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]
February 14, 2003 Today's edition of Brought to You by The Bush Junta, Produced and Directed by the CIA, based on an original script by Henry Kissinger, with a cast of billions.... The "Greatest Shew on Earth," no doubt, and if you don't have a good sense of humor, don't read this page! It is designed to reveal the "unseen." If you can't stand the heat of Objective Reality, get out of the kitchen!
Okay folks its time to come off the fence and decide whos side you are on. Today the US declared in front of the rest of the world at the UN that regardless of the fact that there is NO EVIDENCE to support a war on the Iraqi people, with Blix rubbishing Powell's satellite image "evidence", they are determined to have their bloody war for oil. Tomorrow may be your last chance to stand up and be counted. This is history in the making. It will be the largest worldwide antiwar demonstration ever. I urge you to take this opportunity to join with millions of others around the globe in showing your solidarity with the Iraqi people by saying NO to US and UK imperialism and greed! Check this list of 309 cities worldwide that will be demonstrating.
Just in case you are in two minds, perhaps this excellent Flash presentation will help you decide.
'The most pitiful sight I have ever seen' The 1991 Gulf war was my first experience as a war reporter. As a freelancer, I had knocked on the door of the Irish Times's D'Olier Street office with a piece of gold glittering in my palm: a valid Iraqi visa. I got to meet the editor, who bought me a ticket to Baghdad. Abu Tariq, my taxi driver in the capital, knew I wasn't quite sure how to be a war reporter. So he looked after me, taking me home at night to his wife. On one of those nights, all seven of his children were sitting around the dining room table, cutting up their white cotton table cloth into 10in squares. "They're making gas masks to cover their face with when the war comes," he said. The first days of that war had a curiously surreal air. Most of the press had left before the bombing started. The desperately ambitious, the thrill-seekers and the conscientious stayed on. Still, we were 1,000 miles from the front.
We rattled around at breakfast in the al-Rashid banqueting hall. The bread ran out. Our Iraqi censor, Sadoun, a large man who had gone to Aberdeen University and liked whisky, would bring his pen to check the reports before we filed them. Sometimes he censored, sometimes he didn't. It depended on the time, our numbers, his boredom threshold. John Simpson bossed the Iraqis around in his well-brought-up way. Marie Colvin of the Sunday Times kept a yellow canary in her room like a heroine from a Sebastian Faulks novel, but nobody worried too much about being gassed.Then, one night, Abu Tariq took me to the war. At a bus station south of Baghdad I came across a road filled with the wives, mothers and daughters of the cannon fodder you see in these pages. They were the women of the soldiers of the Basra Road. They were rushing at each battered minibus, taxi and truck arriving from the front at Basra. Like black bees at a honeycomb, they were hurling themselves at the survivors, pulling at the bloodied, wounded men in search of their sons, their fathers and those they loved. "Have you seen him?" "Where is he?" "Is he not with you?" Then, as each heard the news, she would fall to her knees to mourn for one of the 37,000 men who would not come home. It went on all night, a wail of pain and desperation. It was the most pitiful sight I have ever witnessed.
Two days later, I flew home, my head still filled with the women's faces. I picked up a copy of Newsweek on the plane. On the cover was the jubilant General Norman Schwarzkopf. Inside was his description of their victory at the Basra Road. There was obscene detail of F16s and laser-guided missiles, and how they had trapped the fleeing Iraqi army from the air. He was reliving the highlights as if they were the final moments of a cup match. I cried on that plane. Partly still in shock at the women and the pain at that Baghdad station, and partly with shame, because I knew we had done such a lousy job of reporting the war. Few of the pictures you see on these pages were ever seen at the time. The body parts of these men being shovelled into the mouths of the bulldozers were men whose choice was to die at the front or be shot for deserting.
This time they face the same choice. I've been back to Iraq many times. Mostly it has been to write about the sanctions that have destroyed the people of that pitiful nation. In between, I've been to other wars, but as this one builds, it becomes almost unbearable to follow. Except at moments of sanity such as last week's life-affirming stand by Joschka Fischer, Germany's foreign minister, when he told an astonished Donald Rumsfeld: "You have to make the case; I'm sorry but I am not convinced."After 10 years of reporting wars in Iraq, Bosnia, Chechnya, Kosovo and East Timor, I believe passionately that war can only ever be the absolutely final option for humanity. Unfortunately, we have been so protected from its pain and horror by the impenetrable wall of censorship and euphemism - as we will continue to be - that war is allowed to prevail as a legitimate means of conducting human affairs.
