As always, Caveat Lector! The material presented in the linked articles does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the owners of Cassiopaea.org. Research on your own and if you can validate any of the articles, or if you discover deception and/or an obvious agenda, we will appreciate if you drop us a line! We often post such comments along with the article synopses for the benefit of other readers.
The links will open a new window. To return to this page, simply close the new window.
The most successful tyranny
is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one
that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it
seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the
sense that there is an outside.
It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong. --Voltaire--
Faith of consciousness is freedom
Life is religion. Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the worlds will cease. They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the "past." People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the "Future." [Cassiopaea, 09-28-02]
January 28, 2003
Child porn list leaked to Sunday Times - The Sunday Times has obtained Operation Ore's entire list of UK subscribers to child porn sites. Containing 7,272 names, the list includes 'at least 20 senior executives' and a 'senior teacher at an exclusive girl's public school, services personnel from at least five military bases, GPs, university academics and civil servants." There's more: a "famous newspaper columnist is named, along with a song writer for a legendary pop band and a member of another chart-topping 1980s cult pop group, along with an official with the Church of England." - A senior Scotland Yard source quoted in today's Daily Mirror: "The forecast is that the Visa list may top 100,000 alone. Together with Mastercard and American Express customers, plus the other major credit card providers, the projection is the total number of British men who have been accessing these sites will exceed 250,000."
Alleged Pedophiles at Helm of Britain's War Machine, Massive Cover-Up - A child-sex scandal that threatened to destroy Tony Blair's government last week has been mysteriously squashed and wiped off the front pages of British newspapers.
Operation Ore, the United Kingdom's most thorough and comprehensive police investigation of crimes against children, seems to have uncovered more than is politically acceptable at the highest reaches of the British elite. In the 19th of January edition of The Sunday Herald, Neil Mackay sensationally reported that senior members of Tony Blair's government were being investigated for paedophilia and the "enjoyment" of child-sex pornography: "The Sunday Herald has also had confirmed by a very senior source in British intelligence that at least one high-profile former Labour Cabinet minister is among Operation Ore suspects. The Sunday Herald has been given the politician's name but, for legal reasons, can not identify the person. There are still unconfirmed rumours that another senior Labour politician is among the suspects. The intelligence officer said that a 'rolling' Cabinet committee had been set up to work out how to deal with the potentially ruinous fall-out for both Tony Blair and the government if arrests occur."
The allegations are the most serious yet levelled at an administration that prides itself on the inclusion in its ranks of a high quota of controversial and flamboyant homosexual men, and whose First Lady, Cherie Blair, has come under the spotlight for her indulgence in pagan rituals that resemble Freemasonic rites. Unconfirmed information also suggests that the term "former Labour Cabinet minister" is misleading and that the investigation has identified a surprisingly large number of alleged paedophiles at the highest level of British government, including one very senior cabinet minister (known to Propaganda Matrix.com).
The Blair government has responded by imposing a comprehensive blackout on the story, effectively removing it from the domain of public discussion. Attempts on the part of this journalist to establish why the British media has not followed up on the revelations have met with a wall of silence. Editors and journalists of The Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Independent, The Sunday Times, The Observer, The Sunday Telegraph, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Mirror, The Sun, the BBC, Independent Television News and even The Sunday Herald have refused to discuss the matter.
Speaking from London, freelance journalist Bob Kearley told me: "Whether or not a D-Notice has been issued is not clear. But based on some of the feedback I've been getting it's apparent that editors and media owners have voluntarily agreed not to cover the story at this time. Operation Ore is still being reported, but not in regard to government ministers, and it's taking up very few column inches on the third or fourth page. Don't forget that the intelligence services are involved here, and Blair is anxious to ensure that the scandal does not rock the boat at a time when the country is about to go to war."
ISRAEL REELECTS SHARON PREPARATIONS FOR 'TRANSFER' UNDERWAY U.S. + ISRAEL + U.K. TO ENFORCE 'New World Order' - This evening even before the worldly-retarded boy-like George W. Bush gives his 'State of the Union' address from the American Capitol to the world, the ethically-challenged brute-thug Ariel Sharon is likely to have already delivered his victory speech from Israel to the world. And have no doubt about it, as MER has pointed out for some years now, the U.S. and Israel, and Bush and Sharon personally, are working closely in tandem on this crusade to create and enforce a 'New World Order' of military and technological subjugation and domination.
Indeed, were it not for the powerful and deeply entrenched influence of what we call the 'Israeli-Jewish lobby' in Washington, the U.S. would not be so twisted and misguided as it is; for how the Israelis press and influence and manipulate politics and media in the U.S., and especially affairs in Washington, is one of the taboo subjects in contemporary America. Indeed, were it not for Israel's increasingly apartheid-style occupation of the Palestinian people 9/11 probably would not have occurred with today's result.
Indeed, if it were not for the huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction accumulated by Israel, or course with ongoing U.S. help and financing, today's historic arms race throughout the Middle East region would not have taken the course it has.
Wednesday's headlines of course will feature what we will call at this point the well-polished rantings of Bush and Sharon; and certainly in the crucial United States the underlying truths and historical realities that have brought our world to this turning-point moment will hardly be mentioned by the 'mainstream (i.e., corporate) media'.
Meanwhile, as we all are forced to prepare for the still greater and potentially catastrophic storms now brewing, these important articles about how depressed and on-edge today's Jewish State of Israel has become. Just as in years past -- think back to the period before the 1967 war -- this economic and psychological situation is an important part of today's overall 'prelude to war' saga.
I'm losing patience with my neighbours, Mr Bush - I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's running out of patience. And so am I!
For some time now I've been really pissed off with Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street. Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop. They both give me queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty for me, but so far I haven't been able to discover what. I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is.
As for Mr Patel, don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources - that he is, in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have leafleted the street telling them that if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one.
Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the police? But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need evidence of a crime with which to charge my neighbours.
They'll come up with endless red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly murdering people. Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace. But until recently that's been a little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can wade in and do whatever I want!
And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards Iraq is the only way to bring about international peace and security. The one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us.
Mr Bush makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that Saddam is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction - even if no one can find them. I'm certain I've just as much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq.
Mr Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such a clever long-term aim because how can you ever know when you've achieved it? How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves.
Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then some moderate Muslims might convert to fundamentalism. Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to eliminate all Muslims?
It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of other people in the street who I don't like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be really safe until I've wiped them all out.
My wife says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same logic as the President of the United States. That shuts her up.
Like Mr Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole street two weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar terrorist masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you', I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come.
It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing - and, in contrast to what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street.
The wartime deceptions: Saddam is Hitler and it's not about oil - Obsessed with their own demonisation of Saddam Hussein, [Bush and Blair] are now reminding us of the price of appeasement. Bush thinks that he is the Churchill of America, refusing the appeasement of Saddam. Now the US ambassador to the European Union, Rockwell Schnabel, has compared Saddam to Hitler. "You had Hitler in Europe and no one really did anything about him," Schnabel lectured the Europeans in Brussels a week ago: "We knew he could be dangerous but nothing was done. The same type of person [is in Baghdad] and it's there that our concern lies." Mr Schnabel ended this infantile parallel by adding unconvincingly that "this has nothing to do with oil".
How can the sane human being react to this pitiful stuff? One of the principal nations which "did nothing about Hitler" was the US, which enjoyed a profitable period of neutrality in 1939 and 1940 and most of 1941 until it was attacked by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor. And when the Churchill-Roosevelt alliance decided that it would only accept Germany's unconditional surrender – a demand that shocked even Churchill when Roosevelt suddenly announced the terms at Casablanca – Hitler was doomed.
