|
|
 Up |
|
  |
| [prez_usa_exile] SPECIAL: A Life in the Day 2/15/7 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: misc.activism.progressive · Group Profile
Author: prez_usa_exileprez_usa_exile Date: Feb 15, 2007 18:59
GOVERNMENT OF THE USA IN EXILE
Free Americans Reaching Out to Amerika's
Huddled Masses Yearning to Breathe Free
Via usa-exile.org>
February 15, 2007
Why Is the US Press Silent on Brzezinski's Warnings of War against Iran?
By Barry Grey
Global Research, February 14, 2007
WSWS - 2007-02-03
The major national newspapers and most broadcast outlets failed even
to report Thursday's stunning testimony by former national security
adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Brzezinski, national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, is
among the most prominent figures within the US foreign policy
establishment. He delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and
warned that the policy of the Bush administration was leading
inevitably to a military confrontation with Iran which would have
disastrous consequences for US imperialism.
Most significant and disturbing was Brzezinski's suggestion that the
Bush administration might manufacture a pretext to justify a military
attack on Iran. Presenting what he called a "plausible scenario for a
military collision with Iran," Brzezinski laid out the following
series of events: "Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by
accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some
provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran,
culminating in, quote/unquote, `defensive' US military action against
Iran..." [Emphasis added].
Thus Brzezinski opined that a US military attack on Iran would be an
aggressive action, presented as though it were a defensive response to
alleged Iranian provocations, and came close to suggesting, without
explicitly stating as much, that the White House was capable of
manufacturing or allowing a terrorist attack within the US to provide
a casus belli for war.
It is self-evident that such testimony at an open congressional
hearing from someone with decades of experience in the US foreign
policy establishment and the closest ties to the military and
intelligence apparatus is not only newsworthy, but of the most immense
and grave import. Any objective and conscientious newspaper or news
channel would consider it an obligation to inform the public of such a
development.
Yet neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post carried so much
as a news brief on Brzezinski's testimony in their Friday editions.
Nor did USA Today or the Wall Street Journal. All of these
publications, of course, have well-staffed Washington bureaus and
regularly cover congressional hearingsespecially those dealing with
such burning political questions as the war in Iraq.
There is no innocent explanation for their decision to suppress this
story. The Washington Post on Thursday published a large page-two
column and photo on Henry Kissinger's appearance the previous day
before the same Senate committee. The former secretary of state under
Richard Nixon gave testimony that was generally supportive of the Bush
administration's war policy.
Moreover, the Post's web edition carried an Associated Press report on
Brzezinski's appearance. That article introduced subtle but
significant changes to Brzezinski's speculative scenario of the road
to war with Iran which had the effect of underplaying the sharpness
and urgency of Brzezinski's critique of the Bush administration. It
omitted the suggestion that a terrorist attack within the US could
become the justification for war, and it removed the quotation marks
from Brzezinski's talk of a "defensive" war against Iran.
The World Socialist Web Site on Friday telephoned the New York Times,
the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and USA Today to ask for
an explanation for their failure to report Brzezinski's testimony.
None of the newspapers returned our calls.
As for the television news outlets, the "News Hour with Jim Lehrer" on
PBS showed a clip of Brzezinski laying out his war scenario before the
Senate committee, without making any comment. "NBC Nightly News"
ignored the story entirely.
The suppression of this damning critique of the Iraq war, the
conspiratorial methods of the Bush administration, and its drive to an
even wider war in the Middle East is one more demonstration of the
corrupt and reactionary character of the American mass media. It
indicates that the establishment media is preparing once again, as in
the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, to serve as a sounding board for
the administration's war propaganda and lies.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are
not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed.
For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms
including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you
wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use"
you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
) Copyright Barry Grey, WSWS, 2007
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GRE20070214&articleId=4...
=========================================================================================================================================
From: Henri gci.net>
Date: February 14, 2007 12:22:39 PM EST
To: AA Henri the Celt gci.net>
Subject: Emailing: The 9-11 Solution HAS BEEN CENSORED!!!
