claim would shed more light on Mr Bolton's
past, including claims that he tried to manipulate US
intelligence to support his hawkish views.
But flanked by Mr Bolton and the secretary of state,
Condoleezza Rice, at a White House press conference yesterday,
Mr Bush said the combative former undersecretary of state
for arms control had his full confidence. "This post
is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially
during a war and a vital debate about UN reform. So today
I've used my constitutional right to appoint John Bolton
as America's ambassador to the United Nations," he
said.
As a recess appointment - a loophole that allows the
president to make appointments while Congress is not sitting
- Mr Bolton will only be able to serve until January 2007,
when a new Congress is sworn in.
Democrats immediately condemned the move. Senator Edward
Kennedy said: "It's a devious
manoeuvre that evades the constitutional requirement of
Senate and only further darkens the cloud over Mr Bolton's
credibility at the UN," he said.
The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid, said Mr Bolton
was a "seriously flawed and weakened candidate".
[...]
Mr Bolton, a 56-year-old lawyer, is
an unapologetic advocate of assertive US global leadership
and has insisted on holding Iran and North Korea to account
for their nuclear activities, along with voicing an interest
in seeing both governments removed. [...]
Since Mr Bolton's nomination, opponents have focused
on some of his more controversial comments. "The
secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If it
lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference,"
he said in 1994, while in
2000 he said that the security council needed only one
permanent member, the US, "because that's the real
reflection of the distribution of power in the world".
Mr Bush's failure to win a clear endorsement from the
Senate - despite a sustained campaign - has been cited
as demonstrating the limits on the president's power,
even after his recent election triumph.
The decision to bypass the Senate could also have an
impact on the forthcoming confirmation hearings of supreme
court judge nominee John Roberts, with Democratic Senators
more determined than ever to take a hard line against
the president's choice.
Comment:
Bush's distaste for listening to the viewpoints of others
is amply illustrated in this appointment, his 106th
recess appointment:
The president has made 106 recess
appointments, many of them judges. Bolton is the highest-level
such appointment of Bush's administration and the first
U.S. ambassador to the UN named by a recess appointment.
A loophole meant to be rarely used is now turning into
his means of installing the foundation of his theocratic
government without any of the surpervision judged necessary
by the Founding Fathers of the United States.
If, as the above article states, the initial blocking
of Bolton's nomination was evidence of the limits of the
President's power, what are we to believe now that Bush
has shown that, when it comes down to it, there are no
such limits?Can we say, "dictatorship"?
An
Israeli Jew has been charged with helping a Palestinian
suicide bomber enter Israel, where he blew himself up
last month, killing five people.
Kfir Levy, 25, has been charged with manslaughter, along
with two Israeli Arabs also suspected of helping the attacker
to reach the city of Netanya.
Israel's security service says Mr Levy drove the bomber
through a checkpoint. Mr Levy denies the charge.
It is the second time an Israeli Jew has been charged
over such an attack.
Last year, an Israeli taxi driver was sentenced to six
months' community service for driving a suicide bomber
to Geha, near Tel Aviv, where he killed four people, in
2003.
'Unaware'
The Shin Bet security service says Mr Levy and Israeli
Arab Sif Azam drove the bomber from the West Bank city
of Tulkarm to the Israeli Arab town of Taibeh.
It said Mr Levy's vehicle was not subjected to security
checks at an army roadblock because it had Israeli license
plates.
A second Israeli Arab, Abed al-Rahman Abu-Moh, allegedly
drove the bomber the rest of the way to Netanya.
All the suspects deny knowing the passenger planned to
carry out an attack.
Investigators say Mr Levy and Mr Azam claimed the passenger,
Ahmed Jawi, from Atil, told them that a briefcase he was
carrying contained clothes and tools for committing burglaries.
Mr Levy's lawyer, David Zilberman, said his client was
not aware of Jawi's plan.