Not so Saddam it seems. For last week Donald Rumsfeld offered the Hitler of Baghdad a way out: exile, with a suitcase full of cash and an armful of family members if that is what he wished. Funny, but I don't recall Churchill or Roosevelt ever suggesting that the Nazi führer should be allowed to escape. Saddam is Hitler – but then suddenly, he's not Hitler after all. He is – said TheNew York Times – to be put before a war crimes tribunal. But then he's not. He can scoot off to Saudi Arabia or Latin America. In other words, he's not Hitler. [...]
Travelling to the US more than once a month, visiting Britain at the weekend, moving around the Middle East, I have never been so struck by the absolute, unwavering determination of so many Arabs and Europeans and Americans to oppose a war. Did Tony Blair really need that gloriously pertinacious student at the Labour Party meeting on Friday to prove to him what so many Britons feel: that this proposed Iraqi war is a lie, that the reasons for this conflict have nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction, that Blair has no business following Bush into the America-Israeli war?
Never before have I received so many readers' letters expressing exactly the same sentiment: that somehow – because of Labour's huge majority, because of the Tory party's effective disappearance as an opposition, because of parliamentary cynicism – British democracy is not permitting British people to stop a war for which most of them have nothing but contempt. From Washington's pathetic attempt to link Saddam to al-Qa'ida, to Blair's childish "dossier" on weapons of mass destruction, to the whole tragic farce of UN inspections, people are just no longer fooled.
The denials that this war has anything to do with oil are as unconvincing as Colin Powell's claim last week that Iraq's oil would be held in trusteeship for the Iraqi people. Trusteeship was exactly what the League of Nations offered the Levant when it allowed Britain and France to adopt mandates in Palestine and Transjordan and Syria and Lebanon after the First World War. Who will run the oil wells and explore Iraqi oil reserves during this generous period of trusteeship? American companies, perhaps? No, people are not fooled.
Take the inspectors. George Bush and Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and now, alas, Colin Powell don't want to give the inspectors more time. Why not, for God's sake? Let's just go back to 12 September last year when Bush, wallowing in the nostalgia of the 11 September 2001 crimes against humanity, demanded that the UN act. It must send its inspectors back to Iraq. They must resume their work. They must complete their work.
Bush, of course, was hoping that Iraq would refuse to let the inspectors return.
Horrifically, Iraq welcomed the UN.
Bush was waiting for the inspectors to find hidden weapons.
Terrifyingly, they found none. They are still looking.
And that is the last thing Bush wants. Bush said he was "sick and tired" of Saddam's trickery when what he meant was that he was sick and tired of waiting for the UN inspectors to find the weapons that will allow America to go to war. He who wanted so much to get the inspectors back to work now doesn't want them to work.
"Time is running out," Bush said last week. He was talking about Saddam but he was actually referring to the UN inspectors, in fact to the whole UN institution so laboriously established after the Second World War by his own country.
The only other nation pushing for war – save for the ever-grateful Kuwait – is Israel.
Listen to the words of Zalman Shoval, Israeli Prime Minster Ariel Sharon's foreign affairs adviser, last week. Israel, he said, would "pay dearly" for a "long deferral" of an American strike on Iraq. "If the attack were to be postponed on political rather than military grounds," he said, "we will have every reason in Israel to fear that Saddam Hussein uses this delay to develop non-conventional weapons."
As long as Saddam was not sidelined, it would be difficult to convince the Palestinian leadership that violence didn't pay and that it should be replaced by a new administration; Arafat would use such a delay "to intensify terrorist attacks".
Note how the savage Israeli-Palestinian war can only – according to the Shoval thesis – be resolved if America invades Iraq; how terrorism cannot be ended in Israel until the US destroys Saddam. There can be no regime change for the Palestinians until there is regime change in Baghdad.
By going along with the Bush drive to war, Blair is, indirectly, supporting Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza (since Israel still claims to be fighting America's "war on terror" against Arafat).
Does Blair believe Britons haven't grasped this? Does he think Britons are stupid?
A quarter of the British Army is sent to fight in a war that 80 per cent of Britons oppose.
How soon before we see real people power – 500,000 protesters or more in London, Manchester and other cities to oppose this folly?
Yes – an essential part of any such argument – Saddam is a cruel, ruthless dictator, not unlike the Dear Leader of North Korea, the nuclear megalomaniac with whom the Americans have been having "excellent" discussions but who doesn't have oil.
How typical of Saddam to send Ali "Chemical" Majid – the war criminal who gassed the Kurds of Halabja – to tour Arab capitals last week, to sit with President Bashar Assad of Syria and President Emile Lahoud of Lebanon as if he never ordered the slaughter of women and children. But Bush and Blair said nothing about Majid's tour – either so as not to offend the Arab leaders who met him or because the link between gas, war crimes and Washington's original support for Saddam is a sensitive issue.
Instead, we are deluged with more threats from Washington about "states that sponsor terror".
Western journalists play a leading role in this propaganda. Take Eric Schmitt in TheNew York Times a week ago. He wrote a story about America's decision to "confront countries that sponsor terrorism". And his sources? "Senior defence officials", "administration officials", "some American intelligence officials", "the officials", "officials", "military officials", "terrorist experts" and "defence officials".
Why not just let the Pentagon write its own reports in TheNew York Times?
But that is what is changing.
More and more Americans – aware that their President declined to serve his country in Vietnam – realise that their newspapers are lying to them and acting as a conduit for the US government alone.
More and more Britons are tired of being told to go to war by their newspapers and television stations and politicians.
Indeed, I'd guess that far more Britons are represented today by the policies of President Chirac of France than Prime Minister Blair of Britain.
George Bush is the anti-christ - A most interesting take on the subject.
Chinese archaeologists have discovered the ruins of a prehistoric city dating back an estimated 4,300 years in southwest Sichuan province, state press said. The find provided evidence that the region along the upper reaches of the Yangtze River, with the Chengdu Plain at the core, played an important role in the origin and development of Chinese civilization, experts said. The ancient city of Yandian measures 700 metres from north to south and 500 metres from east to west, the Xinhua news agency reported. It covers an area of more than 300,000 square metres. Chen Jian, an official with the relics and archaeological team in the Sichuan capital Chengdu City, said the site is next to a river at an elevation of three metres above the river bank. This indicated that ancient people considered the availability of water and flood prevention when deciding where to build cities, he said. Archaeologists unearthed a number of pieces of inscribed pottery, polished stone axes, chisels and spears at the site. They also found chips of human skulls on the city wall but were unable to explain how they got there.
MICROCHIP IMPLANTS, MINDCONTROL AND CYBERNETICS by Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde, MD Former Chief Medical Officer of Finland - In 1948 Norbert Weiner published a book, CYBERNETICS, defined as a neurological communication and control theory already in use in small circles at that time. Yoneji Masuda, "Father of Information Society," stated his concern in 1980 that our liberty is threatened Orwellian-style by cybernetic technology totally unknown to most people. This technology links the brains of people via implanted microchips to satellites controlled by ground-based super-computers.
The first brain implants were surgically inserted in 1974 in the state of Ohio, U.S.A., and also in Stockholm, Sweden. Brain electrodes were inserted into the skulls of babies in 1946 without the knowledge of their parents. In the 50's and 60's, electrical implants were inserted into the brains of animals and humans, especially in the U.S., during research into behavior modification, and brain and body functioning. Mind control (MC) methods were used in attempts to change human behavior and attitudes. Influencing brain functions became an important goal of military and intelligence services.
Thirty years ago brain implants showed up in xrays the size of one centimeter. Subsequent implants shrunk to the size of a grain of rice. They were made of silicon, later still of gallium arsenide. Today they are small enough to be inserted into the neck or back, and also intravenously in different parts of the body during surgical operations, with or without the consent of the subject. It is now almost impossible to detect or remove them.
Time Magazine: The CIA's Secret Army - Because of past scandals, the agency had largely dropped its paramilitary operations. But the war on terrorism has brought it back into the business.