Brasscheck TV
The 9/11 Solution
The big clue everyone missed
How the key 9/11 myths were implanted
http://www.brasschecktv.com:80/page/80.html
This video was removed from Google Video on February 13, 2007 without
explanation. YouTube blocked my attempt to publish it this morning
(February 14).
Before it was removed, this page received 19,802 visits in four days.
I have read Google's terms of service and in no way does this video
violate any of them.
I am the creator of this video and its copyright owner. The video's
content is not illegal, obscene, an invasion of anyone's privacy, an
incitement to hate or a graphic potrayal of violence.
Here's an explanation of what Google is preventing you from seeing:
Two major 9/11 anomalies have been thoroughly documented, specifically:
1) The stand-down of US air defense on the morning of 9/11 that
permitted commercial jet aircraft to fly erratically and in restricted
air space without challenge
2) Overwhelming physical evidence that World Trade Center buildings
#1, #2, and #7 were brought down by controlled demolition
A third significant anomaly has not been discussed, let alone
acknowledged: the reporting by the major US TV news networks in the
first few hours immediately after the attacks.
Specifically:
1. MSNBC presented an elaborately detailed story about the lifestyle
and anti-US philosophy of Osama bin Laden - while both towers were
still burning and long before Bin Laden had been accused by anyone.
2. Fox News featured a "man in the street" eye witness who explained
in strangely formal language the science behind why the towers
collapsed when most engineers and firemen were utterly baffled and in
shock by what had just taken place.
3. CBS featured a Bush administration insider (and not identified as
such) as a guest who actively worked to dissuade Dan Rather (and
viewers) from speculating that there must have been explosive charges
placed in the buildings for them to have collapsed the way they did.
How was it that these stories - based on no fact, no research and no
inquirry - appeared in full blown form so quickly on US news networks
and then became part of the core myths of what happened on 9/11?
Were these stories prepared in advance?
There's an old intelligence saying that "once is happenstance, twice
is coincidence, but three times is enemy action."
Because most of these clips ran only once and were not repeated after
they'd done their job, it made it difficult, if not impossible, for
viewers to analyze them critically.
Now, thanks to the magic of video tape and a few people who
immediately started taping the news after the attacks, we have this
important evidence that at the very least these attacks appear to have
been anticipated and prepared for by forces that have the ability to
exert strong influence over the output of the newsrooms of major US
news networks.
If you want an update on the status of this video and where you can
see it in the future, please add your name to the Brasscheck TV
subscribers list in the box below
====================================================================================================================================
From: "Rodney Robinson" davis.com>
Date: February 13, 2007 12:37:49 PM EST
To: prez@usa-exile.org
Subject: U.S. Court Orders a Halt to New Field Trials of GM Crops
(7/2/2007)
You may want to forward this...
3. Best News in years regarding GMO's
Date: Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:06 am ((PST))
The following from our GMO activity coordinator, Erica Martenson.
U.S. Court Orders a Halt to New
Field Trials of GM Crops (7/2/2007)
EXTRACT: 'The Court was clearly concerned that the agency has put our
nation's environment at risk by exempting many of these field trials
from environmental review. That's why the judge made the decision
broadly apply to all future field trials of genetically engineered crops.'
---
Federal Court Orders for the First Time a Halt to New Field Trials of
Genetically Engineered Crops
CENTER FOR FOOD FAFETY - Press Release
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/GTBC_DecisionPR_2_7_07.cfm
Far-Reaching Decision Requires More
Rigorous Environmental Review For Future Trials
Past Trials on
Genetically Engineered Creeping Bentgrass Ruled Illegal
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 6, 2007
Contact: Joseph Mendelson (202) 547-9359
Washington, DC - In a decision broadly affecting field trials of
genetically engineered crops a federal district judge ruled yesterday
that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) must halt approval of all
new field trials until more rigorous environmental reviews are
conducted. Citing potential threats to the environment, Judge Harold
Kennedy found in favor of the Center for Food Safety that USDA's past
approvals of field trials of herbicide tolerant, genetically engineered
bentgrass were illegal.