"If he had known that he was carrying a suicide
bomber in his vehicle, he would have done everything possible
for him to be arrested," he told Israel radio.
Mr Levy and Mr Azam were reportedly paid 1,000 Israeli
shekels ($220) for their efforts.
STRASBOURG, France,
Aug 1 (AFP) - A proposition aimed at stamping out smoking
in public places across France is being prepared for parliamentary
debate in November, the MP behind the move, Yves Bur,
told AFP Monday.
The measure, if adopted, would see France join Ireland,
Italy, Norway and Malta in banning cigarettes nationwide
in cafes, bars, restaurants and other places where people
gather.
It would represent a veritable revolution in a country
where an estimated one-third of the population still lights
up despite successive price hikes that make cigarettes
sold in France among the most expensive in Europe.
Smoking is already prohibited in most forms of public
transport and in office spaces.
Up to now, though, those who need nicotine with their
coffee or dessert have puffed on unperturbed, to the chagrin
of non-smokers around them.
"The proposition is not yet formalised. We are in
the stage of going over the idea with the main anti-smoking
groups and in September I will start discussions with
professional organisations," Bur said.
In October, he planned to meet Irish health authorities
and business representatives to hear their experience
and then, if all went to plan, the bill would be presented
November 3, he said.
"The French are a lot more amenable to this sort
of restriction than you might imagine," Bur said,
though he admitted he was far from certain that his initiative
would make it into law.
BEIJING, Aug. 2 (Xinhuanet)
-- China and Russia will hold their first joint military
exercises on Aug. 18-25, China's Ministry of Defense announced
here Tuesday.
In a press release, the ministry said the exercises,
dubbed "Peace Mission 2005", will be carried
out in Vladivostok in far eastern region of Russia and
East China's Shandong Peninsula and nearby offshore seawaters.
The exercises will involve nearly 10,000 troops from
the armies, navies, air forces as well as airborne units,
marine corps and logistic units of Chinese and Russian
armed forces, said the press release.
Chinese and Russian defense ministries signed a memorandum
on conducting joint military exercises in July 2004. The
chiefs of the general staffs of Chinese and Russian armed
forces will announce the commencement of the exercises
in Vladivostok on Aug. 18.
China and Russia have invited the defense ministers
from member countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
(SCO) and representatives from SCO's observer countries
to watch the joint exercises.
The holding of the maneuvers is in line with the guideline
of the UN Charter, and complies with the widely recognized
international laws and the respect of the national sovereignty
and territorial integrity of other countries, said the
press release.
"The exercises neither aim at any third party nor
concern with the interests of any third country,"
said the press release.
The ministry said that the mission of the drills mainly
aim to deepen Sino-Russian mutual trust, promote mutual
friendship and enhance the cooperation and coordination
of the two armed forces in the areas of defense and security.
The joint exercises will also help strengthen the capability
of the two armed forces in jointly striking international
terrorism, extremism and separatism.
Through the exercises, the two armed forces can improve
their coordinated capabilities to handle crises and meet
new challenges and threats, said the press release.
OTTAWA, Aug. 1 (Xinhuanet)
- Canada's military grilled hundreds of immigrants and
refugees who settled in the country at the height of the
Cold War for valuable information, says a new study by
a historian from the University of Toronto.
The Joint Intelligence Bureau, a section of the Defense
Department which handled secret information on economic
and military matters, set up an interrogation unit in
1953 to debrief newcomers from Hungary, Poland and other
countries, the Canadian Press (CP) reported Monday, citing
a report by history professor Wesley Wark.
From 1953 to 1963, a total of 2,000 immigrants, most
of whom came from East European countries, provided intelligence
under the program. It was the closest Canada came during
the era to developing a covert intelligence-gathering
organization based on the human sources, Wark writes.
The program was seen as a means of helping Canada earn
its place with allies at the western intelligence table,
the study quotes 83-year-old Reg Weeks, a retired veteran
of Canadian military intelligence, as saying.
