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 21, 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!
Oil, Dollars, Euros And Dead Iraqi's US strategic concerns. Control of Middle Eastern oil resources has always been a matter of strategic concern to the United States. In his famous speech of 1947 when he initiated the Cold War and enunciated the doctrine that now goes under his name, US President Truman referred to the Middle East with its “great natural resources” as among the considerations that motivated the fight against “communism.” In 1974-75, in the midst of the OPEC oil price hikes and the threat of extended oil embargoes, the US administration discussed the possibility of undertaking military action against oil-producing states.
With the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979, who was installed in a CIA-backed coup against the nationalist Mossadegh government in 1953, the US became increasingly concerned about threats to its interests in the region. Accordingly, in his January 1980 State of the Union address, President Carter warned: “An attempt by an outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.” This new policy, known as the Carter doctrine, he explained was necessitated by the “overwhelming dependence of Western nations on vital oil supplies from the Middle East.” In testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee in 1990, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, defence secretary (now vice-president) Cheney set out the issues involved in the US-led war. “Iraq controlled 10 percent of the world’s reserves prior to the invasion of Kuwait. Once Saddam Hussein took Kuwait, he doubled that to approximately 20 percent of the world’s known oil reserves ... Once he acquired Kuwait ... he was clearly in a position to dictate the future of worldwide energy policy, and that gave him a stranglehold on our economy and on that of most of the other nations of the world as well.” Within days of the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait, an even more blunt assessment was delivered by a “senior American official” (believed to be Secretary of State James Baker) in a comment to the New York Times: “We are talking about oil. Got it? Oil, vital American interests.”
In the period since the Gulf War, those interests have become more, not less, important as the figures on the dependence of the US economy on oil imports reveals. And the question of which corporations control the flow of oil is of vital significance, both from an economic and political standpoint. As the American academic Michael T. Klare (author of the book Resource Wars) points out in a recent article [See Foreign Policy in Focus at http://www.fpif.org], one of the key objectives of the present US administration flows from the analysis made by Cheney in 1990. “[W]hoever controls the flow of Persian Gulf oil has a ‘stranglehold’ not only on our economy but also ‘on that of most of that of the other nations of the world as well.’ This is a powerful image, and perfectly describes the administration’s thinking about the Gulf area, except in reverse: by serving as the dominant power in the Gulf, WE maintain a ‘stranglehold’ over the economies of other nations.” How important the maintenance of this dominance has become has been thrown into sharp relief by the recent conflicts between the US and “old Europe”—in particular France and Germany—in the recent period. As Klare emphasises, control over Persian Gulf oil is also “consistent with the administration’s declared goal of attaining permanent military superiority over all other nations” and the need, set out in the administration’s statements on national security policy, to “prevent any rival from ever reaching the point where it could compete with the United States on something resembling equal standing.”
Oil and the US dollar
In addition to the geo-political interests that operated at the time of the first Gulf War and whose importance has increased, not diminished in the intervening period, there is a powerful new reason why the US needs to ensure a “stranglehold” grip on Persian Gulf oil resources. Various media commentators try to deny the connection between oil and the US war drive. They always insist that in the final analysis it does not matter who controls these resources since they still have to be sold on the world market where supplies will be available to the US and other purchasers. Even assuming that the oil market operates in the way suggested (ignoring the question of boycotts, production restrictions to lift prices and other such measures) there is still another issue to be addressed—in what currency the oil contracts will be paid? And this is a question which is acquiring extreme importance for the long-term financial and economic stability of the United States. When the Gulf War was launched in 1990, an historic transformation had recently taken place in the financial position of the US. For the first time since it became the pre-eminent capitalist power in 1914, the US had become an indebted nation. In the decade and a half since then, it has become the most indebted nation in history.
On the latest estimates, US debts to the rest of the world total more than $2.7 trillion, equivalent to more than one quarter of gross domestic product. To finance this debt, the US requires an inflow of around $2 billion per day from the rest of the world. One of the main reasons the US is able to attract such a massive inflow (amounting to around two-thirds of the international surpluses generated in the world economy) is the role played by the dollar as the central international reserve currency. It has been estimated that by the late 1990s more than four-fifths of all foreign exchange transactions and half of world exports were denominated in dollars, with dollars accounting for about two-thirds of all official currency reserves. But the establishment of the euro by the European Union means that a potential rival has emerged on the international economic scene. At first, the continued rise of the dollar meant that the euro was not an attractive proposition. But the situation has changed with the collapse of the US share market bubble. Since the end of 2000, the dollar has fallen by more than 15 percent against the euro. This is leading OPEC producers to consider whether, at some point in the future, it might be worth their while to shift from payments in dollars to euros. In a speech delivered in April last year, Javad Yarjani, head of OPEC’s Petroleum Market Analysis Department, noted that while in most OPEC countries would continue, in the short-term, to demand payment in dollars, OPEC “will not discount entirely the possibility of adopting euro pricing and payments in the future.”
shift by OPEC to the euro would rapidly confront the US with an
economic “nightmare scenario.” Major oil importers
would need to transfer some of their funds from US dollars
reserves—stocks, bonds and other assets—into euro
reserves. This would see a sharp fall in the value of the dollar,
possibly setting in motion a further withdrawal of funds as
investors became nervous over the value of their dollar assets.
Suddenly the burgeoning US debt, which at present plays little or
no role in day-to-day financial calculations, would become a factor
of considerable importance. In other words, a switch in the
financial basis of the oil export market, or a significant part of
it, would have major consequences for the global financial position
of the US, quite irrespective of whether oil was freely available
or the price charged for it. However, if the US were in control of
Iraqi supplies, either directly or through a puppet, it would be in
a much better position to block any currency shift by the OPEC
countries. Consideration of the long-term strategic issues make
clear why Washington is being driven to use military means to try
to overcome the major economic problems confronting US
Who Attacked the USA?
News embargo after Israeli link leak!
"The attacks have certainly turned US public opinion firmly back in Israel's favor after 11 months of Palestinian uprising, heavy criticism of Israel over war crimes allegations and racism a UN conference in Durban. The attacks serve no Arab group or nation's interests but their timing came in the midst of international condemnation of Israel for its policy of death squad assassination of Palestinian political and police figures", added Stern. If verified, the news of Israel's involvement in the US attack will come as no surprise to intelligence experts. The state of Israel has a long history of covert operations against Western targets with attacks on the King David Hotel, USS Liberty, murder of a Scandinavian UN envoy as well as espionage against the US during the Jonathan Pollard case. On Wednesday the US defense department issued a warning to its officials to halt the leak of information on the investigation which it says is happening on a daily basis since the attacks occurred.
To hell with worldwide protests, an unsupportive Security Council, a diplomatically dubious Hans Blix, an Osama giddy at the prospect of a united Arab world, and a panicked populace grasping at the very slender reed of duct tape and Saran Wrap to protect itself from the inevitable terrorist blow-back -- the business of America is still business. No one in the administration embodies this bottom line mentality more than Dick Cheney. The vice president is one of those ideological purists who never let little things like logic, morality, or mass murder interfere with the single-minded pursuit of profitability. His on-again, off-again relationship with the Butcher of Baghdad is a textbook example of what modern moralists condemn as "situational ethics," an extremely convenient code that allows you to do what you want when you want and still feel good about it in the morning. In the Cheney White House (let's call it what it is), anything that can be rationalized is right.
two were clearly on the outs back during the Gulf War, when Cheney
was Secretary of Defense, and the first President Bush dubbed
Saddam "Hitler revisited." Then Cheney moved to the private sector
and suddenly things between him and Saddam warmed up considerably.
With Cheney in the CEO's seat, Halliburton helped Iraq reconstruct
its war-torn oil industry with $73 million worth of equipment and
services -- becoming Baghdad's biggest such supplier. Kinda nice
how that worked out for the vice-president, really: oversee the
destruction of an industry that you then profit from by rebuilding.
When, during the 2000 campaign, Cheney was asked about his
company's Iraqi escapades, he flat out denied them. But the truth
remains: When it came to making a buck, Cheney apparently had no
qualms about doing business with "Hitler revisited."
When it came to making a
buck, Cheney apparently had no qualms about doing business with
Of course, American businessmen are nothing if not flexible. So his former cronies at Halliburton are now at the head of the line of companies expected to reap the estimated $2 billion it will take to rebuild Iraq's oil infrastructure following Saddam's ouster. This burn-and-build approach to business guarantees that there will be a market for Halliburton's services as long as it has a friend in high places to periodically carpet bomb a country for it.
In the meantime, Halliburton, among many other Pentagon contracts, has a lucrative 10-year deal to provide food services to the Army that comes with no lid on potential costs. Lenin once scoffed that "a capitalist would sell rope to his own hangman." And, while the man got more than a few things wrong, he's been proven right on this one time and time again: from Hewlett-Packard and Bechtel helping arm Saddam back in the '80s, to the good folks at Boeing, Hughes Electronics, Lockheed Martin and Loral Space whose corporate greed helped China steal rocket and missile secrets -- and point a few dozen long-range nukes our way.