'This is a significant victory. The decision requires far more thorough
oversight of the environmental impact of these crops, ' stated Joseph
Mendelson, legal director of the Center for Food Safety.
'The Court was clearly concerned that the agency has put our nation's
environment at risk by exempting many of these field trials from
environmental review. That's why the judge made the decision broadly
apply to all future field trials of genetically engineered crops.'
Mendelson continued.
The federal lawsuit was filed by the Center for Food Safety,
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center and other individuals and
organizations in 2003. At issue in the lawsuit are novel varieties of
creeping bentgrass and Kentucky bluegrass manufactured by Scotts and
Monsanto that have been genetically engineered to resist Roundup,
Monsanto's popular herbicide.
Currently, use of the Roundup weedkiller is limited to spot spraying of
weeds in that the herbicide kills any grass with which it comes in
contact. The new engineered grass has been altered to be resistant to
the weedkiller so that users will be able to spray entire lawns, fields
and golf courses with large amounts of the chemical without fear of
hurting the grass. Large scale planting of the biotech grass would
therefore significantly increase the amounts of herbicide used in home
lawns, sports fields, schools and golf courses around the country.
In seminal studies concerning environmental contamination from
genetically engineered creeping bentgrass, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency found multiple instances of the pollen from engineered
bentgrass traveling several miles and transferring its traits to native
grasses. Last year, EPA researchers found that the engineered grasses
had escaped from field trials to contaminate a national grassland.
'These field trials threaten our public land, our communities and our
health,' said Lesley Adams, Outreach Coordinator for plaintiff
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center.
'We will monitor the USDA very closely to make sure they don't allow any
more of these tests until they've rigorously assessed their
environmental impact,' Adams concluded.
View the court's decision
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/GTBC_Doc_94_Opinion%%202-5-07.pdf
=========================================================================================================================================
US Electromagnetic
Weapons and Human Rights
By Peter Phillips and Lew Brown and Bridget Thornton
Global Research, February 15, 2007
projectcensored.org
February 13, 2007 18:45
Project Censored releases a new study on the history of US
intelligence community human rights violations and continuing research
in electromagnetic weapons
This research explores the current capabilities of the US military to
use electromagnetic (EMF) devices to harass, intimidate, and kill
individuals and the continuing possibilities of violations of human
rights by the testing and deployment of these weapons. To establish
historical precedent in the US for such acts, we document long-term
human rights and freedom of thought violations by US
military/intelligence organizations. Additionally, we explore
contemporary evidence of on-going government research in EMF weapons
technologies and examine the potentialities of continuing human rights
abuses.
In the 1950s and 60s the CIA began work to find means for influencing
human cognition, emotion and behaviour. Through the use of the
psychological understanding of the human being as a social animal and
the ability to manipulate a subject's environment through isolation,
drugs and hypnosis, US funded scientists have long searched for better
means of controlling human behaviour. This research has included the
use of wireless directed electromagnetic energy under the heading of
"Information Warfare" and "Non Lethal Weapons." New technological
capabilities have been developed in black budget projects (government
funded projects that are classified/secret to Congress and the
American people) over the last few decades- including the ability to
influence human emotion, disrupt thought, and present excruciating
pain through the manipulation of magnetic fields. The US military and
intelligence agencies have at their disposal frightful new weapons,
weapons that have likely already been covertly used and/or tested on
humans, both here and abroad, and which could be directed against the
public in the event of mass protests or civil disturbance.
Human Rights belong to people collectively. To believe in rights for
some and not others is a denial of the humanness of people worldwide.
Yet, denial is exactly what Congress and George W. Bush did with the
signing of the Military Commission Act of 2006. The new official US
policy is that torture and suspension of due process are acceptable
for anyone the president deems to be a terrorist or supporter. This
act is the overt denial of the inalienable rights of human beings
propagated in our Declaration of Independence and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. More so, US actions declared to the world
that the US suspends human rights for those it believes are evil.