Here is a bit of collateral damage: The first time I met Abu Ziad was in 1998. He had been the chief accountant with the British Iraqi Oil Company. Then, he had five children and lived in a big house by a bomb shelter. He recalled how during the Iran-Iraq war, when nearly 1 million young men died on each side, he would be at home in Baghdad, hearing the sounds of women wailing in the night for another lost son, husband or lover. He remembered thanking God that he had married late, and that his children were too young to be sent to fight. Then, three years after that war, President Saddam led them into another. At 2am on February 13 1991, two bombs hit the al-Amiriya bomb shelter near his home. The first was a drilling bomb that pierced the roof and cut open the central heating tank. Boiling water poured through the ceiling on to the women and children below, who were playing dominoes, watching Tom and Jerry videos dubbed into Arabic and eating kebabs. Only 15 minutes later, the second bomb exploded with such force that he never had the chance to identify the bodies of his wife and four of their five children: Zena, aged 14; Fuad, aged 12; Lena, aged seven; and Sadaad, aged six. "I saw a body being brought out, then I saw it was Zena's, but they were piling them on top of each other and I couldn't see if it was her. We weren't allowed to go close." Later that morning, Abu Ziad stood outside the shelter. He remembers noticing the ankles of the dead women and children. Their skin had been branded with the metal coils of red-hot mattress springs as they struggled to climb over the metal beds, and each other, to get out. The doors had been locked for security. Four hundred and six people, mostly women and children, died inside. Comment: This is what you are being asked to support people, the murder of innocent women and children, the US government has deliberately tried to scupper the inspections process because they know that it will find no WMD and therefore provide no justification for war. Who knows, perhaps it is part of their agenda to decimate the worlds population, ask Henry kissinger about it.
Vanetine's Day: What better valentine than to commit to being at a march against the madness tomorrow along with millions of others. You may wonder what difference it would make. This short piece by a teacher at the Quantum Future School gives one reason:
I just started reading Jung's The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, and he makes an interesting statement:
"[...] The archetype corresponding to the situation is activated, and as a result those explosive and dangerous forces hidden in the archetype come into action, frequently with unpredictable consequences. There is no lunacy people under the domination of an archetype will not fall prey to. If thirty years ago anyone had dared to predict that our psychological development was tending towards a revival of the medieval persecutions of the Jews, that Europe would again tremble before the Roman fasces, and the tramp of legions, that people would once more give the Roman salute, as two thousand years ago, and that instead of the Christian Cross an archaic swastika would lure onward millions of warrior ready to death-why, that man would have been hooted at as a mystical fool. And today? Surprising as it may seem, all this absurdity is a horrible reality. [...]
I just finished reading Malachi Martin's Hostage to the Devil over the weekend, and musing over it afterwards I thought that demonic possession may be a good analogy for those who are fully immersed into the A influence reality and those who are susceptible to what ever archetype that is introduced by the powers that be.
When talking about the current world situation with those who ask, I have heard after they agree with everything said, what good does knowing this do since we can't do anything, and with obvious relief stop thinking about it.
What is interesting, is that this is the same attitude of those who are about to be possessed. There is a build up of great pressure, and rather than resisting they give in and feel a great relief and are rewarded by a feeling of bliss. Of course, they may regret their decision as they lose all will and live the most horrifying and degrading lifestyle. Most possession is a long process where their will is gradually worn down. Those who are badgered in this manner often have some twist to their thinking that if followed to it's extreme leaves them vulnerable to giving up their free will to this something other.
When we send letters to our elected representatives, or physically go to demonstrations, it is not so much what the effect may be, although there may be an effect. We live in a quantum reality, with linear minds, so it may not be feasible for us to map out what energy we send from us has in real world effects. That is not the point.
Every action we take is an act of will, and a defiance against this realities possession of us. It is also a removal of our energy from the artificially introduced archetype to make the masses easily malleable. Every individual who does not give up their individual will to this archetype means less energy usable for it's overall dominance. It is necessary for the false gods of the media, the modern day oracle in the living room, to constantly reinforce the consensus reality, to constantly play on people desire to appear normal, and to belong to something larger than themselves, otherwise it would just collapse into itself.