Clearly, our national interest runs a distant second when pitted against the rapacious desires of special interests and the politicians they buy with massive campaign contributions. Oil and gas companies donated $26.7 million to Bush and his fellow Republicans during the 2000 election and another $18 million in 2002. So does it really come as any surprise that Cheney's staff held secret meetings in October with executives from Exxon Mobil, ChevronTexaco, ConocoPhillips -- and, yes, Halliburton -- to discuss who would get what in a post-Saddam Iraq? As they say, to the victors -- and the big buck donors -- go the sp-oil-s.
Here's my bottom line: At a
time of war, at what point does subverting our national security in
the name of profitability turn from ugly business into high
Prime Minister Tony Blair is under investigation leading to possible charges for criminal bribery with George W. Bush as a co-conspirator. Cloak and Dagger has been contacted by reliable bank investigators who have uncovered evidence that British PM Blair was involved in criminal bribery. Blair is now under investigation for accepting large bribes from the Bush oil interests. The evidence consists of bank transfers from George Bush financial interests to PM Blair's personal accounts via the United Arab Emirates where the investigations into criminal bribery against Blair began. The bribery purpose is so that the United Kingdom's PM would be sure to go along with Bush's plan to forcibly seize the Iraqi oil fields while also unseating strongman Saddam Hussein. Part of the bribery plan was to use the Oil fields for collateral to support an out of control US deficit. It is no surprise that the U.S. treasury is alarmed by the declining proceeds of tax receipts. The White House is pushing for massive tax cuts for wealthy Americans at the time of a growing deficit. In recent months the Cloak and Dagger program has exclusively presented on air, details from the moderator and producer Sherman Skolnick, of a Chicago Public Access Cable TV program. Cloak and Dagger has spoken directly with the Investigators who presented the evidence to senior French diplomatic officials today. Bank investigators have shown senior French diplomats documents that corroborate the following.
1-That the scheme to grab Iraqi oil fields was in the works over a year and a half ago when several billion dollars was transferred to bank accounts set up for the private benefit of Blair.
2- Another document shows that Blair and his wife privately profited for arranging for North Korea to have nuclear capability. Skolnick also has stated on his TV show including broadcasting documents showing Hilary Clinton, now U.S. Senator Democrat New York, likewise privately profited from the treasonous North Korean deal.
3- The officials said that this will put Blair to the wall and remove his furniture from 10 Downing Street.
Clinton Admits, "We have a lot to answer for, and he [Saddam] is basically partly our creature."Excerpts From Clinton Interview between former President Bill Clinton and James Fallows, of The Atlantic Monthly, on October 21, 2002."I'm neither fish nor fowl. That is, I believe that he [Saddam Hussein] is very bad. We have a lot to answer for, and he is basically partly our creature. I'm not criticizing President Bush on this because I did the same thing. I've sat there and pontificated about how [Saddam] is the only guy to use chemical weapons on his own people. Yeah he did it, and the Reagan Administration was for him when he did it. Nobody raised a peep then, because he was against Iran. We now know that he got his anthrax strain from an American company while we looked the other way. We also know that, or at least a British journalist has alleged, that Casey [the head of the CIA under Reagan] tried to give him cluster bombs. I don't know if that's true or not 'cause I read it in the British press and you never can tell. I wouldn't give it the same credence I would if I read it there [points at The Atlantic].
think they [the original Bush Administration] feel badly about
abandoning the Shiites. At least we tried to protect the Kurds.
And, so... I'd like it if it happened. On the other hand, if it
happened as a result of our initiative, it would be a very high
price to pay. Because of what I said out here today. We are trying
to create a process. I didn't exactly adhere to the Levin view
[referring to Senator Carl Levin of Michigan], because I don't
think you can treat the UN like a shrine. It is an institution that
is still becoming, it's not where we want it to be. We, and others,
sometimes cast our veto votes in ways that are more about us than
about the global interests. So I think we have to try to give the
sanctions one more chance. He's not going to live forever, there
are options for regime change short of bombing the living daylights
out of them. And we know that these... we know that the inspectors
have gotten a ton of stuff out of there. But the effort of trying
will bring us together."
Tell you the truth I'm scared. No, not for myself. I'm old enough not to worry about going to war, or living in fear of terrorism, or getting shot in an alley somewhere. I'll most likely be dead when the real action starts (World War III). So why do I shudder when, asked whether Saddam Hussein should be confronted with a final ultimatum, Bush answers: "He knows my feelings. He needs to disarm."? HIS feelings? Since when is a decision to push America into a bloody war prompted by one man's feelings--even a president's-- rather than by analyzed facts and objective discourse. And Congressional approval, to make it at least halfway legal. Bush's "feely" statement is one of many which have seeped through the down-home façade of this Marlboro Man, to gradually reveal a rigid, uncompromising, egocentric mindset about doing things HIS way (including going to war) to the exclusion of all other ways. That "my way" mindset, I submit, is why President Bush is able, with impunity, to brush aside, or not be influenced by, the huge anti-war protest of millions of concerned people around the world. And, as if this international show of anti-war hands weren't enough to give Bush pause, he has the stultifying temerity to call this world-wide protest "well-intentioned, but irrelevant"-the equivalent of a marketing "focus group"---which clearly demonstrates what our president thinks of his fellow Americans' opinion. "You know," mused Bush, "the size of protests is like deciding, well, I'm going to decide policy based upon a focus group. The role of a leader is to decide policy based upon security-in this case, the security of the people." He said this, mind you, as he sends 20,000 more troops to the Persian Gulf, to join the 150,000 American troops already there, but refuses to close our borders to keep out illegal aliens who are devastating our Southwest, draining the resources of our social services, and opening the door to potential terrorists. Hooray for security. Well, I have news for Mr. Bush. As a creative advertising writer for some 30 years I think I know something about focus groups, having been involved in plenty of them. And I can tell you this: if multi-billion-dollar corporations and their advertising agencies didn't see focus groups as being an effective tool in determining public opinion, they would have canned the idea years ago.
focus group, simply put, is playing a TV commercial to a random
gathering of disinterested viewers (much like a jury), and getting
their positive or negative comments on it, then either discarding
the commercial, or using it, depending on the reactions they get.
What does this mean in terms of the president? It means that when
Bush calls a major portion of the population's opinion
"irrelevant", the equivalent of a "focus group", you can bet the
farm that (l) he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. (2)
he has no respect for the average American's opinion, (3) he has no
intention of backing off, or even reconsidering his "preemptive
strike" agenda, and (4) he intends to do it HIS way, or no way.
Period. I also find it amusing that President Bush, in planning to
attack Iraq unilaterally, is also in the process of thumbing his
nose at the United Nations. This is the same United Nations, mind
you, that many Americans (including this writer) long ago advocated
kicking out of our country because of its anti-American,
socialistic promotion of a World Government. Which, by the way, is
an irony in itself, given that our political "globalists" were
enamored with the idea of having the UN's prestigious, high-rise
headquarters located in New York City, the cradle of America's
financial power and free enterprise. So you know what I think, Mr.
President? It's an either-or situation. Either some faction has you
in their pocket, or you're just a nice, not-too-bright guy with an
ego on overload. Either way, for a president leading a nation,
that's scary. And I don't scare easy. Comment: the answer is actually more simple. Bush
he exhibits all the characteristics.
Blair and Bush set to force UN vote over Iraq America and Britain will table a new UN draft resolution next week authorising military force against Iraq, US officials confirmed yesterday. Both governments intend to force a Security Council vote on the long-awaited second resolution before 14 March, the date set by France for new talks on Iraqi compliance with its disarmament obligations. A senior Downing Street source said Tony Blair and President George Bush had discussed the details of "the when and the how" of a second resolution in a 30-minute telephone conversation on Wednesday night. "France has come up with the 14 March date. That may be a bit too far away," the source said. Colin Powell, the American Secretary of State, told Newsnight: "I would expect in the very near future we will be putting down a resolution, more likely next week." But he said he did not think there would be an explicit reference to the use of force in the resolution or a deadline for compliance by Saddam Hussein. The draft is expected to be tabled before Hans Blix, the UN chief weapons inspector, presents his latest report to the Council next Friday. If the 15-member Council approves a new mandate concluding that President Saddam is in "material breach" of demands to disarm, military strikes could be launched in the first week of March. A more likely date would be later in the month. President Bush underlined his determination to confront the Iraqi President with a speech in which he declared that the liberation of Iraq would deliver "the Almighty's gift of freedom" to the world. Comment: If balsphemy exists then Bush's comment above has got to be it. The man is a psychopath, and by the sounds of it is well versed in the tactics employed by Hitler as outlined in his book "Mein Kampf":
"The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, because the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them more easy victims of a big lie than a small one, because they themselves often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell big ones.
Such a form of lying would never enter their heads. They would never credit others with the possibility of such great impudence as the complete reversal of facts. Even explanations would long leave them in doubt and hesitation, and any trifling reason would dispose them to accept a thing as true.