The New Yorker: What the Administration knew about Pakistan and the North Korean nuclear program. Since 1997, the C.I.A. said, Pakistan had been sharing sophisticated technology, warhead-design information, and weapons-testing data with the Pyongyang regime. Pakistan, one of the Bush Administration's important allies in the war against terrorism, was helping North Korea build the bomb.
In an incident that reporters instantly called Boxgate, Mr. Bush gave a speech on his economic plan at a trucking company warehouse while surrounded by cardboard boxes — a tableau meant to project the image of a president at the epicenter of small-business America. The only problem was the cardboard boxes were stamped with "Made in China," a mark of globalization that was evidently not consistent with the Bush administration message of the day. But no matter. Workers preparing for the event industriously taped over every "Made in China" with a white sticker or packing tape, a literal cover-up that reporters discovered when they peeled off the tape. - Mr. Bush himself spoke in front of a printed canvas backdrop of faux cardboard boxes, which featured "Made in America" in large black letters. Claire Buchan, a White House spokeswoman, said the cover-up was the work of volunteers for the White House.
Richard C. Hoagland of the Enterprise Mission - author of The Monuments of Mars - disclosed what he had described as an 'H-bomb' that would finally settle the Cydonia controversy. The existence of artificial structures on Mars, Hoagland had predicted, was to be no longer mere speculation, but an undeniable fact. After a number of frustrating delays, he finally posted his analysis of the Cydonia IR (infrared) images from the Odyssey spacecraft (released by NASA on July 24/25) on his website, then went on the Art Bell radio show to announce his discovery to the world . - Almost more intriguing than the data itself is the twisted drama unfolding behind the scenes. In his article, Hoagland suggests that the new Cydonia image leaked to him is likely part of a carefully coordinated operation designed to either help or discredit him. This may sound unrealistic to some, but the more you try to get a clearer picture of the situation, the more conspiratorial it actually gets. If anything, it's at least very entertaining to just follow this drama - it's like watching a good 'X-Files' episode.
I'm not sure exactly why it is, but nothing I have read recently about Israel's treatment of the Palestinians touched me quite so deeply as the destruction of about 60 shops in the village of Nazlat Isa. The shootings of civilians, the bulldozing of homes, the reports of torture, the scores of morally filthy assassinations, the improper arrests -- the whole vast, organized mechanism of apartheid cruelty is stomach-turning, but the deliberate bulldozing of a thriving little street of shops just seems uncivilized and bleak beyond measure.
Shop owners in the little village were driven out by Israeli soldiers with gas grenades; their stores and possessions were smashed by bulldozers. Israel's excuse for this atrocious behavior is that the shop owners had not obtained the necessary building permits from Israeli authorities.
It is well known that the Israeli authorities make it difficult for Palestinians to obtain permission to undertake the most basic projects. Requests to make changes or improvements in sewers or streets or buildings remain unanswered for years.
It all resembles what Soviet citizens used to experience when trying to get licenses or permissions from apparatchiks. The effort, often ending in failure, could consume a good fraction of one's lifetime. It proved a remarkably effective way to destroy human initiative, to say nothing of the human spirit.
There is an important difference in the two situations, though. The problem in the Soviet Union resulted from the sheer size and complexity of its bureaucracy plus the inability and unwillingness of anyone at almost any level to take responsibility for making a decision. The problem in the West Bank reflects something more deliberate and ugly. It is Israel's refusal to treat Palestinians as equal human beings. Their needs count for little or nothing. What in many places is a normal, everyday activity, the issuing of building permits, becomes in the Israeli-occupied West Bank a quiet mechanism for denying people livelihoods, dignity, and even health. It is slow motion ethnic cleansing carried out through bureaucracy.
Polls show an increasing number of Israelis supporting "removal," Israel's terrible euphemism for ethnic cleansing by bayonet rather than bureaucracy. This growing support undoubtedly reflects the degrading influence on human values of Sharon, Netanyahu, and Bush.
Comment: Why should the Palestinians have to go anywhere? After all, the Israeli's are illegal occupiers - criminal land thieves supported by Britain and the U.S. in their "Lebensraum Programme." But then, we know why that is: The Consortium that controls Britain and the U.S. want ALL the Semites in one place - Arabs AND Israelis - makes it easier to get rid of them all at once... which the current drive for war in Iraq is designed to accomplish.
Fallling Down the TM Rabbit Hole - How Transcendental Meditation Really Works - Attorney Anthony DeNaro, who is a former professor of economics and business law at the Transcendental Meditation organization's own private university, as well as being a former legal counsel to the same institution, alleges a very serious and deliberate pattern of fraud, and that "outright lies and deception, are used to cover-up or sanitize the dangerous reality on campus of very serious nervous breakdowns, episodes of dangerous and bizarre behavior, suicidal and homicidal ideation, threats and attempts, psychotic episodes, crime, depression and manic behavior that often accompanied roundings (intensive group meditations with brainwashing techniques)".
Was it a bird, a plane, a sonic boom? - Dozens of Hilton Head Islanders called the Emergency Operations Center and Beaufort County Sheriff's Office on Friday asking where "the earthquake" hit. The calls started at 10:03 a.m., after some roofs seemed to rattle and glass seemed to shake. Deputies at the Sheriff's Office on Hilton Head felt it too. - "We were like, 'Oh my gosh, what was that?' " said Beaufort County Sheriff's Office Spokeswoman Debbie Szpanka. "The whole roof shook. For us, it sounded like something landed on our roof with a big thud." Others described it as the sound of a giant fist hitting outside walls or a giant gust of wind that lasted only a second or two. Outside, some looked around, trying to spot a wreck. "What was that?" No one seemed entirely sure Friday, but emergency management workers knew what it wasn't. "All I can tell you is it was not seismic in nature," said Steve Fields, deputy director of Beaufort County Emergency Management. "Maybe Godzilla, I don't know, but it wasn't seismic."
Plane Causes Sonic Boom, Rattles Four-County Area - A loud noise rattled windows and shook buildings in a four-county area Saturday before last around 4:20 p.m. Authorities aren't sure what caused the noise, but it was suggested it might have been an aircraft sonic boom. The boom was heard and felt by persons throughout Coffee, Moore, Franklin, Marion and Lincoln counties while many were focusing their attention on the football game underway in Nashville between the Titans and the Pittsburgh Steelers. Scott Ulm, an employee at the Tennessee Corrections Academy in Tullahoma, said several employees heard the "boom" but exactly what caused it remains a mystery. "It was probably a sonic boom," he said. "But you can't tell for sure. All we heard is that there was a big blast."
Mysterious rumble shakes up Florida area residents - "It wasn't your typical sonic boom," said Woolford, an artist for Blue Dolphin at Ellyson Field. "It just kept going and going, about five or seven seconds. It shook the whole building. My pedestal computer monitor was rocking and rolling back and forth." When he felt the ground beneath his feet tremble, he thought it was an earthquake. Residents from Century to Perdido Key and east to Milton flooded emergency call centers in Escambia and Santa Rosa counties reporting the boom that rattled doors and shook pictures off walls. - The source of the vibration remained a mystery after emergency management and law enforcement officials ran into dead ends looking into the cause. The strongest indication pointed to a sonic boom. They ruled out a space shuttle flight over Northwest Florida. Military officials at Eglin and Hurlburt Field said they had no bombing or training missions that would have caused the rumble. - Officials with the Geological Survey of Alabama say seismic data does not point to an earthquake. "I have nothing showing an earthquake has occurred," said Dorothy Raymond, a geologist with the Survey in Tuscaloosa. - If the military is responsible for the boom, Catherine Olsen, who ran outside to investigate what shook her home near Cordova Mall, said, "they need to fess up. Everyone is so scared with everything going on in the world." This is not the first time the area has experienced a mysterious jolt. Similar unexplained tremors were reported in 1990 and 1991.