Who can deny that at the core of our reality is some dark and mechanical ooze that bubbles up to the surface that mars the superficial glossy sheen painted over this reality with a thin veneer? The perfectly possessed can. There is some discussion of the perfectly possessed in Martin's book, and they are the ones who do not act out of the ordinary, or at least can conduct themselves under acceptable parameters in society without drawing undue attention to themselves, and are often successful. One could say that the organic portals are the perfectly possessed, and all those so worn down by being drained by the portals that they can no longer act or think for themselves, and just accept what ever the television oracle declares.
Just some of my thoughts, before the State of the Union address, which I will not have the stomach to watch. And I read Hostage to the Devil, without flinching, before going to sleep.
Bush's Mayport beach speech 13/Feb/02: A QFS member remarks:"Dubya did it again, I watched part of Bush's speech at the Mayport base today I heard the same thing I heard in his State of the Union speech, and it sounds to me like an admission of murder. This is from the text of his speech":
"With our allies, we've arrested or otherwise dealt with -- (laughter) -- many of the key commanders of al Qaeda. And that includes the terrorist who planned the bombing of the USS Cole. (Applause.) So far, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. Just about that number met a different kind of fate. They're not a problem anymore. (Applause.)" full text here:
QFS member: "It is truly appalling that
there could be laughter at his first remark, and applause at his
second remark. When he got the laughter and the applause, a
sinister little smile appeared on his face. He loved getting not
only tolerance, but approval for what he's done. Life has no value
to this man, and people allow it and applaud it in the twisted
reality he's created where murder makes people feel
False Alarm? Terror Alert Partly Based on Fabricated Information The officials said that a claim made by a captured al Qaeda member that Washington, New York or Florida would be hit by a "dirty bomb" sometime this week had proven to be a product of his imagination.
The informant described a detailed plan that an al Qaeda cell operating in either Virginia or Detroit had developed a way to slip past airport scanners with dirty bombs encased in shoes, suitcases, or laptops, sources told ABCNEWS. The informant reportedly cited specific targets of government buildings and Christian or clerical centers. "This piece of that puzzle turns out to be fabricated and therefore the reason for a lot of the alarm, particularly in Washington this week, has been dissipated after they found out that this information was not true," said Vince Cannistraro, former CIA counter-terrorism chief and ABCNEWS consultant.
It was only after the threat level was elevated to orange — meaning high — last week, that the informant was subjected to a polygraph test by the FBI, officials told ABCNEWS.
"This person did not pass," said Cannistraro.
According to officials, the FBI and the CIA are pointing fingers at each other. An FBI spokesperson told ABCNEWS today he was "not familiar with the scenario," but did not think it was accurate.
Despite the fabricated report, there are no plans to change the threat level. Officials said other intelligence has been validated and that the high level of precautions is fully warranted. Comment: Think the manufacturers of duct tape have an in with al Qaeda? Reminds me of a joke circulating on the Internet this week.
Jacques Chirac and Colin Powell were having a meeting about the situation in Iraq. Chirac began expressing the concerns of the French Government about the course of action the US was taking regarding Iraq.
Chirac: "We understand the US position, but we, the French, are not so convinced as you that the Iraqis are hiding weapons of mass destruction."
Powell: "The American Government is absolutely positive the Iraqi Government has weapons of mass destruction that they are not making available to the UN Inspectors."
Chirac: "How can you be so sure."
Powell: "We still have the receipts."
Iraq Missiles Violate U.N. Rules Experts have concluded that Iraq's al-Samoud 2 missiles can travel beyond the 93-mile limit allowed under U.N. resolutions, a capability that the United States calls a serious violation.
Iraq's Deputy Premier Tariq Aziz denied the allegations.
He said the missiles were short-range and do not have a guidance system.
"When a missile doesn't have a guidance system, it goes five to 10 to 15 kilometers (3 to 6 to 10 miles) beyond'' its range, he said. "That is not very dangerous.''
US Govt Insiders now beginning to spill the beans on 9-11 / CIA connections An interview with Michael Springman exposes the CIA's links with the terrorist attacks on September 11[...]: Michael Springmann worked for the US government for 20 years with the foreign service and consulate. He just went public with the story of his involvement in a large scale CIA operation that brought hundreds of people from the middle east to the US, issued them passports and trained them to be terrorists. Springmann says that the CIA is working closely with Bin Laden and his operatives in Jeddah and has been since 1987. The most haunting implication from this interview is that all of the terrorist acts of late were planned and paid for by the CIA with US taxpayers money so that the US could legitimately bomb the hell out of Afghanistan.