The precious words, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all
men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the
pursuit of Happiness," did not declare that only some men (and women)
possess unalienable rights. Our independence was founded on the
understanding that all men and women are recognized by this nation as
having innate rights derived by their humanity.
Likewise, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, created by the
United Nations in 1948, signed and ratified by the US Congress,
specifies in its preamble that "recognition of the inherent dignity
and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human
family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world."
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been a guide for
international law for most of six decades, and as such binds the
United States to its general principles. Article 10 states that
"everyone is entitled to full equality, to a fair and public hearing
by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his
rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him," and
Article 5 specifically prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment. Both of these basic human rights
have been superceded by the passage the of Military Commissions Act of
2006.
Additionally, the Universal Declaration of Human rights declares that
everyone has the right to freedom of thought and freedom of expression
and opinion. This means that humans have the inalienable right to be
able to freely think their own thoughts and discover their own truths.
This paper addresses this most fundamental human right and explores
the pending threats to individual freedom of thought posed by new EMF
weapons technologies.
Freedom of thought or cognitive liberty is the natural human right of
each person to be secure in their ability to perceive the world to the
best of their ability. To have true cognitive liberty in a world as
complex as ours would mean that first we must have access to truthful
and unbiased information about the actions of others and the general
state of the world. The Center for Cognitive Liberty defines this as
"the right of each individual to think independently and autonomously,
to use the full spectrum of his or her mind, and to engage in multiple
modes of thought."[2] Without accurate representations we cannot make
independently informed choices. It is imperative that the human body
and mind be considered sacrosanct. To invade a person's body without
their consent is an egregious human rights crime.
The circumstance may soon arrive in which anti-war or human rights
protesters suddenly feel a burning sensation akin to touching a hot
skillet over their entire body. Simultaneously they may hear
terrifying nauseating screaming, which while not produced externally,
fills their brains with overwhelming disruption. Not only are both
phenomena currently possible, but designs for more powerful EMF
technologies receive continuous funding from the US Government.
For the US Government to unilaterally declare that our country will
not comply with international human rights laws, nor uphold the core
values of our nation's foundation is an indication of extremism that
supersedes the values and beliefs of the American people. When such
extremism exists we need to take seriously the founders' declaration
that, " to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That
whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it
is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute
new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and
organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely
to effect their Safety and Happiness." (Declaration of Independence 1776)
Peter Phillips, Lew Brown and Bridget Thornton supplied this
introduction to their study "US Electromagnetic Weapons and Human Rights"
http://www.spectrezine.org/NorthAmerica/wokusch2.htm
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are
not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed.
For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms
including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you
wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use"
you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
) Copyright Peter Phillips, projectcensored.org, 2007
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=PHI20070215&articleId=4...
========================================================================================================================
NOTE: Thanks to Peter Myers for this. -- kl, pp
Ketcham's CounterPunch
Article on the Five Dancing Israelis
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:13:06 -0000
From: Rowan Berkeley googlemail.com>
Ketcham's new article on the Five Dancing Israelis has been ripped and
placed here as a 2 MB pdf file:
http://www.internet.uqam.ca/web/t6270/israel_and_911.pdf
=========================================================================================================================================
Information Warfare, Psy-Ops and the Power of Myth
A Look at the Bombing of
the Golden Dome Mosque in Samarra
By Mike Whitney
Global Research, February 14, 2007
The bombing of the Golden Dome Mosque in Samarra is the cornerstone of
Bush's psychological operations (psy-ops) in Iraq. That's why it is
critical to have an independent investigation and discover who is
really responsible. The bombing has been used as a "Pearl Harbor-type"
event which has deflected responsibility for the 650,000 Iraqi
casualties and more than 3 million refugees. These are the victims of
American occupation not civil war.