Something therefore always remains and sticks from
the most imprudent of lies, a fact which all bodies and individuals
concerned in the art of lying in this world know only too well, and
therefore they stop at nothing to achieve this end." ~ Adolph
Hitler Mein Kampf
The pyrotechnics were used without permission from the club, said Kathleen Hagerty, a lawyer representing club owners Michael and Jeffrey Derderian. "No permission was ever requested by the band or its agents to use pyrotechnics at The Station, and no permission was ever given," she said. The band's singer, Jack Russell, said the manager checked with the club before the show and the use of pyrotechnics was approved. And Paul Woolnough, president of Great White's management company, said tour manager Dan Biechele "always checks" with club officials before pyrotechnics are used. "I'm not going to reply to those allegations, but I do know that the club would have been informed, as they always are," Woolnough said. Biechele could not immediately be located for comment. The owner of a well-known New Jersey nightclub said Great White failed to tell him they were using pyrotechnics for a concert there a week ago. "Our stage manager didn't even know it until it was done," said Domenic Santana, owner of the Stone Pony in Asbury Park. "My sound man freaked out because of the heat and everything, and they jeopardized the health and the safety of our patrons." Most of the bodies were found near The Station's front exit, some of them burned and others dead from smoke inhalation. Hall also said some appeared to have been trampled in the rush to escape.
"They tried to go out the
same way they came in. That was the problem," Hall said. "They
didn't use the other three fire exits." Many of the injured
were taken to Rhode Island Hospital. The governor said at least 25
people were in critical condition at state hospitals with severe
burns and suffering from smoke inhalation. The ages of the victims
ranged from the teens to the late 30s. "As much as we can prepare
for anything like this the stark reality is hard to imagine," said
Dr. Joseph Amaral, a surgeon and president of Rhode Island
Hospital. "One of the most remarkable things for me is the degree
of inhalation injuries that everyone sustained." The blaze broke
out at about 11 p.m. during the first song at the concert in West
Warwick, about 15 miles southwest of Providence. "All of a sudden I
felt a lot of heat," said Russell, the band's singer. "I see the
foam's on fire. ... The next thing you know the whole place is in
flames." He said he started dousing the fire with a water bottle
but couldn't put it out, then all the lights went out. "I just
couldn't believe how fast it went up," he said. Russell said one of
his band members, guitarist Ty Longley, was among the missing.
Firefighters worked through the morning Friday to pull charred
bodies from the building as onlookers watched, worried about
missing friends."They were completely burned. They had pieces of
flesh falling off them," said Michelle Craine, who was waiting to
hear about a friend who was missing. "It was the worst thing I've
ever seen." It was the second tragedy at a U.S. club in four days.
Early Monday, 21 people were killed and more than 50 were injured
in the Chicago melee, which began after a security guard used
pepper spray to break up a fight.Comment: These tragedies could just be
coincidences, but thinking about the comment by the Cs
cycles in the human experiential cycle which corresponds to the
passage of comet cluster" and tying it in with the fact that comet C/2002 V1 was
last here approx 35,000 years ago which just happened to coincide
with the beginning of
the last major Ice age over Europe and the further comments
from he Cs that: "One change to occur in 21st Century is sudden
glacial rebound, over Eurasia first, then North America. Ice ages
develop much, much, much faster than thought", and the link between
changes in weather patterns being linked to a possible pole shift,
we can begin to read between the lines and "see the signs" that we
seem to be at the threshold of a VERY significant time in our
Inspectors call US tips "Garbage" While diplomatic maneuvering continues over Turkish bases and a new United Nations resolution, inside Iraq, U.N. arms inspectors are privately complaining about the quality of U.S. intelligence and accusing the United States of sending them on wild-goose chases. CBS News Correspondent Mark Phillips reports the U.N. has been taking a precise inventory of Iraq's al-Samoud 2 missile arsenal, determining how many there are and where they are. Discovering that the al-Samoud 2 has been flying too far in tests has been one of the inspectors' major successes. But the missile has only been exceeding its 93-mile limit by about 15 miles and that, the Iraqis say, is because it isn't yet loaded down with its guidance system. The al-Samoud 2 is not the 800-mile-plus range missile that Secretary of State Colin Powell insists Iraq is developing. In fact, the U.S. claim that Iraq is developing missiles that could hit its neighbors -- or U.S. troops in the region, or even Israel -- is just one of the claims coming from Washington that inspectors here are finding increasingly unbelievable. The inspectors have become so frustrated trying to chase down unspecific or ambiguous U.S. leads that they've begun to express that anger privately in no uncertain terms.
U.N. sources have told CBS News that American tips have lead to one dead end after another. Example: satellite photographs purporting to show new research buildings at Iraqi nuclear sites. When the U.N. went into the new buildings they found "nothing." Example: Saddam's presidential palaces, where the inspectors went with specific coordinates supplied by the U.S. on where to look for incriminating evidence. Again, they found "nothing." Example: Interviews with scientists about the aluminum tubes the U.S. says Iraq has imported for enriching uranium, but which the Iraqis say are for making rockets. Given the size and specification of the tubes, the U.N. calls the "Iraqi alibi air tight." The inspectors do acknowledge, however, that they would not be here at all if not for the threat of U.S. military action. So frustrated have the inspectors become that one source has referred to the U.S. intelligence they've been getting as "garbage after garbage after garbage." In fact, Phillips says the source used another cruder word. The inspectors find themselves caught between the Iraqis, who are masters at the weapons-hiding shell game, and the United States, whose intelligence they've found to be circumstantial, outdated or just plain wrong. Meanwhile, the U.S. and Britain are planning to present a new resolution to the U.N. Security Council on Monday in a bid for support to use force to disarm Iraq. Finishing touches were being put on the resolution on Thursday. Adoption is by no means assured. A majority of the 15 council members are opposed to war at least until U.N. weapons inspectors report in mid-March.
Secretary Powell said a headcount was "academic" because the resolution demanding Iraqi disarmament had not been put forward. Powell, who flies to Japan on Friday for the start of a five-day Asia trip, juggled resolution diplomacy with stressful negotiations with Turkey, a potential key ally in any war. Turkey is balking at U.S. terms for an economic aid package. Powell, who interceded on Wednesday with Prime Minister Abdullah Gul, said he had told the Turkish leader "our position was firm with respect to the kind of assistance we could provide." However, Powell said, "there may be some other creative things we can do." As for the expected U.N. resolution, the Bush administration sees little value in extending inspections and much to worry about in Iraq's connection to al Qaeda and other terror groups. One U.S. official said the projected day for presenting the resolution was Monday but that it could slip a day or two. Powell said, "We won't put a resolution down unless we intend to fight for the resolution, unless we believe we can make the case that it is appropriate." In Baghdad, meanwhile, Iraq allowed another flight by an American U-2 surveillance plane Thursday as President Saddam Hussein's government sought to convince the world that it is cooperating with the weapons inspectors.
In New York, a U.N. spokesman said Iraq also had submitted a list of people involved in the destruction of banned weapons -- a key demand by chief weapons inspector Hans Blix. It was the second flight this week by a U-2 in support of the U.N. inspection program. The Iraqi Foreign Ministry said the plane spent six hours and 20 minutes over Iraq's territory, searching for evidence of banned weapons. In regard to the possible basing of U.S. troops in Turkey, Gul said in Ankara that a statement would be made on Friday. He did not elaborate. Powell did not elaborate on the refinements under consideration, but another U.S. official said one approach might be to seek a $1 billion congressional appropriation that would then permit Turkey to obtain loans at preferential U.S.-government rates for many times that amount. Ships carrying equipment for a U.S. infantry division are already at sea. The United States wants to base tens of thousands of soldiers in Turkey to open a possible northern front against Iraq. The dispute with Turkey is one of many problems the Bush administration has as it tries to line up support for an attack on Iraq if Saddam doesn't disarm quickly. Implying the United States might deploy troops elsewhere if terms could not be reached with Turkey, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said "we have to deal with realities, and we will."
Meanwhile, President Bush sought to keep the pressure on the Security Council, telling a suburban Atlanta audience, "Denial and endless delay in the face of growing danger is not an option." The president has said the council risks irrelevance if it does not face up to Iraq's defiance of more than 10 years of disarmament resolutions. Mr. Bush also has said if the council does not approve a second resolution he is prepared to go to war with a "coalition of the willing" -- nations like Britain that agree with him that Iraq's arsenals of biological and chemical weapons pose a threat. Mr. Bush planned to host Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar of Spain, an ally, at his Texas ranch Friday and Saturday. Another potential ally, Prime Minister Simeon Saxcoburggotski of Bulgaria, is due next Tuesday at the White House. Comment: When is someone going to challenge Bush and Blair on a very fundamental point i.e. that there is NO EVIDENCE to support their accusations against Saddam!! The whole world is being told by the inspectors "Saddam is co-operating" "there is no evidence of WMD", yet Bush Blair and Co continue to state " Saddam must disarm or else" "Saddam cannot continue to threaten the world" Has the whole world gone stark raving mad?! Can no one call a spade a spade anymore? Can no one stand up and say "hang on a minute, what the hell page are you on?!?" Just in case some of you were wondering, in the above article, the "cruder word" that the inspector used to describe US intelligence about the whereabouts of Saddam's "weapons" was "BULLSHIT!"