Hear the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) interview here.
Discharged Reservist: 'This War Is Wrong' Sudbury, 27, of Salt Lake City, enlisted in the Army Reserve after he graduated from Hillcrest High School in 1994. "I was filled with the pride and honor in defending my country," he says. In January 2000, he re-enlisted for another three years. Like many other soldiers, the events of Sept. 11, 2001, filled him with anger and a desire to retaliate. "Then I started asking myself why anyone would want to do this to the United States?" Sudbury says. Answering that question led him to a new view of the United States and to the conclusion that there is a rift between the government and the people. He came to believe that "our government has lied and even manipulated events in order to get us to go to war."
Misleading the Public On Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State dropped a bombshell at a Congressional hearing on Iraq and revealed that he had a transcript of an 'upcoming' audio message from Osama bin Laden which betrays the links between bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. However, the White House may have put its foot in its mouth this time around.
Upon careful scrutiny of the audio message from bin Laden (and broadcast at 3pm EST on the Arabic News Network Al- Jazeerah), it appears the Bush administration may have been so desperate to pin anything on Saddam and bin Laden that they did not wait to actually hear the contents of the message, nor provide adequate and reliable translation. The bin Laden message expresses solidarity with the Iraqi people, advises them to remain steadfast in the coming invasion of their country and declares that Saddam and his aides are not important. "It is not important if Saddam and his government disappear," the man thought to be bin Laden says. "This is a war against you, the Muslims, and you must take arms to defend yourselves." U.S. officials were quick to point out that the bin Laden message directly incriminates Iraq and proves the existence of ties between bin Laden's Al-Qaida and Saddam. U.S. media touted the official line before even hearing the tape, or awaiting a reliable translation. "Undeniably links Iraq with Al-Qaida," says one CNN anchor.
And then something happened that neither the U.S. administration nor the media anticipated: bin Laden called Saddam an apostate.
The audio message goes on to reveal that bin Laden believes Saddam to be a socialist, and declares "socialists and communists are unbelievers," thereby labelling Saddam an apostate of Islam, an infidel. It is worth mentioning that the government of Iraq is quasi-socialist and secular, and not Islamic. Walid Phares, an Arabic-speaking MSNBC Analyst finds that the audio message undermines Saddam's regime: "Osama bin Laden does not care about Saddam in fact he can't wait till the demise of Saddam; he is trying to position himself to offer Iraqis an alternative ideology - he calls socialism abhorrent to Islam." The voice alleged to be bin Laden's in the audio message also called on the spilling of Saddam's blood: "His blood is halal." This wording is used to indicate what is permissive or legally allow for the killing of a usurper or criminal. The audio message also called for the overthrow of governments supporting the U.S. - Nigeria, Morocco, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
If bin Laden is effectively calling on Muslim Iraqis to overthrow Saddam and that Saddam is irrelevant in the coming war and Iraqis should not fight for him, how then can the U.S. administration use this message to prove Saddam and Al-Qaida are linked? That question left some analysts baffled. Kenneth Pollack, CNN analyst and anti-terrorism specialist, says that this is not the first time that bin Laden has used the plight of Iraq under sanctions and under Saddam to rally Muslims to his cause. In fact, bin Laden has spoken of the Iraqi issue since 1996, and has not hidden the fact that he is growing distaste for Saddam's socialist, Baathist regime. "The October audio message this year was a four minute tape and bin Laden expressed sympathy for the Iraqi people," says Peter Bergen, CNN consultant on terrorism. "I don't see today's audio message as endorsing Saddam," he concludes.
If anything, bin Laden's message directed to the people, not leadership of Iraq, (any Arab speaker with two ears can testify that the opening lines of the audio message distinctly declare that this is a message to the Iraqi people) is ambiguous as pertains to alleged links with Saddam. Nevertheless, U.S. officials maintain that this is all the proof they need. However, the U.S. viewing public must be aware that the they were only allowed to view excerpts of the 16-minute audio message, and contrary to what CNN has been proclaiming, it is not all about Iraq. The audio message also includes advice on refraining from alcohol and illicit sex, and respecting one's parents, in addition to other spiritual advice. The audio message will not go down so easily in Europe and the Middle East and will be seen as a desperate attempt by a U.S. administration that has taken a bashing in Nato and at the U.N. to turn the tables around.