The bombing was concocted by men who believe that they can control the
public through perception management. In practical terms, this means
that they create events which can be used to support their far-right
doctrine. In this case, the destruction of the mosque has been used to
confuse the public about the real origins of the rising sectarian
tensions and hostilities. The fighting between Sunni and Shiite is the
predictable upshot of random bombings and violence which bears the
signature of covert operations carried out by intelligence
organizations. Most of the pandemonium in Iraq is the result of
counterinsurgency operations (black-ops) on a massive scale not civil war.
The Pentagon's bold new approach to psychological operations (psy-ops)
appears to have derived from the theories of former State Dept
official, Philip Zelikow (who also served on the 9-11 Commission)
Zelikow is an expert on "the creation and maintenance of 'public
myths' or 'public presumptions'. His theory analyzes how consciousness
is shaped by "searing events" which take on "transcendent importance"
and, therefore, move the public in the direction chosen by the
policymakers.
"In the Nov-Dec 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs he (Zelikow) co-authored
an article called 'Catastrophic Terrorism' in which he speculated that
if the 1993 bombing of the World Trade center had succeeded 'the
resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe
it. Such an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event
in American history. 'It could involve loss of life and property
unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America's fundamental sense
of security, as did the Soviet bomb test in 1949. The US might respond
with draconian measures scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider
surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly
force. More violence could follow, either future terrorist attacks or
US counterattacks. Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders
negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently". ()
Zelikow's article presumes that if one creates their own "searing
event" (such as 9-11 or the bombing of the Golden Dome Mosque) they
can steer the public in whatever direction they choose. His theory
depends entirely on a "state-media nexus" which can be depended on to
disseminate propaganda uniformly. There is no more reliable
propaganda-system in the world today than the western media.
New Clues in the Bombing
New clues have surfaced in the case of the bombing of the Golden
Mosque which suggests that the claims of the Bush administration are
false. An article by Marc Santora, ("One Year Later, Golden Mosque is
still in Ruins", New York Times) provides eyewitness testimony of what
really took place one year ago:
"A caretaker at the shrine described what happened on the day of the
attack, insisting on anonymity because he was afraid that talking to
an American could get him killed. The general outline of his account
was confirmed by American and Iraqi officials. The night before the
explosion, he said, just before the 8 p.m. curfew on Feb. 21, 2006, on
the Western calendar, men dressed in commando uniforms like those
issued by the Interior Ministry entered the shrine. The caretaker said
he had been beaten, tied up and locked in a room. Throughout the
night, he said, he could hear the sound of drilling as the attackers
positioned the explosives, apparently in such a way as to inflict
maximum damage on the dome".(NY Times)
Clearly, if the men were men dressed in "commando uniforms like those
issued by the Interior Ministry", then the logical place to begin an
investigation would be the Interior Ministry. But there's never been
an investigation and the caretaker has never been asked to testify
about what he saw on the night of the bombing. However, if he is
telling the truth, we cannot exclude the possibility that paramilitary
contractors (mercenaries) or special-ops (intelligence) agents working
out of the Interior Ministry may have destroyed the mosque to create
the appearance of a nascent civil war.
Isn't that what Bush wants to divert attention from the occupation and
to show that the real conflict is between Shiites and Sunnis?
It's unlikely that the mosque was destroyed by "Sunni insurgents or Al
Qaida" as Bush claims. Samarra is predominantly a Sunni city and the
Sunnis have nearly as much respect for the mosque as a cultural icon
and sacred shrine as the Shiites.
The Times also adds, "What is clear is that the attack was carefully
planned and calculated".
True again. We can see from the extent of the damage that the job was
carried out by demolition experts and not merely "insurgents or
terrorists" with explosives. Simple forensic tests and soil samples
could easily determine the composition of the explosives and point out
the real perpetrators.
The Times even provides a motive for the attack: "Bad people used this
incident to divide Iraq on a detestable sectarian basis."
Bingo! The administration has repeatedly used the incident to
highlight divisions, incite acrimony, and prolong the occupation.
Finally, the Times notes the similarities between 9-11 and the bombing
of the Golden Mosque: "I can describe what was done as exactly like
what happened to the World Trade Center."(NY Times)
In fact, the bombing of the Golden Mosque is a reenactment of
September 11. In both cases an independent investigation was
intentionally quashed and carefully-prepared narrative was immediately
provided. The government's version of events has been critical in
supporting the extremist policies of the Bush administration.