Comet Side-Effects May Hit Earth Soon COMET BOARD ZAPPED AFTER NASA CAUGHT FAKING IMAGES. 7 Photos Missing in NASA Web Imagery. Massive Solar Flare During Flyby. Comet now on Earth Trajectory? Solar Wind Data Confirm Event ! Ridge Issues Ominous "Get Food" Warning. Comet Discussion Board Zapped After Members caught NASA faking images
MASSIVE SOLAR ERUPTIONS have accompanied the close solar flyby of the comet NEAT Tuesday. One coronal mass ejection plume at 05:00 hours 18 Feb. --Tuesday morning, extended at least 5 million miles from the surface of the sun toward the comet, Other coronal discharges were observed extending in excess of 12 million miles.
the early hours of Thursday morning around 6:30am the
Godlikeproductions.com comet discussion board (linked to the absent
Kent Steadmans' CyberspaceOrbit website) inexplicably went offline
NASA FAKE A webimage posted by NASA [our copy] from a sequence of 7 missing hourly photos of the comet near the sun, had a telltale partial white comet image below the observed comet location. [ snapshot ] The photo thus shows two positions for the comet. This partial matched the exact position of the comet in later NASA images in the sequence posted from the SOHO satellite. A poster to the comet board placed a link to an animated composite [our copy] showing that NASA's earlier and later images were duplicates and suggesting that a photo editing error had caused the revelaing glitch. Both the discussion board and Godlikeproductions.com website went offline around thrity minutes later. Solar Wind Data from the Space Environment Center now confirm striking changes in speed, temperature and density of the solar wind around the time there was an interruption in the posted web images from the SOHO satellite. Similar changes in magnetic field data and low energy protons have been recorded.
BAD WEATHER EXCUSE - IN ADVANCE A total of 7 hours of data from early Tuesday had been missing from the hourly photographs released by the SOHO project monitoring the comet's passage. Live web imaging experienced interruptions of data by NASA --which in advance was already implausibly citing "weather problems" in the Wash. DC area as the reason. Also, the Goddard space facility displayed a Code RED -- stated to be as a result of weather problems, and which instructed non-emergency staff not to attend Tuesday 18th through Wednesday 19th February.
However the Rt 295, freeway which goes by the NSA and Goddard facilities was clear Wednesday. Indeed, locals informed GuluFuture.com that the freeway is invariably kept open because of the importance of the facilities it serves. In any event, it was 50F in the area Wednesday 19th, and snow had stopped. Also a US military website following the comet's flyby did not provide new images from 11:30pm EST Tuesday until late Wednesday afternoon. The images normally update several times an hour. At one point the website showed pictures from FEB 12th, 2003 in their 5 minute live update.
THE IMPLICATIONS. Given all this, the current image data has highly dubious credibility. The severity of the solar reactions could have torn the comet apart and even without this, the coronal mass ejection could cause significant weather, geomagnetic, and seismic effects on Earth.
One side-effect of the interaction with the sun may be that the orbit of the comet has been flattened. Orbit calculations had indicated it would be directly overhead [image] around Nov. 28, 2003, but if alternative theories about comet composition are correct, then the close flyby could have altered the trajectory disastrously. [ Try 3D orbit calcualtor ] Even if the comet were to miss (likely) then the possible debris field from the close approach to the sun could still pose serious dangers. But electromagnetic and solar wind effects could be felt much earlier. On Wednesday, an ominous statement by Homeland security chief Tom Ridge, recommended American citizens to have "3-days supply of food and water as well as flashlights" in preparation for an "attack."
The Homeland Security site advises:
The new campaign seeks to reduce fears and provide information by providing individuals specific actions they can take to protect themselves, their families and their communities in the wake of an attack, or another emergency situation. Emergency Supply Kit: Start with three days worth of nonperishable food and water. Remember, even if your community is not directly affected by an attack, your life and daily routine may be disrupted. You may need to shelter at home for a couple of days. Roads and stores may be closed - electricity may be turned off - your water supply might be interrupted.
Slightly excessive for a terror attack perhaps?
BEST KEPT SECRET Incredibly, there has been little media advance reporting of this most spectacular comet passage since Hale-Bopp and virtually no reporting of these current solar responses or the gaps in web imaging. However one of the most intriguing aspects of all this, is that only four days ago, Dr. Geoffrey Sommer, of the Rand Corporation in Santa Monica, California said that secrecy might be the best option if scientists were ever to discover that a giant asteroid was on course to collide with Earth.
"Overreaction not just by the public but by policy-makers scurrying around before the thing actually hits because we can't do anything about it anyway ... to a large extent you are better off not adding to your social costs," said Dr Sommer, who is also an adviser on terrorism. That's right, Dr. Sommer works for the Rand Corporation and is also an adviser on terrorism.
BIZARRE NASA MESSAGE RE LIVE WEB IMAGING: "NOTE: The Washington DC metropolitan area is under a snow emergency. If the LASCO team has technical problems with the software that reformats telemetry into images for the web they may not be able to fix it until the emergency is lifted."
DIAMETER EQUALS 870,000 MILES
Spectacular Comet Hit by Solar Flare? Spectacular images of the recently found NEAT comet show the cosmic voyager more than twice the size of planet Jupiter may have been struck by a massive solar eruption. Images from the SOHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory) satellite, which sits partway between Earth and the Sun and is designed primarily to monitor space weather, have on Tuesday morning shown a massive solar plume extending over a 5 million miles above the sun -seemingly towards the comet. But though the photography is time-lapsed, there are 7 hourly photographs missing from the data released by the SOHO project -meaning it is impossible to determine if the plume later extended to strike the comet.
coronal mass ejection (CME), already appears to have hit the comet
Monday, according to SOHO deputy project director Paul Brekke. The
SOHO imaging shows sunlight reflecting off gas and dust from the
comet's nucleus and hydrogen solar wind from the sun. The comet has
been in LASCO's imaging domain since Sunday. It will begin to move
out of the field of view around 5 a.m. EST on Thursday, Feb.
NEW ZEALAND WEBSURFER NZDOOODE COMMENT:"Yeah, I contacted my National newsroom on the 18th and they told me that I was the first to tell them about it *shocked* is the mainstream media asleep or are they liars!??! I saw this 2002V1 comet with my naked eyes on sunset the other night, the sun was obscured by some loud, it was the most amazing sight I have ever seen before, in the sky. A major astronomical event like this, to keep the truth from the public is pure EVIL!! I looked in the sun's direction today and was dazzled by an unusual "very white" saturated light - significantly brighter than usual!! We are getting very red skies at sunrise and at sunset, it's summer here and we just got a forecast for unusual thunder/snow/hail tomorrow.
February 24, 1996
July 4, 1998:
First there was the story of the sun's companion brown star which
is apparently approaching the solar system, and I would like to
know, if possible, details of its orbit; that is, how far it is,
what is its speed, and when it will be first seen. Can we know it?
Orbit: how close will it come?
Okay. Now, this closest pass, is this something that is going to
chief, 16 others die in plane crash * Chief marshals wife,
top PAF officers among dead * Committee to investigate cause of
Sends Extra AWACs To Help Guard Skies Of America. Following
a request by the United States, NATO's North Atlantic Council today
approved the deployment of two E3 Airborne Early Warning and
Control aircraft to join five other AWACs aircraft of this type
already operating in support of U.S. homeland security. NATO AWACs
aircraft have been conducting operations over the US since 9
October 2001. They are based at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma.
This deployment is one of the most visible examples of NATO's
reaction to the terrorist threat faced by all Allies. It has
enabled the US to use its own AWACs aircraft for operations
elsewhere. The commitment of two further AWACs aircraft to join
NATO's first operational deployment in the US demonstrates the
Alliance's determination to play a full part in the campaign
against terrorism. NATO will nonetheless continue to meet its
operational responsibilities elsewhere, especially in the Balkans,
in part because of the willingness of France and the United Kingdom
to employ their national AWACs aircraft in this role. Comment: In an effort to counteract the obvious
bias and disinformation being spread by the media on behalf of the
government, I suggest that in the above article and from now on,
whenever you read the words "campaign against terror" or "war
against terror" or "war on terror" just mentally substitute the
words "the grand deception". You will begin to get a much more
accurate representation of what is actually going on and who the
main players are. On the same point, the below quote is worth
reading again: "Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops
entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be
grateful. This is especially true if they were told there was an
outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that
threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the
world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil.
The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with
this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for
the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world
government." -- Henry Kissinger speaking at Evian, France, May 21,
1992 Bilderburg meeting. Unbeknownst to Kissinger, his speech was
taped by a Swiss delegate to the meeting.
February 20, 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!
Prime Minister Tony Blair is under investigation leading to possible charges for criminal bribery with George W. Bush(43) as a co-conspirator. Cloak and Dagger has been contacted by reliable bank investigators who have uncovered evidence that British PM Blair was involved in criminal bribery. Blair is now under investigation for accepting large bribes from the Bush oil interests. The evidence consists of bank transfers from George Bush financial interests to PM Blair's personal accounts via the United Arab Emirates where the investigations into criminal bribery against Blair began. The bribery purpose is so that the United Kingdom's PM would be sure to go along with Bush's plan to forcibly seize the Iraqi oil fields while also unseating strongman Saddam Hussein. Part of the bribery plan was to use the Oil fields for collateral to support an out of control US deficit.It is no surprise that the U.S. treasury is alarmed by the declining proceeds of tax receipts. The White House is pushing for massive tax cuts for wealthy Americans at the time of a growing deficit.In recent months the Cloak and Dagger program has exclusively presented on air, details from the moderator and producer Sherman Skolnick, of a Chicago Public Access Cable TV program.Cloak and Dagger has spoken directly with the Investigators who presented the evidence to senior French diplomatic officials today. Bank investigators have shown senior French diplomats documents that corroborate the following.