Report from Reader in Hawaii: Aloha Kakou! We had a "sonic boom" last tues. the 21st. about 8:30pm It was VERY strange!, our dogs started to bark a few secounds before the whole house shook with a load boom, you could almost see things kinda "warp" right before the bang. Friends of ours felt the same thing about 20 miles away at about the same time. I've heard plenty of sonic booms from planes, but this was different, we are surrounded by military bases so to hear bombs going off is not that unusual, we hear some pretty strange explosions this was oddly different! Its a weird coinsidence that this "sonic boom" was felt over on the mainland also!
Large meteorites drop on the Earth rather often. As is known, within ten years US’s nuclear detection system and spy satellites registered about 250 strong explosions caused by pieces of asteroids, comets and large meteorites that dropped on the Earth. When such objects from space drop in densely populated areas, they can entail lots of troubles there. For instance, if the famous Tunguska meteorite had lingered for some time more, it would have dropped in Russia’s European part, but not in Siberian taiga. It is not ruled out that the meteorite would have ruined the Russian capital completely. The latest object from space dropped on the Russian territory on September 25, 2002. When it dropped, a strong explosion sounded in Siberian taiga, near the city of Bodaibo in Russia’s Irkutsk region, at 3:00 a.m. A special expedition is to be organized next spring for investigation of the explosion’s consequences and for study of the object itself.
Flashback! Residents of the town of Bodaibo in the Irkutsk region witnessed the fall of a large celestial body. Scientists suggest that it might have been a meteorite. This was reported by the regional department of the Russian EMERCOM. They added that they received the information from the Institute of Solar and Earth Physics of the Siberian division of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Scientists said that Bodaibo residents could see the fall of a very large luminous body, which looked like a huge stone. The unidentified object fell in the woods. The site of the fall is situated very far from any settlements, but locals felt a strong shock, which could be comparable to an earthquake. In addition to that, the people also heard a thunder-like sound. Flashes of bright light could be seen above the site of the meteorite’s fall.
A team of geologists has determined the age of the oldest known meteorite impact on Earth - a catastrophic event that generated massive shockwaves across the planet billions of years before a similar event helped wipe out the dinosaurs.
Is Stealth a present of some space beings? An article was published in Los Angeles Times in the early 1990s under the title “Did UFO build Stealth?” The author of the publication wondered why the B-2 Stealth looked like an extraterrestrial flying vehicle. Readers were dumbfounded with suggestions of the author saying that UFO engineers helped Americans design and build Stealth. The information was published with reference to Great Britain’s leading ufologist Doctor Weis; it was declared to be the biggest secret of the US Government. To all appearance, technology of extraterrestrials must be progressive and successful. But how did it happen in fact? - Bulgarian engineer, Colonel Todor Andreyev wrote in 1988 that machines developed in accordance with the Stealth program had been developed in the USA since 1975; the program was strictly classified, that is why any publications on the problem were brief and contradictory starting with 1977. - Invisible planes are very dangerous, this can be seen from Richard Cheney’s statement saying that one Stealth bomber could have performed the operation in Libya. For the attack at Libya, the USA used 18 F-111 bombers, 15 naval force bombers, 28 refueller planes, several planes of electronic resistance, control planes and regular bombers. Los Angeles Times quoted Doctor Weis as saying that extraterrestrials helped in every stage of the Stealth bomber development. So, publications of this kind in the gutter press for the broad masses spread the opinion saying that black triangles of “invisible” planes were generated by some extraterrestrial beings, and that humans, especially non-Americans wouldn’t cope with such planes. But there were some cases registered when such invisible planes were brought down. For instance, there was one “invisible” plane, F-117 among 68 American planes brought down during the conflict between the USA and Iraq in 1991.
Prepare for the Snow Job! - President Bush will assert in his State of the Union address that Saddam Hussein poses a "serious threat" to the United States, but will stop short of declaring or justifying war Tuesday night. That step would come later if Bush concludes that Iraq cannot be disarmed any other way, the White House said Tuesday. Much of Bush's speech will focus on domestic concerns, officials said.
The Bush administration has assembled what it believes to be significant intelligence showing that Iraq has been actively moving and concealing banned weapons systems and related equipment from United Nations inspectors, according to informed sources. After a lengthy debate over what and how much of the intelligence to disclose, President Bush and his national security advisers have decided to declassify some of the information and make it public, perhaps as early as next week, in an effort to garner more domestic and international support for confronting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein with military force, officials said. "The United States possesses several pieces of information which come from the work of our intelligence that show Iraq maintains prohibited weapons," Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said in an interview published yesterday in an Italian newspaper. "Once we have made sure it can be done safely, I think that in the next week or soon after we can make public a good part of this material." Comment: I'm not holding my breath for truth here...
As it is known, wherever America goes, it must get there first. Today, America is going to be the first to decide the fate of Saddam Hussein and, accordingly, of the Iraqi oil. For Washington, the collective will of the international community is possibly something important, nevertheless minor. Whatever President Bush can say in his state-of-the-union address on Tuesday, he faces three scenarios of further development of the U.S. - Iraqi confrontation. Bush's foreign policy team believes that the choice must be done within weeks, not months. Or, more precisely, within six weeks according to a recent leakage. The first option is a war with Iraq without the UN consent.
The United States calls on the so-called "coalition of interested countries" and attacks Iraq disregarding the Security Council. In this case, Washington receives soldiers and weapons from such motley partners as the UK, Australia, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria. The former two are America's long-standing allies and the latter two possibly hope to get economic compensation. In their turn, such friends of the United States in the region as Kuwait, Qatar and Turkey provide bases and logistics support.
In order to justify its unsanctioned attack, the U.S. will most possibly charge Iraq with crimes of two levels - technological and terrorist, the latter is "higher", so to speak. At the technological level, Baghdad will be accused of evading co-operation with the inspectors, especially, of the unwillingness to give an account of the stocks of banned weapons which were found in Iraq earlier. These include 4 tonnes of VX nerve gas, components for the production of 20,000 litres of substances that can be used for biological weapons, 15,000 shells for their delivery and 6,000 chemical bombs.
At a higher level, the so-called Armageddon argument will be used. Washington and London will throw up their hands, saying they had no other option but attacking Iraq. How could they otherwise prevent Baghdad from handing weapons of mass destruction to international terrorists? Indeed, how otherwise? It is not easy to give a substantial reply, unless we question the fact that Hussein has such malicious designs. The versions of Arab nationalism professed by Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden are very different. The first type is not as malignant as the second, is it? Nobody has yet proved that Baghdad has any ties with Al-Qaeda.
It might seem that if a war is launched without the UN sanction, the U.S. can use successful experience - in 1999, it carried out bombings of Yugoslavia without the consent of the world community. At that time, Washington brushed aside the Security Council, as Russia's veto would disrupt any attempt to justify the aggression against Belgrade regarded at that time as Moscow's "historical ally". However, these two international situations are incommensurable. At that time, America' interference with the Kosovo conflict had strong support of NATO and public opinion in the U.S. For a war on Iraq, the United States lacks allies both in the alliance and at home. France and Germany lead the opposition of most European countries against military solution to the Iraqi problem. At the same time, 57% of Americans believe that Washington has no right to command attack without the support of these two countries.
The American administration could also try to predict the reaction of the Arab world on its illegitimate military action. According to German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, "the consequences for regional stability will be catastrophic." The second option is a war via arm-twisting diplomacy. In this case, George Bush will try to knock up consensus within the Security Council and obtain a resolution sanctioning the use of force.
So far, this option is unfeasible. Hans Blix recognised in his report to the Security Council on Monday that his inspectors in fact failed to prove that Iraq had banned weapons. The American intelligence does not seem to have sensational exposures with regard to Iraq either. And, primarily, Russia, France and China reject the force option and insist that UNMOVIC and IAEA should continue to work in Iraq. They do not rule out the extreme measure - using the right of veto. But reality overturns even those forecasts that seem very sound. Eventually, the United States can exert unbearable pressure on the Security Council, so that even its permanent members would ponder over whether they have to kick against the pricks, when America is pursing its major international goals.