Just as 9-11 has been used to justify the enhanced powers of the
"unitary" president, the evisceration of civil liberties, and a
permanent state of war; so too, the bombing of the Golden Mosque, has
been used to create a fictional narrative of deeply ingrained
sectarian animosity that has no historical precedent. Both events need
to be exposed by thorough and independent investigations.
The Bush administration has consistently abandoned the limitations of
"reality-based" politics. They govern through demagoguery, force and
deception. This is no different.
9-11 and the Golden Mosque are the foundation blocks in the Pentagon's
"Strategic Information" program. It is a war that is directed at the
American people and it relies heavily on the power of myth.
Forewarned is forearmed.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are
not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed.
For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms
including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We
are making such material available to our readers under the provisions
of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of
political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you
wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use"
you must request permission from the copyright owner.
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
) Copyright Mike Whitney, Global Research, 2007
The url address of this article is:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=WHI20070214&articleId=4...
========================================================================================================================
From: Rick Davis
Date: February 15, 2007 1:36:01 AM EST
To: undisclosed-recipients: ;
Subject: US media show that Bush CAN have it both ways!
http://wonkette.com/politics/george-bush/msm-conspiracy-to-control-all-information...
=========================================================================================================================================
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
The Carter Plan
I've been thinking more about the idea that the Palestinians need a
Marshall Plan to get them back on their feet (I think it should be
called the Carter Plan as Jimmy was the guy brave enough to bear the
wrath of the Lobby and write some of the truth about Israel).
Unfortunately, the reason it will never happen is that it is such a
good idea. Simultaneously, the United States would regain almost all
of the goodwill it has lost in recent years (it would also have to get
its troops out of Iraq), the Palestinians would have a chance at
building a normal and prosperous country, and the Israelis would lose
most of their security concerns as the Palestinians would have better
things to do than to be angry at Israel.
It will require an enormous amount of money to undo the damage caused
by the Israelis. Even if Israel completely withdraws from the
Occupied Territories, the minimum step required for peace in the
Middle East, it will leave behind a society so battered by years of
Zionist brutality that there is a real danger of it falling into
radicalism. This was exactly the thinking behind the Marshall Plan:
restoring Europe to prosperity was regarded by American planners as
necessary to keep the Europeans out of the ideological sway of the
Soviets.
How would the Americans pay for it? Obvious, isn't it? The Americans
would simply have to redirect some of the billions of dollars in aid
it gives to Israel each year. Israel won't need it, as peace with the
Palestinians will greatly reduce the real Israeli need for military
expenditures (just think of the money Israel would save in not having
to use the IDF to brutalize the Palestinians). The net outlay for the
United States would be about the same (but would have an end, unlike
the never-ending parasitism of Israel), but instead of buying
world-wide enmity, the Americans would restore their lost reputation,
largely originally built by the Marshall Plan, as being a beacon of
hope for the world. If Americans need a big project other than
starting wars, the Carter Plan would be a good place to start.
posted at 3:45 AM
=============================================================================================
From: Henri gci.net>
Date: February 14, 2007 5:44:07 PM EST
Subject: Disabled soldiers forced to repay military bonuses
HOW THE SYSTEM THANKS THOSE WHO HAVE
FAITHFULLY SERVED IT
Disabled soldiers forced
to repay military bonuses
Soldiers Back from War Fight Different
Battle
WPXI 13 February 2007 / 4:20 pm EST
PITTSBURGH Soldiers who were paralyzed, suffered brain damage
and lost limbs owe the government enlistment bonus money.
They must pay the money back because they didn't fulfill their tour
of duty.
Bob Truska, who was in the Navy, got an honorable discharge for
what the Navy calls a personality disorder. One year later, he got
a bill for more than $3,000, part of his $7,000 enlistment bonus.
Bob said, "I didn't know of anything I had to pay back after I got
out of the military."