1-That the scheme to
grab Iraqi oil fields was in the works over a year and a half ago
when several billion dollars was transferred to bank accounts set
up for the private benefit of Blair.
Human shields' use is war crime -- With around 30 Western
volunteer "human shields" now in Baghdad and more on their way,
Pentagon officials Wednesday warned that any Iraqi military
personnel who put those civilians at risk would be violating
international law and could face war crimes charges.
Comment: yeah tell
about it Rummy, you two-faced hypocritcal
'Sept 11 attack was Jewish
conspiracy' Radical Muslim Abu Hamza
has astonishingly claimed that a Jewish conspiracy destroyed the
Twin Towers. The Egyptian-born preacher made the bizarre claim in
the wake of the conviction of a student in Germany for acting as
the 11 September attackers' banker. Hamza claimed Moroccan student
Mounir al-Motassadek, jailed for the maximum 15 years for being an
accessory to 3,000 murders, had been framed by German police trying
to meet performance targets. The outburst came at a public
appearance in Bethnal Green last night by Hamza, who has been
barred from preaching at Finsbury Park mosque. Hamza also claimed
that the US was prepared to "invade Turkey" as part of its alleged
attempt to seize control of the Middle East's oil, and accused
"Zionists" and American fundamentalist Christians of worshipping
the Antichrist. He told how he he believed the World Trade Center
was not brought down by planes hijacked by al Qaeda but by Jewish
extremists packing the buildings with explosives. "We are sure it
was a Zionist plot," he said. "From the way the building collapsed
you could see the building has been demolished from the inside
because there is no way the whole building would just collapse like
that." And the hook-handed cleric, who is being investigated over
allegations of housing benefit fraud, accused Jews and Christians
of a wider conspiracy to bring an end to Islam.
Russia Says Inspectors Are Being Pressed In an indirect attack on the United States and Britain, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said Thursday that U.N. weapons inspectors were being pressured to provide a pretext for war on Iraq. Ivanov did not say who was applying the pressure, which he said aimed "to provoke them (inspectors) to discontinue their operations in Iraq ... or to pressure them into coming up with assessments that would justify the use of force." It was clear, however, he was referring to Washington and ally Britain. Both have said Iraq has had sufficient time to comply with U.N. resolutions on disarming voluntarily and oppose a long extension of the U.N. inspections regime. Ivanov called on the international community "to help rather than put pressure" on the inspectors. "The faster we receive concrete results from the international inspectors' activities, the greater the chances of a political settlement of the situation," Ivanov told reporters. Russia, which holds a veto on the Security Council, has consistently called for the Iraq crisis to be solved through diplomacy and has pushed for the extension of U.N. weapons inspectors' work, a position at odds with Washington's attempts to rally support for a military strike. Ivanov urged Baghdad to "show maximum openness" with the inspectors, who began work in November after the council passed resolution 1441. Russia has been playing both sides of the Iraq issue recently, on the one hand urging Washington to tone down rhetoric and at the same time demanding Baghdad cooperate with inspectors. Recent inroads at the United Nations by countries calling for a peaceful solution and peace rallies around the world seem to have emboldened Russia to more harshly criticize the United States and Britain. The Russian Foreign Ministry praised this week's debates on Iraq in the United Nations, saying in a statement that they confirmed "the broad support in the world for Russia's approaches aimed at continuing political efforts for a peaceful solution of the Iraq problem through the United Nations and the Security Council."
Washington and London are
drawing up a new resolution to put forward soon to the Security
Council that U.S. officials say will be tough and test the
council's resolve on Iraq. It's not known, however, if the
resolution will call for use of force to disarm Baghdad. Ivanov
said it was premature to discuss Moscow's reaction to a possible
new resolution, but he said Russia had not given up its right to a
veto. "All permanent members of the U.N. Security Council have the
right to veto, including Russia. But each has to show its
responsibility in exercising this right," Ivanov said. In an
interview with Italian daily Corriere della Sera published
Thursday, Ivanov said that "if a new resolution was meant to give
"authorization to the use of force, then we believe it's harmful."
But, he told the paper, "Russia's duty today is not to split the
Security Council, but to keep its unity as much as possible."
Russia does not rule out considering any new draft resolutions if
they support the inspections and implementation of resolution
1441," he told reporters in Moscow. On Wednesday, a visiting U.S.
congressman, Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., said he was confident that
Russia would not stand in the way of U.S. military action against
Iraq - in part because Moscow is keenly interested in recovering
$7-8 billion in Soviet-era debt owed by Baghdad. In the Corriere
della Sera interview, Ivanov warned that using force against Iraq
could make other countries, like North Korea, feel threatened -
ultimately pushing them to develop their own chemical and
biological arsenals. "There could be a proliferation of
insecurity," he said. "It's a very dangerous logic."
Simple Math for Dumb Americans. According to the opinions of many U.S. citizens, as of late, Americans are becoming less and less popular with the World community. President W. would have us all believe that the European population, once believed to be our cousins overseas, is becoming increasingly hostile toward Americans. Fact of the matter is, he couldn't be farther from the truth. The United Nations has been unabashedly fighting the Bush administration's toddler-like desire to invade Iraq all year. Even longtime U.S. supporter, Germany, has become increasingly vocal in its disagreement with Bush's Iraqi policy. Even perennial chicken-shits, the French, are standing up to W.'s increasingly repetitive calls for a "unilateral, U.N. attack." In a recent editorial for The Nation, columnist Eric Alterman reports that even though Spain's staunchly conservative government has been in support of Bush's plans for Iraqi invasion, the Spanish people have been protesting the allegiance.
Recently, 48 Hours, 20/20, MSNBC and CNN have all run programs investigating this growing perception that Europeans are progressively becoming more and more anti-American. Surprisingly, America's T.V. journalists were unable to find much commentary from the World community that could be labeled as anti-American. I don't remember exactly which Abercrombie & Fitch-clad reporter in the field, for which program, went to which country. I do remember that none of them--and these jokers went everywhere from Milan to Mogadishu--could find any strong anti-American sentiment, outside of the occasional Muslim extremists, of course. They did run into a lot of normal, average people (who just happen to live outside of America) who were not only more educated on Bush's foreign policy, but were not real pleased with it. They were not, however, anti-American.
According to the increasingly conservative crowd hanging out around Washington D.C. these days, if you do not agree with the president's foreign policy, you are anti-American--regardless of where you live. National news agencies perpetuate this myth by showing citizens of other countries protesting W.'s policies and labeling them as "anti-America(n) protests." Once again, they couldn't be farther from the truth. The saddest lesson to be learned, however, was not that the Bush administration is trying to paint anti-war sentiment as anti-American, but that most of the foreigners interviewed by any one of the news programs not only exhibited their superior knowledge of international politics, but they were far more informed on American politics than most Americans.
The fact that people who don't even live in this country are more up on American current events of import (this doesn't include any news run on the E! Channel) and that they are protesting against the policies of our government in greater number, and at a greater volume than our own citizens, is frightening--but not in the way Washington D.C., and your television, would have you believe. These facts are frightening because everyone on the planet seems to be more aware of the global consequences of Bush's international policies than Americans. What's even more terrifying is that W.'s spin-doctors are using this ignorance to garner support for his now-imminent invasion of Iraq.
case you're wondering why Europeans are against an American
invasion of Iraq, it's mainly due to W.'s many other foreign policy
blunders. W. may see an invasion of Iraq as a mission of mercy for
the world, but the world ain't having it. Many Europeans are
understandably disgusted with W.'s refusal to sign any strategic or
anti-ballistic missile treaty that involves America's disarming.
Refusing to limit one's own nuclear arsenal while simultaneously
demanding that another country disarm itself smacks of hypocrisy
regardless of what God you pray to. Not surprisingly, W., in his
narrow-minded self-righteousness, fails to see this comparison. I
say, if being against war, and specifically W.'s oil-mongering war,
makes me un-American, then "Vive la France!"
dailies urge America to launch war against Saddam With most
estimates that an American attack on Iraq is now no more than weeks
away, Israeli newspapers devote much of their news space to
Israel’s preparations for the anticipated war in the Gulf. In
an interview with the Tel Aviv daily Yediot Ahronot, Chief of Staff
Moshe (Bougie) Yaalon says Israel has the capacity to strike back
hard if attacked by Iraq, adding that he believes the American
invasion will cause an “earthquake” in the Middle East.