The possible new resolution should not necessarily sanction a war. It may be written in a sophisticated and ambiguous language, enabling the opposing countries to save their face and even to feel content with their "righteous" position. They would not have to say "war" or forgive Saddam... Now, Washington is most concerned about the persistency of such Security Council members as Germany, Syria, Mexico and, possibly, Pakistan. However the precedent with voting on 1441 Resolution on November 8 showed that combinations of words in a diplomatic document are inexhaustible. For instance, Syria rejected the draft resolution, but an hour before the voting it informed the U.S. about its decision to vote for it. This time, the relations with Washington can be ranked above the Arab solidarity.
t is not ruled out that in the coming days, the inspectors can find something that will urge the Security Council to adopt a "force resolution". But they will have to find real combat weapons really posing the threat of mass destruction. Empty warheads is empty business. The third scenario is unexpected compromise. George Bush has a chance of reaching a compromise with Iraq at the supreme moment, an agreement that would either avert the threat of war for a long time or exclude it at all. For example, the U.S. President could consent to prolonging the period of the UN commission's work for several months. It does mean to give this commission "a chronological carte blanche" as IAEA Director Mohamed El Baradei insists. Such a gesture would enhance the U.S. positions in the eyes of its critics. They would recognise that Washington gave Saddam the ultimate chance and the Iraqi leader has no one to blame if he fails to use this chance.
So far, Bush's statements do not even hint that this is possible. From mid-April the manoeuvres of American soldiers in the Arab desert will be similar to browning in the microwave oven. "Time is expiring," Colin Powell says in Davos, Condoleezza Rice in an interview with the New York Times. But there is one more variant of the compromise scenario - Saddam Hussein and his associates can leave Iraq for some other country (say, Belarus) to save their own state from war. It is this variant that top U.S. officials seem to be favouring. However, Minsk denied its possible involvement in this sophisticated scenario. Still, it can only be realised in fantasies. Saddam Hussein believes that he is so great a leader of the Arab world that voluntary resignation is humiliating. "He is made of other stuff," according to a Russian analyst.
Mr. Bush offers as justification for the coming slaughter unified worldwide opinion. It is true, the world has spoken. The problem is, the Bush Administration refuses to hear what is being said. "The world has said Iraq should not be in possession of weapons of mass destruction; they also said; "Don't launch a full scale military assault aimed at gaining control of the lucrative Iraqi oil fields. And most importantly, work in accordance with the UN Security Council." That last part is routinely omitted by Mr. Bush as he plays the role of war salesman. At every turn the Bush administration has made false and misleading statements in building their case for war. At every turn the Administration has misstated the support and intentions of our historic allies in a blatant attempt to fan the fires of war. At every turn the Administration undermines attempts by the United Nations Security Council to resolve the issues peacefully. The continued massing of US assault forces on Iraq's border clearly signals Mr. Bush and his associates have no intention of working with the UN or anyone else. They are men with guns in their hands and gold in their eyes. Mr. Bush and his associates have repeatedly made a point of derailing and obfuscating the International Criminal Prosecution Process. They have berated and bribed nation after nation for assurances of immunity from International War Crimes prosecution. For these men, immunity from criminal prosecution will be precious indeed.
Later this year, the U.N.-established Conference on Disarmament will seat a new president: Iraq. The nation under scrutiny by the world body for weapons of mass destruction will have control – for nearly four weeks – of the agenda of a committee established in 1979 as "the single multilateral disarmament negotiating forum of the international community." - U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq, at first, was unaware that Iraq's turn was coming up. After further inquiry, however, he found that Baghdad will serve as chair, beginning at the end of May, according to a rotating schedule of the 75 member nations done in alphabetical order.
Twisters in Cyprus - A tornado touched down Monday near the port area of Limassol, extensively damaging shops and property, and littering the streets with trees, broken glass, water tanks ripped from rooftops. Twenty-eight people were injured, most of them slightly, police said. - Most of the injured sustained cuts and bruises, and all but 10 were either treated at the scene or treated in hospitals and soon released, police said. None of the injuries was life-threatening. The tornado, unusually powerful for the Mediterranean island, struck about 10 a.m., when businesses were just opening in a neighborhood of shops and small factories near the new port. The police press office said the tornado uprooted trees and severed power lines. About two hours later, a tornado also hit coastal area of Larnaca, near Kiti village, about 70 kilometers (45 miles) to the east, where police reported damage to homes and property. No injuries were reported there, according to police. In Limassol, roofs were torn off several stores when the tornado touched down for a few minutes, lifted, then briefly touched down again. A trailer was overturned and a shipping container it had been carrying was ripped from its bed. Antonis Antoniou, who works in a pharmaceutical factory, said the tornado lasted three or four minutes and that he had stepped outside to watch it coming in from the sea until co-workers pulled him in to safety. "The windows started breaking and they told everyone to go into the basement," he said. - Bad weather also delayed the arrival of the 15-ship British naval task force that was gathering off Cyprus on Monday to head on to the Gulf, according to officials at the British base near Limassol. The ships were heading to the Gulf in support of any U.S.-led military action against Iraq.
The weekend attack on the Internet crippled some sensitive corporate and government systems, including banking operations and 911 centers, far more seriously than many experts believed possible. The nation's largest residential mortgage firm, Countrywide Financial Corp., told customers who called Monday it was still suffering from the attack. Its Web site, where customers usually can make payments and check their loans, was closed with a note about "emergency maintenance." Police and fire dispatchers outside Seattle resorted to paper and pencil for hours Saturday after the virus-like attack disrupted operations for the 911 center that serves two suburban police departments and at least 14 fire departments. American Express Co. confirmed that customers couldn't reach its Web site to check credit statements and account balances during parts of the weekend. Perhaps most surprising, the attack prevented many customers of Bank of America Corp., one of the largest U.S. banks, and some large Canadian banks from withdrawing money from automatic teller machines Saturday. President Bush's No. 2 cyber-security adviser, Howard Schmidt, acknowledged Monday that what he called "collateral damage" stunned even experts who have warned about uncertain effects on the nation's most important electronic systems from mass-scale Internet disruptions.
A year ago, a group of activists marched on Senator Feinstein’s office to meet with Senator Boxer and Senator Feinstein’s staff and to demand a Congressional Investigation of 9-11. We raised a number of questions, including- What is the relationship between Bin Laden, his family and the Bush family and the Carlyle Group? Why were no fighter planes dispatched to intercept the four hijacked planes on September 11th , in violation of standard procedures? What is the U.S. relationship with Pakistan, and especially with its intelligence service, the ISI? Why did the then director of the ISI have $100,000 transferred to the man whom the FBI now calls the ringleader of the Sept. 11th attacks, and why does the U.S. not pursue this question? Did the CIA have foreknowledge of the attack, who tried to profit with put options on American, United, Merrill Lynch… stock just before the attack? Why were the FBI told to not investigate the Bin Laden family links in the US?
Bush and Cheney quickly urged Daschle to “limit the inquiries of 9-11,” which were officially overseen by the C.I.A. and men who deserved to be investigated for their September 11th 2001 breakfast meeting with the “Money Man” behind the attacks.
Resisting a nationwide demand for an Independent Commission, Bush finally conceded to create a commission, with very limited parameters, to be overseen by the renowned Henry Kissinger, the war criminal extraordinaire who has repeatedly lied to Congress, and has been working for oil companies very interested in the Caspian Sea Basin. His replacement, Thomas Kean, is hardly an improvement, with oil interests and financial ties to Bin Laden’s brother-in-law.
Just because the government is lying to the American people, and trying to cover-up the truth about 9-11 doesn’t mean that they were guilty of the entire operation, but it does make them a prime suspect, especially when the attack is the “pretext” for aggressive wars over oil resources, the dismantling of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, democracy and dissent at home and abroad. It is also clear that a government that is terrorizing its own people and the world, behaving in a criminal manner, has lost its legitimacy (although with a stolen election there really wasn’t much legitimacy to begin with).