According to the BBC, "BBC's security correspondent, Frank Gardner, said the figure on the tape voiced support for Iraq, but that in no way did it prove a link between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi leadership."Arabic speakers are sure to pour scorn on the official U.S. line. U.S. Congressional leaders, who have appeared on talk shows immediately following the excerpted broadcast of the audio tape have alluded to incorrect translations of the original Arabic content.By default, the U.S. public is offered a half-censored, half-baked version of the audio tape. While U.S. officials have conceded that the voice on the tape is indeed that of bin Laden, no one has bothered to focus on why the man U.S. President Bush vowed to get "dead or alive" is very much alive and a clear and present danger.
February 13, 2003
Patriot Act, the sequel: Someone in the Justice Department clearly wants to preserve our most cherished civil liberties. Last week, that individual leaked a bill secretly drafted by Attorney General John Ashcroft's staff to the Center for Public Integrity. "The Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003," is a chilling sequel to the USA Patriot Act, passed shortly after Sept.11, 2001. It's already been dubbed "Patriot Act II." The draft legislation would reduce judicial oversight of surveillance, authorize secret arrests, create new death penalties and allow the government to revoke the citizenship of any American who is a member of -- or gives material support to -- a group designated as a "terrorist organization" by Ashcroft. Charles Lewis, executive director of the Center for Public Integrity, speculates that the Bush administration may have planned to introduce this legislation after another terrorist attack or in the middle of a war with Iraq.
Congress, moreover, was not consulted. Ashcroft's office only sent copies to House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Vice President Dick Cheney on Jan. 10, 2003. Secret arrests? Expatriation because you belong to a suspicious political group? Unchecked surveillance? These are instruments of repression, used by totalitarian states. They are why American soldiers have fought -- and died -- in wars against fascism and communism. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., warned that "Patriot Act II" amounts to "little more than the institution of a police state." We call upon our congressional delegation, as well as Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, to vigorously challenge any such attempt to undermine constitutional rights.. Comment: This is not a drill folks, the signs are there for all who choose to see, now is the time to take your stand before it really is too late. The Germans under Hitler choose to turn their heads. Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Hard To Believe Probably the toughest thing for most Americans to do is to recognize that their own government is deliberately deceiving them. Americans have a tendency to place implicit faith in their leaders.Unfortunately, there have been too many instances of government deception for me to overcome skepticism. The Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which plunged us into a real war in Vietnam, was based on an incident that never happened. In the buildup to the first Gulf War, two major deceptions were practiced on the American people. One is the infamous tale of Iraqi soldiers yanking babies out of incubators. It never happened. The other is the claim that Iraqi forces were massing for an invasion of Saudi Arabia. That, too, never occurred.The fact that Saddam Hussein lacks credibility doesn't mean that President Bush and his administration have it. They, too, have been engaging in deception. Both Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell continue to claim that Iraq has a nuclear weapons program. The nuclear inspectors, however, say they have found no evidence of any nuclear weapons program. Moreover, a top Iraqi nuclear scientist who defected to Canada (and therefore has no obligation to tell American officials what they want to hear) broke his silence recently.
He was in Iraq up until 1998.He said Iraq was so devastated by the war that scientists working on the nuclear program were all pulled off and reassigned to help rebuild the country's infrastructure. Dr. Imad Khadduri, now a college instructor in Toronto, said, "All we had after the war from that nuclear program were ruins, memoirs and reports of what we had done ... on the nuclear weapon side, I am more than definitely sure nothing has been done." In an interview with Reuters, he said further, "For Bush to continue brandishing this image of a superhuman Iraqi nuclear power program is a great fallacious information."
Once again, Powell brought up the aluminum tubes as alleged evidence of Iraq's nuclear program. Technical experts say, however, that the kind of tubes necessary for a nuclear device must not be anodized. Yet the tubes Iraq tried to buy were specifically ordered to be anodized. Again, the nuclear inspectors agree with Iraq and not with Bush and Powell.Bush has repeatedly cited the 1988 gassing of Kurds in Halabja as evidence of Iraqi cruelty. Recently, Stephen C. Pelletiere, a former CIA analyst, has reminded us of a Defense Intelligence Study that concluded that (1) the Kurds were casualties in a battle for the city between Iraqi and Iranian forces and not the object of the attack; and (2) that it was the Iranian gas that killed the Kurds.I remember reading a story in The Washington Post about this report. Now, one of two things is inescapable: Either the U.S. government was lying when it issued the report, or the president and his people are lying today when they blame it on Iraq. It has to be one or the other.As for Powell's dog-and-pony show, the satellite photos and the alleged voice intercepts prove nothing, and both can be easily fabricated.