Maariv says the assessment is that the US will attack sooner rather
than later, and that the Israel Air Force will be on red alert from
next week. The paper also quotes Major-General Amos Gilead, the
coordinator of government activities in the Palestinian
territories, as saying “dormant terrorist cells” are
awaiting orders from Baghdad. Yediot Ahronot reports that an attack
was averted Thursday when two Islamic Jihad members were captured
north of Nablus, and a Hamas man who was traveling with them was
shot dead when he tried to escape. It adds that two other members
of the cell were captured later in Nablus, and that the aim was a
car or suicide bombing in the Sharon area. Maariv highlights Labor
Party leader Amram Mitzna’s victory in the party bureau,
which voted unanimously against joining Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon’s new government. In the columns, the main subject is
Iraq. In Maariv’s Sabbath supplement, columnist Dan Margalit
criticizes the opponents of American action in Iraq and warns that
“if Saddam Hussein’s regime is allowed to survive, a
terrible war may be averted, but the war that will inevitably come
later will be much more terrible.” “Saddam’s
removal has become a necessity,” Margalit asserts. “If
America holds back now, he will be intoxicated with success and
encouraged to launch aggression after aggression against his
neighbors, and more extreme Islamic elements will compete with him
in testing the patience of the West, which it perceives as rotten
and hollow. “The Romans,” Margalit concludes,
“said that ‘if you want peace, prepare for war.’
In the reality of 2003, this saying must be adapted to ‘if
you want peace, go to war.’” Margalit’s colleague
at Maariv, Ben Caspit, warns that “with Saddam’s
execution orders signed and sealed by President George W. Bush and
delivered by Secretary of State Colin Powell in his UN Security
Council presentation, the Iraqi leader is like a wounded and
trapped animal, his motivation to wreak damage at its highest ever
level. The question we must all ask is whether he is still capable
of causing damage. “Bush has to come back from Baghdad with
Saddam’s scalp,” Caspit maintains. “Any other
result would be perceived as a stunning and dangerous victory for
world terrorism and a resounding American defeat. Bush
doesn’t intend to make the same mistake as his father, and he
intends to go all the way, regardless of the cost. The juggernaut
is already underway and it won’t stop in Baghdad. Iran,
Syria, Hizbullah, North Korea and Al-Qaeda are all in its sights.
Saddam is first, because he is the most accessible, convenient and
Caspit explains that
“in his besieged headquarters in Ramallah, Palestinian leader
Yasser Arafat sits with bated breath, holding thumbs for Saddam. He
realizes that his future is directly linked to Saddam’s fate.
Iraq has been increasing the flow of funds to the Palestinians,
trying to heat up the atmosphere. All this will come to an end on
the day after the war. But, will there be a critical mass that will
carry Arafat to his end as well? “Sharon would love to see
Arafat join Saddam in oblivion, enabling him to declare a
historical victory and to set in motion his version of a peace
process.” In Yediot Ahronot, Palestinian affairs analyst Roni
Shaked ascribes more complex motives to Arafat. “Despite his
solidarity with Saddam, Arafat sees the war as an opportunity, and
hopes to enjoy the fruits of a new order in the Middle East after
the American operation. The big demonstrations organized by Hamas
in Palestinian towns are an embarrassment, as is the Iraqi
financial assistance for the families of the suicide bombers.
Arafat’s people have been trying to calm things down,
removing large portraits of Saddam from the streets of Palestinian
towns. He wants Palestinian protests to look like those in America
sympathy for the Iraqi people, not its leader.”
Surveying Palestinian expressions of solidarity with Saddam and the
Iraqi people, Shaked notices that “unlike 1991, they
aren’t calling for the bombardment of Tel Aviv, or preparing
to dance on the rooftops as the Scuds fly over. This time they want
to appear more prudent and responsible. The Palestinian leadership
fears that supporting Iraq could undermine and weaken the prospects
for the realization of their vision of a Palestinian state.”
At the same time, Shaked observes, “the Palestinians are
anxious over the possibility that with the world’s attention
on Iraq, Israel will exploit the opportunity to hit out at them, to
conquer Gaza, and even to carry out a mass expulsion to Jordan. On
the margins, especially in intellectual circles, there are voices
saying that the war on Iraq should be used as a pretext to end the
In his interview with Alex Fishman in Yediot Ahronot, Chief of Staff Yaalon also sees a possible end to the intifada after the American invasion of Iraq. He says it will cause a “regional earthquake” and “create a new regional order a new regional architecture. If successful, it will have a positive effect and strengthen all the pragmatic elements in the region. Remember, the last intifada ended in 1991, with the Gulf War.” In the interview, Yaalon also sees a connection between the American war on Iraq and the situation along Israel’s northern border, and says that after the war there will have to be changes there too. “Lebanon,” he complains, “has become a platform in the service of the Syrians and the Iranians, for creating tension in the north and for fueling Palestinian terror. The fact is, Lebanon is being exploited as a platform for exerting pressure on Israel.” “At the moment,” Yaalon writes, “the situation in the north is relatively stable. The Syrians are worried that if there is an escalation, the Syrian Army may be tested by the Israeli Army. That is a ball game the Syrians don’t want to get into. On the other hand, Hizbullah have to keep explaining why things are so quiet. Therefore, from time to time they launch an attack of one kind or another.” The bottom line for the chief of staff is that the situation, as it exists today, is intolerable and, he says, it will have to change, either by diplomacy or by military force. Writing from Washington, Maariv political analyst Chemi Shalev finds profound political significance in the fact that Israel’s dead astronaut Ilan Ramon has become an “all-American hero,” and says the outpouring of emotion in America after the astronaut’s death has raised Israeli-American ties to a new level, which could have an impact on the post-Saddam Middle East. “Just as on Sept. 11 (2001) the fanatical extremists, who rejoiced at the astronaut’s death, are suffering from conceptual blindness,” Shalev writes. “For although Israel suffered the loss of Ramon the individual, it has been greatly strengthened by its deep penetration into the heart of the American consensus. From now on, not only common interests and shared values, not only a strategic alliance, but a brotherhood of blood. “The emotional sway in America toward Israel includes numerous groups that up till now didn’t know much about or take any interest in the vagaries of the Middle East,” Shalev continues. “For a public which sees the world in terms of black and white, evil and good, Israel has been indisputably placed on the side of the seekers of freedom and good.” This, he argues, “is especially significant with regard to speculation on the day after the American war on Iraq. With public opinion so warm toward Israel on the eve of the opening of a new presidential election season, even a far less friendly president than Bush would think twice about hurting the apple of the American eye. “Chance, cruel fate and the malfunction of the spaceship Columbia’s heat protecting tiles have created such a fund of goodwill that only a particularly extreme and inept Israeli government would be able to lose it. Sharon also knows this. That’s why he is making such an effort to escape the Israeli voters’ verdict, which almost foisted a government like that on him.” Comment: This guy is 100% deluded.
Oil, Currency and the War on Iraq It will not come as news to anyone that the US dominates the world economically and militarily. But the exact mechanisms by which American hegemony has been established and maintained are perhaps less well understood than they might be. One tool used to great effect has been the dollar, but its efficacy has recently been under threat since Europe introduced the euro. The dollar is the de facto world reserve currency: the US currency accounts for approximately two thirds of all official exchange reserves. More than four-fifths of all foreign exchange transactions and half of all world exports are denominated in dollars. In addition, all IMF loans are denominated in dollars. But the more dollars there are circulating outside the US, or invested by foreign owners in American assets, the more the rest of the world has had to provide the US with goods and services in exchange for these dollars. The dollars cost the US next to nothing to produce, so the fact that the world uses the currency in this way means that the US is importing vast quantities of goods and services virtually for free. Since so many foreign-owned dollars are not spent on American goods and services, the US is able to run a huge trade deficit year after year without apparently any major economic consequences. The most recently published figures, for example, show that in November of last year US imports were worth 48% more than US exports. No other country can run such a large trade deficit with impunity. The financial media tell us the US is acting as the ‘consumer of last resort’ and the implication is that we should be thankful, but a more enlightening description of this state of affairs would be to say that it is getting a massive interest-free loan from the rest of the world. While the US’ position may seem inviolable, one should remember that the more you have, the more you have to lose. And recently there have been signs of how, for the first time in a long time, the US may be beginning to lose.
One of the stated economic objectives, and perhaps the primary objective, when setting up the euro was to turn it into a reserve currency to challenge the dollar so that Europe too could get something for nothing. This however would be a disaster for the US. Not only would they lose a large part of their annual subsidy of effectively free goods and services, but countries switching to euro reserves from dollar reserves would bring down the value of the US currency. Imports would start to cost Americans a lot more and as increasing numbers of those holding dollars began to spend them, the US would have to start paying its debts by supplying in goods and services to foreign countries, thus reducing American living standards. As countries and businesses converted their dollar assets into euro assets, the US property and stock market bubbles would, without doubt, burst. The Federal Reserve would no longer be able to print more money to reflate the bubble, as it is currently openly considering doing, because, without lots of eager foreigners prepared to mop them up, a serious inflation would result which, in turn, would make foreigners even more reluctant to hold the US currency and thus heighten the crisis. There is though one major obstacle to this happening: oil. Oil is not just by far the most important commodity traded internationally, it is the lifeblood of all modern industrialised economies. If you don’t have oil, you have to buy it. And if you want to buy oil on the international markets, you usually have to have dollars. Until recently all OPEC countries agreed to sell their oil for dollars only. So long as this remained the case, the euro was unlikely to become the major reserve currency: there is not a lot of point in stockpiling euros if every time you need to buy oil you have to change them into dollars. This arrangement also meant that the US effectively part-controlled the entire world oil market: you could only buy oil if you had dollars, and only one country had the right to print dollars - the US.