"In those days we were very highly dependent on
the Americans and the Brits," Weeks said. [...]
Krysia Diver in Stuttgart
Tuesday August 2, 2005
The Guardian
In Japan people think
it rude to say "you" - but in India there are
six different ways to address a person.
And if you need to find out which countries take tea,
and which prefer a cup of cha, the world's first atlas
about the composition of languages should be able to help.
In a world where globalisation leads to the death of
one language every fortnight, it is hoped that the World
Atlas of Language Structures will help to revive a wilting
interest in linguistics.
German linguists have spent five years compiling the
book, working with 40 language experts specialising in
languages ranging from Chinese to those spoken by only
100 adults.
Roland Kriessling, a linguist specialising in African
languages, said: "In Namibia, there are many languages
which sound completely bizarre to the western ear.
"!Xoop, for example, has different clicking sounds,
including the tut, the horse's hoof sound and the kiss.
The phonetic complexity of !Xoop could put it into the
Guinness Book of Records."
The atlas contains details of about 2,600 languages,
where they prevail, and how they are used. And, with grammar
still a hot linguistic topic, it includes a map of sentence
structures around the world.
Readers can also discover which languages are rich in
vocabulary, and which use restricted terminology. In some
languages, for example, there is no distinction between
the arm and the hand.
Michael Cysouw, one of the atlas's authors, told the
Guardian: "If you ask the average man how many languages
are in the world, he will probably say a couple of hundred.
In fact there are 7,000."
Despite highlighting the range of languages spoken throughout
the world, the atlas does not explain why language evolved
in different ways.
"The atlas draws together information about languages,
but its purpose is not to draw conclusions," Dr Cysouw
said. "It invites people to investigate what lies
behind the linguistics."
BEIJING, Aug. 2 --
A rare spell of hot weather has hit Eastern Europe, leaving
dozens of people dead.
According to local media in Bulgaria, Sunday's highest
temperature in Plovdiv city in the south of the country
reached 38 celsius, which is also the highest record in
the city's 104-year history, while the highest temperature
over the past three days in the southwestern city of Sandanski
hit 39 degrees.
Five elderly people in Bulgaria have died of heart attacks
brought on by the continuous hot wave.
The country's weather forecast department says the hot
weather is likely to last the whole of August.
The fierce weather has also attacked other countries
in the region, 19 elderly people have died due to the
heat in Romania.
JAKARTA (AFX) - An
earthquake measuring 5.7 on the Richter scale jolted the
eastern Indonesian island of Ambon today, prompting panic
but there were no reports of casualties or damage, an
official said.
The undersea quake struck at 5:39 pm and was located
96 kilometres southeast of the city of Ambon in the Maluku
province, an official with the meteorological agency in
Jakarta told Agence France-Presse.
Its epicenter was located some 33 kilometers under the
floor of the Banda Sea, sending tremors that were also
felt on Seram island, the official said.
The Detikcom online news service reported that the earthquake
caused panic in Ambon, with residents rushing out of buildings
and causing traffic jams.
Dissident scientists
advocating a controversial theory of the universe are
having a field day in the wake of NASA's Deep Impact comet
collision earlier this month.
Scientists promoting the Electric Universe model say
their predictions
for the comet mission appear to have been more accurate
than NASA's.
The Electric Universe theorists, collected at Thunderbolts.info,
believe that electricity, when factored properly into
astrophysics, plays a greater role in the cosmos than
the standard gravitational model, which says electrical
forces are insignificant on a cosmic scale.
Proponents of the Electric Universe model say they can
explain many of the bizarre phenomena and mysteries in
cosmology, from a swath of anomalies seen in the solar
system to unusual surface features on Mars and Jupiter's
moon, Titan. The theory can also sweep away the need for
theoretical "dark matter" and "dark energy."
Comets are a cornerstone of the model, visible proof
of the legitimacy of the theory as they traverse eccentric
orbits around the sun.