you don't think American intelligence agencies indulge in
fabrications and forgeries, then you have a lot of reading to do on
the history of those agencies. The rest of his presentation was
based on "anonymous sources" and defectors who, as any veteran
intelligence officer will tell you, always have to be taken with a
grain of salt. Since their request for asylum depends on the
intelligence agency's recommendation, they have a tendency to say
what they know the intelligence people want to hear.
year 2003, it is way too late for Americans to view their
government as a benign big daddy who always tells the truth and
always has their best interests in mind. Sadly, government just
doesn't work that way. The bottom line is that Iraq is not a threat
to the United States, but it does have oil that's not now
controlled by any American or British company.
Billions Are Wondering
Why: Several billion people in the world - including myself
- are wondering why:
The famous Indian philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti once described the difference between an individual and a human being. An individual is someone who is concerned only with aspects of his own life; a true human being is concerned with aspects of the lives of every person in the whole world.
We are on the cusp of a new world. Whether we advance toward a new age of enlightened empathy and understanding or regress back into the dark ages of traditionally secret political manipulation is a question that currently hangs in the balance. Perhaps a billion people all over the world will be out on the streets Saturday (2/15/03) to express which way they hope this question will go. There are demonstrations against the unjust invasion of Iraq planned in virtually every American city. Find out where it is and go. If you don't, there may come a day - and maybe real soon - when you can't.
US Senator Robert Byrd Senate Floor Speech Wednesday,
February 12, 2003
This nation is about to
embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in
an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of
preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation
can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening
but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on
the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in
contravention of international law and the UN Charter. And it is
being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many
countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or
some other nation's -- hit list. High level Administration figures
recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the table when
discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more
destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty,
particularly in a world where globalism has tied the vital economic
and security interests of many nations so closely together? There
are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and U.S.
intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation.
Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, suspicion, and
alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the once solid
alliance against global terrorism which existed after September 11.
Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with
little guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur.
Family members are being called to active military duty, with no
idea of the duration of their stay or what horrors they may face.
Communities are being left with less than adequate police and fire
protection. Other essential services are also short-staffed. The
mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel prices
are rising and may soon spike higher. This Administration, now in
power for a little over two years, must be judged on its record. I
believe that that record is dismal.
CIA 'sabotaged inspections and hid weapons details' Senior democrats have accused the CIA of sabotaging weapons inspections in Iraq by refusing to co-operate fully with the UN and withholding crucial information about Saddam Hussein's arsenal. Led by Senator Carl Levin, the Democrats accused the CIA of making an assessment that the inspections were unlikely to be a success and then ensuring they would not be. They have accused the CIA director of lying about what information on the suspected location of weapons of mass destruction had been passed on. The row is of heightened significance given the Bush administration's preparations to argue later today before the UN Security Council that the inspections have run their course and it is now time to move to military action. France, Russia, Germany and other members of the Security Council are likely to back a counter-proposal to increase the number of inspectors, providing them, if necessary, with the support of armed UN soldiers, as a means of avoiding a military strike.
The accusation of US sabotage emerged from a series of Senate hearings on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, George Tenet, the CIA director, told the armed services committee panel that the agency had provided the UN inspectors with all the information it had on "high" and "moderate" interest locations inside Iraq – those sites where there was a possibility of finding banned weapons. But Mr Tenet later told a different panel that he had been mistaken and that there were in fact "a handful" of locations the UN inspectors may not have known about. Senator Levin, from Michigan, responded by saying the CIA director had not been telling the truth. Citing a number of classified letters he had obtained from the agency, he said it was clear the CIA had not shared information with the inspectors about a "large number of sites of significant value".