Law Professor Francis A. Boyle has kindly offered to draw up articles of impeachment for Bush II (the only thing that stopped Bush I). It behooves those of us who care about peace, planet, democracy, our human fate to demand that our “public servants” rein in our “rogue government” before it inflicts more harm upon us and the world. - Visit your local Congress Critter and urge them to do the right thing.
In November, Veteran journalist Helen Thomas brought the grit and whir of a White House press conference to Bartos Theater, speaking with passion about the media's role in a democracy whose leaders seem eager for war. Actually, the 82-year-old former United Press International reporter didn't just speak: she surged into her topic, giving everyone present an immediate sense of the grumpy wit and fierce precision that gave her reporting on American presidents Kennedy through Bush II such a competitive and lasting edge. - "I have never covered a president who actually wanted to go to war. Bush's policy of pre-emptive war is immoral - such a policy would legitimize Pearl Harbor. It's as if they learned none of the lessons from Vietnam," she said to enthusiastic applause. -
"Where is the outrage?" she demanded. "Where is Congress? They're supine! Bush has held only six press conferences, the only forum in our society where a president can be questioned. I'm on the phone to [press secretary] Ari Fleischer every day, asking will he ever hold another one? The international world is wondering what happened to America's great heart and soul." -
"Great presidents have great goals for mankind. During my years of covering the White House, Kennedy was the most inspired; Johnson rammed through voting rights and public housing; Nixon will be remembered for his trip to China and for his resignation; Ford for helping us recover from Nixon; and Carter for making human rights the centerpiece of foreign policy," Thomas said in an even, respectful tone. She just sighed over Clinton, who "tarnished the Oval Office." Thomas' mood became visibly more somber at the mention of Ronald Reagan's military buildup and at the name Bush. Again and again, Thomas warned the MIT audience, "It's bombs away for Iraq and on our civil liberties if Bush and his cronies get their way. Dissent is patriotic!"
Thomas didn't let the press off the hook, though. "Everybody learned the lessons of Vietnam, including the Pentagon. In Vietnam, correspondents could go anywhere - just hop on a helicopter and report on the war. Now we don't have that access. It's total secrecy. The media overlords should be complaining about this. I do not absolve the press. We've rolled over and played dead, too," she said. Asked to advise young journalists, Thomas pounced. "Remind the politicians you interview that you pay them, that they are public servants. Remember every question is legitimate. And don't give up. There's always a leak. There's always someone who's trying to save the country," she said.
Helen Thomas: Bush "Worst President" - John Bogert on Helen Thomas - (this report is disappearing rapidly. I had to get it from a cached version - scroll down this page for the report) -As late as 1972 she was the only woman on the Nixon China trip. Still, she survives in a Washington press corps that she says has gone soft, accepting presidential spin without question. Then came Johnson’s Great Society and Vietnam. Nixon, she said, was a man who would — when presented two roads — "always choose the wrong one." He was followed by "healing" Ford, well-meaning Carter, Reagan’s revolution, Bush Sr.’s self-destruction and Clinton’s damaging of the presidential myth. She seemed to have sympathy and affection for everyone but George W. Bush, a man who she said is rising on a wave of 9-11 fear — fear of looking unpatriotic, fear of asking questions, just fear. “We have,” she said, "lost our way." Thomas believes we have chosen to promote democracy with bombs instead of largess while Congress "defaults," Democrats cower and a president controls all three branches of government in the name of corporations and the religious right. As she signed my program, I joked, "You sound worried." "This is the worst president ever," she said. "He is the worst president in all of American history." The woman who has known eight of them wasn’t joking.
In recent weeks, much has been made of the Iraqi weapons declaration, which Iraqi officials have claimed is final and comprehensive. The world will never really know because the report was seized en route to the United Nations Security Council from Cyprus by U.S. officials who claimed that the declaration contained vital information and military technology secrets that could not be distributed to the rest of the non-permanent members of the Security Council. And definitely not to the rest of the world, who would love to see how Iraq's weapons procurement program had gotten so advanced, so discreetly.
UK and US claim justification as Blix accuses Baghdad of lies, but UN inspectors get more time - The US and Britain were yesterday declaring victory for their hawkish stand on Iraq, after the chief United Nations weapons inspector accused Baghdad of lying about its stockpiles of VX gas, anthrax and plans to develop long-range missiles. At the end of a crucial day at the UN, the inspectors appeared to have earned themselves more time to search Iraq - but only a limited reprieve of less than three weeks. Washington and London agreed to hear another assessment of Iraqi compliance on February 14. - Mr Blix, responsible for chemical, biological weapons and missiles, stunned the security council with an outspoken condemnation of Iraqi behaviour, saying Baghdad had yet to accept the need for genuine disarmament. "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance - not even today - of the disarmament which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace." Mr Blix gave a litany of unaccounted-for Iraqi weapons, including 6,500 chemical bombs, material sufficient to create 5,000 litres of anthrax and an unknown quantity in weapon form of the lethal chemical VX. He also pointed to programmes to build possible long-range missiles. By contrast, Mohamed El Baradei, in charge of nuclear inspections, presented a generally positive picture of Iraqi cooperation and appealed for a "few more months" to carry on his work "to avoid a war". Comment: We know whose team Blix is playing on. Wonder what bait he has taken???
Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tareq Aziz, speaking after U.N. weapons inspectors said Baghdad was not doing enough to help their probes, on Monday promised Iraq would cooperate more in future. But Aziz also struck a defiant tone, telling Canada's CBC television that if U.S. troops invaded they would be met with "bullets, not flowers" and would suffer heavy casualties. Earlier in the day chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix told the United Nations Security Council that Baghdad had not come to a "genuine acceptance" of its obligations to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and was not cooperating fully. "They're asking Iraq to provide more cooperation. OK, let them say that. We are doing that," Aziz told CBC anchor Peter Mansbridge in a one-on-one interview conducted in Baghdad amid a U.S. military buildup for possible war.
Aziz said there were only two areas of contention between Iraq and the inspectors -- the question of whether U-2 surveillance planes could fly over the country and the conditions under which Iraqi scientists could be interviewed. "All other aspects of cooperation have been met and we promise to be more forthcoming in the future replying to all their needs in (a) way that will satisfy them," he said. COMPLAINTS DISMISSED Blix rapped Iraq for leaving gaps in a Dec. 7 declaration on its weapons programs. He also listed instances where he suspected Iraq had not fully declared important aspects of its chemical, biological and ballistic missile arms programs. Aziz dismissed statements from Secretary of State Colin Powell and others claiming that Iraq had not declared all its stocks of anthrax, saying all the country's biological weaponry had been destroyed in 1991. "When Powell speaks about those things he speaks about them as if they are real weapons in the hands of the Iraqis and he alleges they might be given to terrorists and the terrorists will use them against the American people. ... This is a manipulation of facts. This has no significance," he said.
Britain said Tuesday Iraq had clearly ignored United Nations disarmament demands, rallying behind President Bush as he prepared to set out his case for war to American voters and skeptical allies. Warning Baghdad to stop its "game playing," British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said it was in "material breach" of U.N. Security Council resolutions, echoing Washington for the first time with lawyerly wording that lays Iraq open to an attack. Bush is expected to use his State of the Union address at 9 p.m. (0200 GMT Wednesday) to argue that war is becoming unavoidable after weapons inspectors told the U.N. Monday that Iraq was dragging its feet in complying with their demands. The U.S. president has so far failed to rally much of the world behind his hawkish position, leaving many unconvinced by his argument that Iraq poses an immediate threat to its own neighbors and could provide lethal weaponry to the sort of anti-Western groups that carried out the Sept. 11 attacks. But in one sign of change, Russia, a veto-wielding member of the Security Council, signaled a tougher line against Iraq, urging it not to hamper the inspectors' work.