According to the model, comets are not inert balls of
ice and rocky dust particles aggregated into a "dirty
iceball" as standard comet theory holds. Instead,
they are solid, asteroid-like rocks, containing little
ice. Negatively charged with electricity, their motion
through the positively charged solar wind triggers electrical
discharges. These, not vaporized ice, produce the characteristic
comet glow and tail.
Prior to the July 4 impact, the Electric Universe group
published a detailed chain
of events they expected to see when Deep Impact struck
comet Tempel 1 with an 820-pound copper projectile.
The prediction said there would be two impact flashes:
a small flash as the projectile penetrated the comet's
electrified atmosphere, followed by a huge impact flash
that would be "unexpectedly energetic."
And that's exactly what appeared to happen on July 4,
in an impact that astonished NASA investigators.
"What you see is something really surprising,"
said mission co-investigator Peter Schultz. "First,
there is a small flash, then there's a delay, then there's
a big flash and the whole thing breaks loose."
The renegades at Thunderbolts made more predictions,
including an expected massive surge in X-ray production,
a lack of subsurface water and very high explosion temperatures.
However, confirmation or debunking of their predictions
awaits detailed data from NASA, which has yet to release
the results.
The Thunderbolts ragtag team of rebels comprises writers,
researchers, electrical engineers and comparative mythologists,
led by Australian physicist Wallace Thornhill.
Meantime, on the Deep
Impact website, NASA scientists theorize that the
collision's intense flash was likely caused by tons of
fine dust thrown up by the impact and lit by the sun.
And the double flashes, some have suggested, were caused
by the projectile penetrating two surfaces on the comet:
a soft outer layer and a harder deeper nucleus of rock
and ice.
Indeed, NASA investigators have conceded that Comet Tempel
1 appears to be something of an anomaly that does not
conform to the dirty iceball model. The theory now is
that the nuclei of different comets may have different
compositions, according to Donald Yeomans, a mission scientist
on Deep Impact.
Whatever the outcome, the self-styled "alternate
paradigm theorists" are energized by the evidence
from Deep Impact, as well as the shifting theories and
unexplained data from previous comet observations.
They point to photographs of comets by various probes
that have revealed distinctly ice-free rock-like objects,
and images of strange bright patches they say are proof
of electrical discharges in action.
"Why are comet nuclei coal-black as if they have
been burnt?" asked David Talbott, executive editor
of Thunderbolts.info. "Why is there a superabundance
of extremely fine dust?
"And if comet nuclei are merely melting in the sun's
heat, why are they sharply cratered and rocky? They should
be smooth like a melting scoop of ice cream."
The Electric Universe model is broadly dismissed as pseudoscience
by scientists. Indeed, its Wikipedia entry was recently
deleted after users successfully argued that it did not
constitute a legitimate theory.
"It's complete cobblers," said Dr. David Hughes,
comet expert and professor of astrophysics at Britain's
University of Sheffield. "Absolute balderdash."
Crudely put, for astronomical material to be charged
electrically, it must be in the form of hot ionized gas,
otherwise known as plasma, Hughes said.
"The inside of a comet has a typical temperature
of minus 100 Celsius," he said. "Electricity
on the surface of a comet? Forget about it. It's not a
contender."
Scientists from NASA's Deep Impact investigation team
declined to comment on specific observations made by the
Thunderbolts group.
Despite the skepticism, Electric Universe theorists are
not deterred.
"All the things we see around comets fit the electrical
model but don't make much sense in terms of icy snowballs
sublimating into space," said Thunderbolts' Thornhill.
Answers to the surprises of Deep Impact and the credibility
of the Electric Universe theory will have to wait until
NASA releases X-ray readings, spectroscopic analysis and
other detailed data during the $333 million mission. These
are expected in a few months.
But answers are not guaranteed. So much dust was thrown
up by the impact that cameras on board the probe were
unable to take pictures of the crater -- a vital piece
of evidence for settling the major unanswered question
in comet theory: what a comet is actually made of.