said the CIA had told him additional information would be passed to
the inspectors within the next few days. Mr Levin pushed Mr Tenet
on whether he thought the inspections had any value. The CIA
director replied: "Unless [President Saddam] provides the data to
build on, provides the access, provides the unfettered access that
he's supposed to, provides us with surveillance capability, there
is little chance you're going to find weapons of mass destruction
under the rubric he's created inside the country ... The inspectors
have been put in a very difficult position by his behaviour. Mr
Levin said later he believed the CIA had, in effect, taken the
decision to undermine the inspections. "When they've taken the
position that inspections are useless, they are bound to fail," he
told The Washington Post. "We have undermined the inspectors." Mr
Levin has raised his concerns with the White House. In a letter to
President Bush, the senator asked that America provide the
inspectors with as much information as available. He wrote: "The
American people want the inspections to proceed, want the United
States to share the information we have with the UN inspectors and
want us to obtain United Nations support before military action is
used against Iraq." Comment:
Here's the proof that the US government has no interest in Iraqs
weapons of mass destruction, you are being asked to support a war
that will likely lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of
innocent Iraqi men, women and children, and it has NOTHING to do
with protecting the world from WMD. We say it again: IMPEACH BUSH
10 million join world protest rallies Up to 10 million people on five continents are expected to demonstrate against the probable war in Iraq on Saturday, in some of the largest peace marches ever known. Yesterday, up to 400 cities in 60 countries, from Antarctica to Pacific islands, confirmed that peace rallies, vigils and marches would take place. Of all major countries, only China is absent from the growing list which includes more than 300 cities in Europe and north America, 50 in Asia and Latin America, 10 in Africa and 20 in Australia and Oceania. Many countries will witness the largest demonstrations against war they have ever seen. The majority will be small but 500,000 people are expected in London and Barcelona, and more than 100,000 in Rome, Paris, Berlin and other European capitals. In the US, organisers were yesterday anticipating 200,000 marching in New York if permission is given. A further 100,000 are expected to march in 140 other American cities. What is extraordinary, say the organisers, is the depth and breadth of opposition that the US and Britain are meeting across the world before a war has even started.
"This is unprecedented. Demonstrations only got this large against the Vietnam war at the height of the conflict, years after it started," said a spokesman for Answer, a coalition of US peace groups which helped organise a march of 200,000 people last month in Washington.Many in the global peace movement optimistically hope that public opposition to a war is becoming politically significant and could now affect the timing of an invasion of Iraq and possibly even help avert conflict altogether. "The internationalism of the opposition is the most powerful weapon people have. It's all we have. We think that Bush and Blair are well aware that global opposition is mounting fast and that they are now desperate to start the war before they are completely isolated by world opinion," said a spokesman for United for Peace and Justice, a US coalition. New polls in Europe and the US yesterday suggested that opposition is still mounting and is likely to continue even if the US gets a second resolution. Spanish and Dutch polls showed that more than 70% now oppose even UN-mandated action, with slightly fewer in Italy. Yesterday CND reported that it was struggling to cope with the deluge of people wanting to join. In Germany, more than 300 towns are sending coaches to Berlin, where more than 100,000 people are expected to march.
"Opposition is broader than at any time in the past. This will be the largest peace march in 20 years," said Malte Keutzseldt of Attac, Germany. "The peace movement is getting older now, but a new generation of young people is deeply concerned. The churches and unions have linked to make the coalition far broader than even the anti-nuclear missile marches in the 1980s". In Paris, a march organiser said that feeling was running high and that he expected the anti-war demonstration to be largest ever. The most unusual rally is expected to be in the international territory of Antarctica, where dozens of scientists and others at the US McMurdo base on the edge of the Ross sea will take to the ice.
The idea of an international day of action against the war was first suggested in London after the last peace march in October. It was discussed by peace and anti-globalisation groups from 11 countries at the European social forum in Florence in November, but only became truly international following meetings in Cairo, Egypt and Porto Alegre, Brazil, last month. Since then the idea of coordinating international peace protests has spread rapidly across the world and up to 30 new cities a day are believed to be planning demonstrations. Next month activists from all continents will meet in London to propose further global actions. Coordinated international demonstrations have flourished in the past five years with anti-capitalist marches and campaigns by environmentalists and anti-globalisers against corporations like McDonald's, Shell and Esso, and against global warming or international trade. Mostly organised on the web by activists working below the radar of the mainstream media, they have taken the establishment by surprise in many countries and only been reported by independent media.