Jack Straw today said war against Iraq was more likely than ever and accused Saddam Hussein of an "unbelievable refusal" to comply with UN resolutions. Ignoring international calls to give weapons inspectors more time to do their jobs, the Foreign Secretary claimed Iraq's "blatant non-compliance" made military action likely.
BLIX REPORT DOES NOT JUSTIFY WAR - SADDAM Hussein is a lying, cheating, devious tyrant. He always has been and he will be as long as he remains in power. The highly critical report by United Nations weapons inspectors confirmed what everyone already knew about this thoroughly nasty piece of work. But what it didn't do is confirm what George Bush and Tony Blair want us to believe: that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and intends to use them. And that is the crux of this desperately dangerous situation. - George Bush is a gung-ho president who wants to get his hands on Iraq's oil and win populist votes by deposing an evil tyrant. But these are not reasons for us to commit our magnificent armed forces to battle. Nor are they reasons to slaughter thousands of innocent Iraqi people in the process. The Americans and our own Government will use Hans Blix's report as the trigger for an attack. That is obvious by their rhetoric yesterday. But they have provided no proof of Saddam's supposed WMD arsenal. And without that they will not have the support of the international community. Nor will they have right on their side.
Despite a tough report by chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix on Iraq, few members of a split U.N. Security Council changed their positions on war or peace, leaving Washington Tuesday scrambling for support. Blix bolstered the U.S. case for military action by saying Baghdad had to come to a "genuine acceptance" of its disarmament obligation. He told the Security Council Monday that Iraq failed to answer crucial questions on its long-range missiles and chemical and biological arms programs, But council members Russia, France, Syria, Germany and China, as well as U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, said the inspections were working and should be given more time, particularly in the light of any concrete evidence that Iraq has rebuilt its arsenal as the Bush administration contends. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Washington would release "additional information in the time period ahead."
French President Jacques Chirac and Saudi Arabia's foreign minister agreed during talks on Tuesday that all alternatives to war should be explored to resolve the Iraq crisis, Chirac's spokeswoman said. Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said after the talks he hoped a "calamity of immense proportions" could be avoided in Iraq and the country's territorial integrity maintained. Chirac's spokeswoman, Catherine Colonna, said the two men wanted United Nations weapons inspectors to continue their work in Iraq, but stressed that the Iraqi authorities must improve their cooperation. "They both believe that all solutions other than the use of force, which can only be justified as a last resort, must be explored," Colonna said, briefing journalists on the talks. "In particular, the inspectors should be given the necessary time and means to complete their mission," she added. On leaving his talks with Chirac, al-Faisal said he and the French leader had discussed "our perception of the situation and what needs to be done to prevent a calamity and a crisis of immense proportions inside Iraq." "In my government, we are all hoping for a possibility of a solution that avoids the dismemberment and maintains the territorial integrity of Iraq," he added.
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov announced at a joint press conference on Tuesday with Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Dr. Abdelouahed Belkeziz, that UN international inspectors had to continue their work in Iraq. According to Ivanov, Russia was proceeding from the basis that cooperation had to be expanded within the frameworks of various international organizations so that a political solution to the Iraqi problem could be found. The minister also stressed that there was still potential for this to be achieved. Ivanov said that the recent reports issued by the UN international inspectors showed a fairly clear picture of the development of the situation in Iraq. However, he added that the Iraqi leadership had to observe completely all the latest recommendations from the United Nations.
Mr Bush and Mr Blair might have a tougher fight than they anticipated. Not from Saddam Hussein perhaps - although it is still not obvious that they can capture and hold Iraq's cities without major losses - but from an anti-war movement that is beginning to look like nothing the world has seen before. It's not just that people have begun to gather in great numbers even before a shot has been fired. It's not just that they are doing so without the inducement of conscription or any other direct threat to their welfare. It's not just that there have already been meetings or demonstrations in almost every nation on Earth. It's also that the campaign is being coordinated globally with an unprecedented precision. And the people partly responsible for this are the members of a movement which, even within the past few weeks, the mainstream media has pronounced extinct.
Far from dying away, our movement has grown bigger than most of us could have guessed. September 11 muffled the protests for a while, but since then they have returned with greater vehemence, everywhere except the US. The last major global demonstration it convened was the rally at the European summit in Barcelona. Some 350,000 activists rose from the dead. They came despite the terrifying response to the marches in June 2001 in Genoa, where the police burst into protesters' dormitories and beat them with truncheons as they lay in their sleeping bags, tortured others in the cells and shot one man dead.
But neither the violent response, nor September 11, nor the indifference of the media have quelled this rising. Ever ready to believe their own story, the newsrooms have interpreted the absence of coverage (by the newsrooms) as an absence of activity. One of our recent discoveries is that we no longer need them. We have our own channels of communication, our own websites and pamphlets and magazines, and those who wish to find us can do so without their help. They can pronounce us dead as often as they like, and we shall, as many times, be resurrected.
Whether we are noticed or not is no longer relevant. We know that, with or without the media's help, we are a gathering force which might one day prove unstoppable.
If Tony Blair will not speak for England, then who will? - History never exactly repeats itself, and the supporters of peace and war in this generation are interestingly transposed today compared with their predecessors in 1939. But we are once again a country desperately in need of a clear, temperate voice at a time of unmistakable international crisis. Rarely has it seemed more important in recent years for the national interest on the world stage to be properly articulated and clearly acted upon. And yet if Tony Blair no longer speaks for England - or, more properly, Britain - then who does?
U.S. won't be ready to fight until March - While the Bush administration keeps warning that time is running out for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to disarm, the U.S. troops, tanks and supplies needed to make war against Baghdad won't be ready for a possible invasion until mid-March at the earliest. After weeks of deployment orders, an estimated 60,000 troops are in the Persian Gulf region and another 100,000 are due to follow them. But the U.S. ground presence in Kuwait now is at less than 20,000 soldiers, a small fraction of those required to invade Iraq. Privately, U.S. military officers in Kuwait voice skepticism over an assessment from the Pentagon that American forces will be ready for war by late February if President Bush orders military action. Some retired officers and military experts agree. "You could conceivably be two months or more away in order to satisfy every ground commander," said retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark, the former NATO commander who oversaw the 1999 allied effort that ousted Serbian forces from Kosovo. "The force isn't there yet." Though the Pentagon's war plans remain secret, a number of senior officials have indicated that an invasion force to be massed largely in Kuwait probably would consist of three heavy Army divisions, a light division, one Marine Expeditionary Force and a contingent of British troops and armor.
U.S. and Afghan forces are fighting a large band of rebels in the mountains of southern Afghanistan in the biggest battle in the country for nearly a year, officials said Tuesday. U.S. military spokesman Colonel Roger King said at least 18 rebels loyal to renegade commander Gulbuddin Hekmatyar had been killed in the fighting, describing it as the largest group of enemy forces encountered since "Operation Anaconda" last March. As Washington shifts its attention to Iraq, the U.S. military has increasingly come under attack in Afghanistan, suggesting that 14 months after toppling the Taliban they have not succeeded in wiping out the fundamentalist militia and their allies. King said U.S. B-1 bombers, AC-130 gunships and Apache helicopters as well as Allied F-16 warplanes had attacked enemy positions for more than 12 hours throughout the night in a range of hills not far from the Pakistani border.