If on the other hand OPEC were to decide to accept euros only for its oil (assuming for a moment it were allowed to make this decision), then American economic dominance would be over. Not only would Europe not need as many dollars anymore, but Japan which imports over 80% of its oil from the Middle East would think it wise to convert a large portion of its dollar assets to euro assets (Japan is the major subsidiser of the US because it holds so many dollar investments). The US on the other hand, being the world's largest oil importer would have, to run a trade surplus to acquire euros. The conversion from trade deficit to trade surplus would have to be achieved at a time when its property and stock market prices were collapsing and its domestic supplies of oil and gas were contracting. It would be a very painful conversion. The purely economic arguments for OPEC converting to the euro, at least for a while, seem very strong. The Euro-zone does not run a huge trade deficit nor is it heavily endebted to the rest of the world like the US and interest rates in the Euro-zone are also significantly higher. The Euro-zone has a larger share of world trade than the US and is the Middle East’s main trading partner. And nearly everything you can buy for dollars you can also buy for euros - apart, of course, from oil. Furthermore, if OPEC were to convert their dollar assets to euro assets and then require payment for oil in Euros, their assets would immediately increase in value, since oil importing countries would be forced to also convert part of their assets, driving the prices up. For OPEC, backing the euro would be a self-fulfilling prophesy. They could then at some later date move to some other currency, perhaps back to the dollar, and again make huge profits. But of course it is not a purely economic decision. So far only one OPEC country has dared switch to the euro: Iraq, in November 2000. There is little doubt that this was a deliberate attempt by Saddam to strike back at the US, but in economic terms it has also turned out to have been a huge success: at the time of Iraq's conversion the euro was worth around 83 US cents but it is now worth over $1.05. There may however be other consequences to this decision. One other OPEC country has been talking publicly about possible conversion to the euro since 1999: Iran, a country which has since been included in the George W. Bush’s ‘axis of evil’.
A third OPEC country which has recently fallen out with the US government is Venezuela and it too has been showing disloyalty to the dollar. Under Hugo Chavez’s rule, Venezuela has established barter deals for trading its oil with 12 Latin American countries as well as Cuba. This means that the US is missing out on its usual subsidy and might help explain the American wish to see the back of Chavez. At the OPEC summit in September 2000, Chavez delivered to the OPEC heads of state the report of the 'Interrnational Seminar on the Future of Energy’, a conference called by Chavez earlier that year to examine the future supplies of both fossil and renewable energies. One of the two key recommendations of the report was that ‘OPEC take advantage of high-tech electronic barter and bi-lateral exchanges of its oil with its developing country customers’, i.e. OPEC should avoid using both the dollar and the euro for many transactions. And last April, a senior OPEC representative gave a public speech in Spain during Spain’s presidency of the EU during which he made clear that though OPEC had as yet no plans to make oil available for euros, it was an option that was being considered and which could well be of economic benefit to many OPEC countries, particularly those of the Middle East. As oil production is now in decline in most oil producing countries, the importance of the remaining large oil producers, particularly those of the Middle East, is going to grow and grow in years to come. Iraq, whose oil production has been severely curtailed by sanctions, is one of a very small number of countries which can help ease this looming oil shortage. Europe, like most of the rest of the world, wishes to see a peaceful resolution of the current US-Iraqi tensions and a gradual lifting of the sanctions - this would certainly serve its interests best. But as Iraqi oil is denominated in euros, allowing it to become more widely available at present could loosen the dollar stranglehold and possibly do more damage than good to US economic health. All of this is bad news for the US economy and the dollar. The fear for Washington will be that not only will the future price of oil not be right, but the currency might not be right either. Which perhaps helps explain why the US is increasingly turning to its second major tool for dominating world affairs: military force. Comment: Its all about economics, at the expense of human life.
Chicago-area man arrested in Florida-based terrorism case. A suburban Chicago man was arrested Thursday in connection with a federal investigation of a Tampa-area college professor whose university has accused him of having ties to a terrorist fund-raising network. The man was identified by a source as Ghassan Z. Ballut of south suburban Tinley Park. A woman who identified herself as Ballut's wife, Hanan, answered the telephone at his home and said that he had been arrested by FBI agents at 6 a.m. She said he was supposed to appear in court in Chicago later that morning. The woman did not answer the door at her home shortly after 10 a.m. Minutes later, authorities left the home carrying a large envelope marked "evidence." They got into a minivan and drove away without comment. A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Chicago, Randall Samborn, declined to comment.
The investigation in Florida has focused on a University of South Florida professor, Sami al-Arian, who was one of several individuals rounded up by federal agents Thursday morning. The university has accused him of having ties to a terrorist fundraising network and sought to fire the tenured professor. In Tampa, U.S. attorney's office spokesman Steve Cole said that Attorney General John Ashcroft would be holding an afternoon news conference in Washington with Paul Perez, U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Florida. He said that the arrests were related, but would not elaborate. Hanan Ballut, 36, said she did not know why her husband was taken into custody. "My husband is clean as a whistle. My husband is a person who works and supports his family," she said. "We are American Muslims. We're here to live in peace. We know that we did not do anything wrong." She said she and her husband are both U.S. citizens. She said he is 41 and works at the Ford City Mall on Chicago's southwest side. She said her husband told her, "Don't worry about it, take care of the kids, I'll be back," as he was led away. Comment: Beginning of the round up?
US Navy boards ships in hunt for Iraqi arms. The United States Navy is boarding an average of six vessels a day as it steps up patrols in international waters searching for Iraqi weapons rumoured to have been hidden on ships or smuggled overseas. Most of the operations have been in and around the Persian Gulf, where Western naval detachments are enforcing international sanctions against Iraq, ensuring there is no traffic in forbidden goods. UNMOVIC, the United Nations agency searching for hidden chemical and biological weapons, said on that Wednesday there had been a steady stream of reports suggesting that Iraqi weapons had been smuggled abroad in recent months to countries such as Sudan and Syria. The search for hidden weapons has taken the UN weapons inspectors to a wide range of sites. A team of inspectors showed up unexpectedly at the agriculture school of Tikrit University, 175 kilometres north of Baghdad, and gathered around a metal tank, examining and photographing it.Peter Hinchliffe, a marine adviser at the International Chamber of Shipping, said steps were under way to design an internationally accepted tracking system to keep a closer watchon vessels.There was no evidence that ships carrying Iraqi missiles were concealed at sea, he said, but added: "The Indian Ocean is a very big place; it's not difficult to hide things there."US naval patrols in the Gulf have yielded only minor discoveries of drugs and a handful of unauthorised guns.David Osler, industrial editor of the maritime journal Lloyd's List, said: "It's becoming a bit of an embarrassment to them; they haven't really found anything." QFS member comments: A few days ago the story about the Saddam's aresenal being sent to sea at about the time that Blix re-entered Iraq with the inspectors was published. A strange inconsistency about that story was that US/UK forces did not want to approach or board the suspect ships, for fear that they would be scuttled, thereby dumping a hellbroth of bio/chem/nuke stuff in the Indian Ocean. Now this story...how quickly their environmental scrupples are adjusted...also no mention of the three prime suspect ships story
Flash presentation on World as 100 people Some would have us believe that the current state of things on the planet, as evidenced by the above is "just the way things are", as if to suggest that chance could bring about such a lamentable situation. This is a laughingly childish suggestion and patently not true. As has been discussed in "Ascencion: the true Quest for the Holy Grail", at various times in our planet's recent history millions of people were praying for a positive outcome to a given situation, only to see the worst case scenario result. The statistics in the above flash presentation are a manifestation of the extremely imbalanced nature of our planet and the power structure upon it. Western governments have for many years sought to manipulate the planet, its people and resources in order that they should dominate completely. As they did so however, they were (consciously or unconsciously) doing the bidding of a far greater, darker and more manipulative force that has had this planet under its "spell" for 309,000 years. This force has succeeded in implementing its long-standing plan to produce as much suffering, pain, war and strife as possible for humanity. They do this because they literally feed on it. The success of this agenda has been secured by the manipulation of world events in favour of those power hungry men that have willingly bombed, killed and maimed for centuries. We are now entering the final stage of their plan, during which they intend to broaden the already widespread suffering on the planet to include the rest of us, the until now "priveleged" western countries. The responsibilty for the implementation of this final instalment has been offered to the current puppet(s) of choice, George Bush and Co, as they push us all relentlessly down the road to "war without end".
Antiwar protests fail to sway Bush on plans for Iraq President Bush dismissed antiwar protests today as a factor in his plans for confronting Iraq and pressed ahead with a strategy to persuade reluctant allies that United Nations weapons inspections would not secure the disarmament of Saddam Hussein. In his first public comments about the antiwar demonstrations by millions of people over the weekend in the United States and abroad, Mr. Bush said his overriding goal was to protect the American people and that leadership sometimes involved bucking public opinion. "Size of protest -- it's like deciding, well, I'm going to decide policy based upon a focus group," Mr. Bush said in response to a reporter's question at the White House. "The role of a leader is to decide policy based upon the security, in this case, the security of the people."