"The whole world's marching," said Helmut, a German student
in London. "This peace party should be better than the millennium
celebrations." The Stop The War
Coalition (STWC) is planning a display of mass direct action
designed to bring Britain to a standstill on the day any war starts
with Iraq. The protests would involve demonstrations in the centre
of London and other big towns and cities, wildcat strikes by
anti-war supporters and mass sit-ins at schools, colleges and
universities across the country. A spokeswoman for
the SWTC said: "We do think there will be a whole wave of civil
disobedience if war breaks out. People want to be peaceful and are
quite slow to anger, but they will be very angry if after
Saturday's mass show of opposition Tony Blair refuses to listen."
Comment: I honestly cannot
think how else the case for a war in Iraq will be made other than
some form of staged "terrorist" attack and the US and British
governments will be relying on people not making the OBVIOUS
connection that Saddam would be the LEAST likely perpetrator since
it would simply give justification for an invasion that he has gone
to great lengths to avoid. Again, to discern who is behind any
attack look to who benefits. The US have done it before, in Pearl
Harbour and the gulf of Tonkin. As Roosevelt said: "Nothing happens
by accident in politics, if it happens you can bet it was planned
America gripped by fear of 'dirty bomb' attack. From the anti-aircraft missiles around Washington to government recommendations that families prepare bunkers in their homes against biological, chemical, radiological weapons, America is suffering its most acute bout of terror jitters since the attacks of 11 September. Nerves began to jangle last week when the new Department of Homeland Security raised its colour-coded threat alert to orange, denoting a "high" risk of an attack. Then came the latest purported Osama bin Laden tape, urging more suicide attacks against American citizens. And yesterday, George Tenet, the CIA director, issued his grimmest warning yet, telling a Senate panel that a strike could come as early as this week, either in America or in the Arabian peninsula, perhaps involving a dirty bomb. The threat was "the most specific we have ever seen", he warned. Hours earlier, the Pentagon confirmed that anti-aircraft Stinger missiles had been deployed around key sites in Washington, considered with New York the likeliest targets for the terrorists. But all along the eastern seaboard tensions are running high, and ordinary people are taking precautions.
"Duct tape, plastic sheeting, can openers; you name it, we're selling it," the manager of Candey's hardware store, just half-a-dozen blocks from the White House, said yesterday. The run was sparked when Homeland Security officials issued a list of instructions on how to prepare for an emergency. Families are being urged to designate a "safe room" in their house, which could be sealed with plastic sheeting and tape. They should stockpile three days of food and water, at the rate of a gallon per person per day, as well as blankets, torches, radios and spare batteries. Families should also have pre-arranged plans on how to keep in contact if separated. The government insists the precautions are "prudent planning", just as people should prepare for natural disasters such as hurricanes, tornados or floods. But officials freely compare the measures to steps taken by Israel, whose citizens face the risk of attack every day. The threat of a terrorist outrage in America in the next three weeks was "perhaps the equivalent of eight on a scale of one to 10", Tom Ridge, the Homeland Security Secretary, has said. Most at risk now are not traditional targets such as airports and government buildings, but so-called soft targets, such as schools, banks, shopping centres and sports arenas. The attacks could be more insidious too, with bombs replaced by poison in the water supply. Comment: He's definitely under your bed! Again I say it, that Osama really is more of a friend to the US administration that anything else. I mean, just when Dubya is under serious pressure over his warmongering, with more and more nations oppsing him, and with the biggest worldwide anti war demos scheduled in just two days time, up pops Osama to scare us all into oblivion! What a coincidence...again!
Some 41 MPs from the three main parties signed a Commons
motion saying Britain should not go to war in Iraq until "all other
policy options have been exhausted". The MPs demanded "clear
evidence" that Iraq poses an imminent threat and for any war to be
explicitly authorised by the UN Security Council and the
Commons.The sponsors included two Conservative former cabinet
ministers, Douglas Hogg and John Gummer, and the former Labour
minister Chris Smith, who said: "The Iraq issue is a very important
point in the life of the PLP. It has galvanised public opinion in a
way I have not seen on any other issue in the past six years." Mr
Blair told MPs: "The moral choice in relation to this is a moral
choice that has to weigh up the moral consequences of war. But the
alternative is to carry on with a sanctions regime which, because
of the way Saddam Hussein implements it, leads to thousands of
people dying needlessly in Iraq every year.'' Meanwhile, Gerard
Errera, the French ambassador in London, denied that France was
"posturing" over Iraq and appeared to dash Mr Blair's hopes that
Paris would not veto a new UN resolution authorising a war. He said
France would defend its "deeply held convictions" without
Fair Use Policy
Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org