King said U.S. and allied warplanes had dropped 19 2,000-lb bombs and two guided 500-lb bombs on enemy positions near a series of caves in the remote hills. "There were repeated gun engagements by the AC-130 and the AH-64 Apaches," he added. In the southern border town of Spin Boldak, residents stood on rooftops and shipping containers to watch flames and smoke rising from the Adi Ghar mountain, 23 km (14 miles) to the north. Norway's government said its warplanes had dropped bombs in battle for the first time since World War II. King said U.S. forces were still trying to establish how many rebels were in the area, although initial information had suggested it was a group of around 80 men. AC - 130 Gunship Targeting video - Afghanistan - large file, 5 mega - you must right click on the link to download the file. Keep in mind that the men doing the bombing have NO idea who they are killing - whether they are innocent civilians or not. While watching this, just imagine yourself, your family, your friends in the picture. USAF Fact Sheet AC-130H/U Gunship
Pakistan's military said on Tuesday it had shot down a pilotless Indian spy plane which crossed into Pakistani airspace in the disputed Kashmir region. The military said two Indian "remote piloted vehicles" (RPVs) had crossed over the Line of Control, or cease-fire line, in the past 48 hours. "Pakistani troops took appropriate measures which forced the Indian RPV's to abandon their spying mission. One intruding RPV was seen falling in flames," the military said in a statement. The statement said more than 200 similar violations by India had taken place in 2002. "The proof of which has been provided with the shooting down of these unmanned aircraft in the past." India, however, denied the incident.
North Korea has insisted that only talks with the United States can solve a nuclear standoff and rejected involving other countries, according to a Pyongyang statement carried by Russian news agency Interfax Tuesday. "We consistently stand against all and any attempt to internationalise the nuclear question on the Korean peninsula, and...we will not participate in multilateral talks in any way," said the North Korean Foreign Ministry statement. "The one and only way to achieve a peaceful and just solution to the Korean nuclear issue is direct talks on equal terms between North Korea and the United States. There can be no other way."
Former U.N. arms inspector Richard Butler said Tuesday that Washington was promoting "shocking double standards" in considering taking unilateral military action to rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction. Butler, who led U.N. inspection teams in Iraq until Baghdad kicked them out in 1998, said Iraqi President Saddam Hussein undoubtedly possessed weapons of mass destruction, and was trying to "cheat" his way again out of the latest U.N. demand to disarm. But a U.S. attack, without United Nations backing, and without any effort to curb the possession of weapons of mass destruction globally, would be a contravention of international law and sharpen the divide between Arabs and the West.
"The spectacle of the United States, armed with its weapons of mass destruction, acting without Security Council authority to invade a country in the heartland of Arabia and, if necessary, use its weapons of mass destruction to win that battle, is something that will so deeply violate any notion of fairness in this world that I strongly suspect it could set loose forces that we would deeply live to regret," Butler said.
Butler's successor as the chief U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq, Hans Blix, reported Monday to the 15-member Security Council that Baghdad had only reluctantly complied with its latest demand to disarm. Washington is pressing the United Nations to take firm action but says it is prepared to go it alone and has amassed a considerable military force in the region. Butler, addressing a conservative Australian think-tank, The Sydney Institute, said the stated U.S. motive -- to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction -- lacked credibility because of Washington's failure to deal with others on the same terms.
Countries such as Syria are suspected of possessing chemical or biological warfare capabilities, he said. U.S. allies Israel, Pakistan and India have nuclear arsenals but have not signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The United States and other permanent Security Council members were themselves the possessors of the world's largest quantities of nuclear weapons, he said. "Why are they permitting the persistence of such shocking double standards?" Butler said. He said that, instead of beating the drums of war, the United States should propose an international mechanism -- similar to the Security Council -- to enforce the application of the three main conventions controlling the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weaponry. It should also take the lead by reducing its own stockpiles. "I hope we don't have to await the train wreck before we decide to change history," Butler said.
Bronze Age residents of what is now modern-day Iraq, Syria and Turkey traded and traveled more widely along a network of highways than previously thought, archeologists studying newly released U.S. spy photographs said on Monday. Around 5,000 years ago, wheeled wagons navigated along wide dirt roads that extended dozens of miles across the fertile prairies of northern Iraq and its neighboring states, and probably to the Mediterranean Sea, the research showed. "We assumed that these ancient sites were pretty parochial, but in fact they were tied together by well-traveled highways," said University of Chicago archeologist Tony Wilkinson, who coauthored a paper on the findings to be published in the upcoming issue of the journal Antiquity.
Ominous storm clouds have been gathering for some time. There have been a few gusts of wind and a few drops of rain have fallen. An enormous storm is about to strike an unsuspecting world. Only a tiny fraction of people in this nation and the rest of the developed world are prepared physically and financially for what is about to strike their lives.
Our great nation, along with others, have warning systems in place to provide the populace with early warnings for many natural disasters such as hurricanes, earthquakes and tornados. A very great tragedy, a true disaster, is about to hit the entire globe, but there were no warnings to prepare for it in advance. And, even more tragic, a widespread general alarm has not yet happened a full 3 years after the first signs of grave trouble appeared.
The true understanding of what is now happening and what is to come is held by a tiny fraction of our population. From the top down, neither President Bush, his advisors nor members of our Congress, with the possible exception of Representative Ron Paul of Texas, have a correct and full knowledge of the economic devastation about to strike. There are no signs of recognition of our "once in a century" storm by our corporate leaders in Wall Street or around the nation. The ivory towers of academia have not recognized the scope and magnitude of what they now perceive as a "modest recession." Prof. Jeremy Siegel of the Wharton School of Finance, a renowned author and student of the stock market, has recently declared on CNBC that the bear market is over - a brilliant case of the blind leading the blind!
The highly paid executives and the thousands of employees of the large corporations that have declared bankruptcy recently must surely recognize that something quite unusual is occurring. The heads of other companies struggling to keep their business alive and the millions of investors who have lost trillions of dollars from their retirement plans know that there are serious problems with our economy. But no one, from the President and Alan Greenspan on down to our nation’s daily newspapers, are telling the scary truth about the crisis situation threatening America and the rest of the world.
The crux of the great tragedy now unfolding is that the basic knowledge underlying cycles in the stock market and economy were discovered in the 1930s by Ralph Elliott and published in his monumental book the "Elliott Wave Principle." Seventy years later, there has been no serious recognition and acceptance of his revolutionary discoveries.
More on the Google situation: After my email to google - reported several days ago - complaining that we were being "censored," , I received the following:
Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring results. At the same time, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site, as noted in our advertising terms and conditions.
You may be aware that a different set of laws and regulations apply to commercial speech (advertising) than to the search results we show when you do a Google search. As a business, Google must make decisions about where we draw the line in regards to the advertising we accept, both from a legal and company values perspective.
Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver. We will continue to deliver results for sites that advocate the full spectrum of political positions and personal opinions.
Our editorial staff reviews all the ads that run on Google to make sure they meet our criteria. Since we show ads immediately, there may be a short period of time when an ad is running before it has been reviewed and approved by Google.
Please note that we try to keep this lag as brief as possible and do remove ads that we find to be outside our guidelines. We appreciate your comments on this issue, which will help inform our future policy discussions. Thank you for taking the time to write us.
After "adjusting" our sponsored link to "conform" with the suggested adwords for a news site and reactivating it, we received the following:
After reviewing your account, I have found that one or more of your ads or keywords does not meet our guidelines. These results are outlined in the report below.
SUGGESTIONS: -> Content: At this time, Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain "language that advocates against an individual, group, or organization". As noted in our advertising terms and conditions, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site.
Unacceptable Content: Google believes strongly in freedom of expression and therefore offers broad access to content across the web without censoring search results. Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver.
In other words, it is not acceptable to "advertise" a page that advocates Impeaching George Bush!!!! Of course, saying over and over again "Please note that the decisions we make concerning advertising in no way affect the search results we deliver." is completely meaningless when one notes the frequency with which google often "fails" to regularly update its webcrawling. It does seem, however, that with attention being brought to their policies and censorship activity, google is aware that they are being watched and that there are OTHER search options that people will turn to once it is understood that the best and most complete results can be obtained elsewhere - such as alltheweb.
Fair Use Policy
Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org