Administration officials said the United States planned to submit a proposed new resolution on Mr. Hussein's failure to disarm to the United Nations Security Council, probably at the end of this week or early next week after the conclusion of a United Nations debate about Iraq that began today. A statement from the European Union on Monday that explicitly if reluctantly supported the use of force against Iraq as a last resort raised British and American hopes that the Security Council could ultimately be won over. Officials said the European acceptance of the principle that force might be necessary, in combination with possible critical statements about Iraq's cooperation over the next several weeks by Hans Blix, one of the chief United Nations weapons inspectors, could ultimately provide the basis for backing of force by Security Council members, including France. The new resolution is expected to be a short, straightforward assertion that Iraq has defied calls by the United Nations to give up its weapons of mass destruction and now faces the "serious consequences" threatened in the previous resolution, officials said. Both Jacques Chirac, the French president, and Gerhard Schröder, the German chancellor, have this week criticized the idea of a second resolution. France has made it clear that it will oppose the measure. Mr. Bush has said he plans to reach a decision on the use of force against Iraq within weeks, whatever the Security Council does.
But with military forces still moving into place, there were indications that the United States and Britain want to use the next several weeks to give the leaders of France and other nations that oppose an immediate war an opportunity to show their publics that inspections and diplomacy are not making headway. Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain said today that the large antiwar protests in his country would not affect his close alliance with the United States over Iraq. "Of course I understand the concerns of the thousands that marched on Saturday, and of course I should and do listen to those concerns," Mr. Blair said at a news conference in London. But Mr. Blair said the world should also listen to the voices of Iraqi exiles, who, he said, have made a case that Saddam Hussein's government is "one of the most barbarous and detestable regimes in modern political history." Mr. Bush referred scornfully today to giving Mr. Hussein "another, 'nother, 'nother last chance" to comply with prior United Nations resolutions demanding that Iraq disarm. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and his deputy, Richard L. Armitage, continued intensive discussions today with the British and others on the wording of the new resolution. Administration officials said the measure might not be voted on for two more weeks, and the language might be revised in that period. By early March, the administration expects that Mr. Blix will be prepared to make a more negative appraisal of Iraq's cooperation than he did before the Security Council on Friday. Officials said Mr. Blix gave them that impression in private.
Mr. Blix is being pressed by the United States to set "benchmarks" over the next several weeks, demanding that Iraq fulfill its obligations in at least three specific areas: allowing unimpeded interviews with scientists, destroying illegal rockets and allowing unconditional overflights by reconnaissance planes. A refusal to cooperate on any of those would make it clearer that Mr. Hussein was defying the inspectors, administration officials said. In another indication of the pressure on the United States to give weapons inspections and diplomacy more time, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien of Canada told his Parliament that he would oppose military action against Iraq that was not explicitly authorized by the Security Council. The administration today pursued negotiations with Turkey, which has been demanding $32 billion in loans, grants and debt forgiveness as the price for allowing the United States to stage troops there and open a northern front against Iraq in the event of war. Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, said the president "understands that Turkey is in a difficult position." But Mr. Fleischer also made clear that the United States was not interested in drawn-out negotiations with Turkey over the size of the package, saying it was "decision time" for Turkey.
After a weekend in which protesters in the United States, Europe and much of the rest of the world urged giving diplomacy more time or ruling out war altogether, Mr. Bush said he welcomed the right of people in democracies to express their opinions. But he indicated that he viewed the protesters as questioning not so much his reluctance to extend United Nations weapons inspections or seek other nonmilitary ways to contain Saddam Hussein, but the need to deal with Iraq's weapons of mass destruction at all. "Evidently, some of the world don't view Saddam Hussein as a risk to peace," Mr. Bush said. "I respectfully disagree." Mr. Bush used the words "courage" or "courageous" to describe his two most stalwart allies in confronting Iraq, Mr. Blair and Prime Minister José María Aznar of Spain, who is scheduled to visit Mr. Bush at his ranch in Texas this weekend. Mr. Fleischer compared the protests to those in Europe in 1983 against President Reagan's deployment of intermediate-range missiles against the Soviet Union. In the long run, he said, the fall of the Soviet Union proved that the American doctrine of "peace through strength" had been successful and that the protesters had been wrong. Comment: There ya have it folks, straight from the horse's mouth "leadership involves bucking public opinion", in other words, the US is no longer a democracy and in fact has not been for a very long time, its just that they aren't hiding it anymore.
Six Step Attitudinal Change Plan "The Six Step Attitudinal Change Plan gives New World Order Planners the ability to silently, almost invisibly, change the attitudes and values of the entire population of a people. They must achieve this before they stage the appearance of their "Christ". You will have trouble believing how much of your daily life is being manipulated, but once you understand how this is being accomplished, you can take steps to reduce its effect or eliminate it. Learn to protect your loved ones.
Step 2. At first, the public is shocked, then outraged.
Step 3. But, the VERY FACT that such a thing could be publicly debated becomes the SUBJECT of the debate.
Step 4. In the process, sheer repetition of the shocking subject under discussion gradually dulling its effect.
Step 5. People then are no longer shocked by the subject.
Step 6. No longer outraged, people begin to argue for positions to moderate the extreme; or, they accept the premise, challenging, instead, the means to ACHIEVE it." Comment: Remind you of anything that is happening in the US right now?
We'll attack Iraq and then deal with Syria, Iran and North Korea says US TEL AVIV: U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton has assured Israeli officials on Monday that America will attack Iraq, and will also deal with Syria, Iran and North Korea after occupying Baghdad. According to a report publlished by Israel¹s leading newspaper Haaretz, Bolton, who is undersecretary for arms control and international security, is in Israel for meetings about preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction. In a meeting with Bolton on Monday, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said that Israel is concerned about the security threat posed by Iran. It's important to deal with Iran even while American attention is turned toward Iraq, Sharon said. Bolton also met with Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Housing and Construction Minister Natan Sharansky. These meetings strengthen the doubts about the Israeli hands behind the war on Iraq and its nefarious designs to set the region on fire by pushing United States to attack other Muslim countries in the Middle East. This report should be eye opener for the leaders of Bahrain, Kuwait and other Muslim nations who are supporting the United States in its aggression against Iraq, commented an observer while criticising the Bush administration for endangering the World peace through ill-concieve aggressive moves to appease Israel.
302 Iranian Soldiers Die in Plane Crash - An Iranian military plane carrying 302 members of the elite Revolutionary Guards crashed in the mountains of southeastern Iran on Wednesday, killing all on board in the country's worst plane crash ever, state-run media reported. The plane was en route from Zahedan, on the Pakistan border, to Kerman, about 500 miles southeast of Tehran, state-run Tehran television reported. It crashed in a mountainous area about 20 miles from its destination. The Russian-made Antonov airliner operated by Iran's military lost contact with the control tower at 5:30 p.m. Wednesday, according to the reports. The official Islamic Republic News Agency said rescuers had reached the crash site and that all 302 people on board had been killed, making the crash the deadliest in Iran's history. The death toll surpassed the 290 killed on July 3, 1988, when an Iran Air A300 Airbus was shot down over the Persian Gulf by the USS Vincennes.
agency said the plane's passengers and crew were all members of the
Revolutionary Guards. Earlier reports said 270 were aboard, but the
latest media updates didn't explain the increase. State television
and radio did not offer reasons for the crash and did not address
the possibility of terrorism. There was heavy snowfall in many
parts of Iran on Wednesday, including in Zahedan, which hadn't seen
snow in three years. Associated Press efforts to reach provincial
officials were unsuccessful early Thursday. Tehran television
quoted an anonymous official as saying the forces had visited the
impoverished Sistan-Baluchestan province, of which Zahedan is the
capital, for an "important mission." The Revolutionary Guards,
under the direct control of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
are seen as the defenders of Iran's Islamic regime. The guards
protect Iran's borders and defend ruling hard-liners in this
ultra-conservative society. The government issued a statement
offering condolences to the families of the victims, television and
radio reports said. Iranians were preparing for an Islamic holiday
on Thursday, the feast of Velayat, when Shiites believe Islam's
prophet Mohammad appointed his son-in-law, Ali, as his successor.
Wednesday's crash was the latest in a string of air disasters in
Iran mostly involving Russian-built aircraft. A Ukrainian An-140
aircraft flew into a mountainside Dec. 23, 2002, while preparing to
land at an airport near the central city of Isfahan, killing all
the estimated 46 scientists aboard. In February 2002, a
Russian-made Tupolev Tu-154 airliner, carrying 119 people, smashed
into snow-covered mountains not far from its destination of
Khorramabad, 230 miles southwest of Tehran. Comment: Maybe the US has started work on Iran
already. Or maybe it was just a plane crash. Given that Iran plays a central role in the US' current
middle east "political" maneuverings, this plane "crash" might have
more to it than meets the eye. As Roosevelt said "Nothing happens
by accident in politics, if it happened you can bet it was planned
Fair Use Policy
Contact Webmaster at signs-of-the-times.org