The Navy said his honorable discharge "does not exempt him from
recoupment of the unearned enlistment bonus, and his personality
disorder is not a disability but could interfere with assignment or
performance of duty."
According to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, each
month from October 2005 through October of 2006, at least 600
members of the military and as many as 1,100 have owed bonus
debts totaling anywhere from $2.5 million dollars each month to
$4 million.
The money comes from skyrocketing enlistment and re-enlistment
bonuses being offered to lure recruits and keep experienced troops
in uniform.
Just this past year, the Army doubled its top bonus from $20,000
to $40,000.
http://www.wpxi.com/news/11002564/detail.html
They didn't see the shyster clause when they signed up!
Continuing the fight for a better world
NEW ORDER
Dept E
PO Box 270486
Milwaukee WI 53227
http://www.theneworder.org
======================================================================================================================================
From: "Roger Rancourt" gmail.com>
Date: February 13, 2007 7:14:09 PM EST
Subject: CclNews> The Corruption has reached its limit: Demand on all
officials for Formal Grand Jury
Department of Justice, International Police Officers including and
especially the French Government:
A well known pedophilia scandal has been going on behind closed doors
for some time, and up until now the perpetrators have done everything
in their power to cover it up.
Now we are fully fed up with it, and are demanding a formal Grand
Jury is impaneled immediately to deal with the entire pedophilia
scandal linked to the CIA Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, Porter Goss, Mark Foley,
and Mel Sembler.
"As the details of the Mark Foley scandal unfold, I am struck by the
chilling similarities between the behavior of the Catholic Church and
what we are seeing right now with the leadership of the U.S. Congress.
My documentary film, Deliver Us From Evil, will open in theaters in
Los Angeles and New York and Boston on October 13, and then nationwide
on October 27.
The film is the true account of Father Oliver O'Grady, the most
notorious pedophile in the history of the modern Catholic Church.
Despite warning signs and complaints, the Church played an elaborate
shell game for years, moving O'Grady from parish to parish in an
effort to avoid liability and responsibility. The consequences of
their actions were tragic.
The Catholic Church would like us to believe that the clergy abuse
scandals are behind us. "Old news", they say. But with the revelation
that Mark Foley was sexually molested as a teenager by a member of the
clergy, this issue is clearly not behind us. It is not old news. We
don't know the full extent of Foley's abuse as a teenager, but we see
clearly how the long term effects of this kind of exploitation, which
took place nearly 40 years ago, is causing havoc today in the lives of
many people. It may even play a pivotal role in a national election.
As I discovered in making Deliver Us From Evil, clergy sexual abuse
creates lifelong trauma for everyone involved - for the victims, their
families and loved ones, the perpetrators, and the institutions. And
the more these actions are denied, rationalized or covered-up, the
worse they become. Sexual abuse creates a repeating cycle where many
of the priest abusers were themselves victims of child molestation.
And rather than being a few "rare exceptions," we now know that, by
some estimates, 100,000 people, most of them children, were sexually
molested by priests in the United States in recent years alone. This
number doesn't include the countless others who are still too ashamed
to come forward and report their abuse.
Deliver Us From Evil shows clearly how the Church hierarchy
participated in a long-term pattern of denial and deception, choosing
to protect its reputation instead of dealing with these systematic
problems honestly. Today, we see Congressional leaders acting
precisely in the same manner in trying to manage the Foley crisis. ABC
News reported that Republican House staff warned congressional pages
as far back as 2001 to stay away from Foley. For five years, House
leaders have known about this potential problem, but failed to take
sufficient corrective action to protect their underage charges.
Similar to the Catholic Bishops, the House leaders seem to have been
only concerned about self-protection, keeping their power and
fundraising structure in place, and hoping that the abuses never saw
the light of day. Simple honesty, morality and common sense were
completely abandoned in their drive to conceal the truth and protect
their own institutional interests.
For both the Catholic Church and the Congress, the well-being of
children does not seem to matter enough to rein in the behavior of
adults in their own ranks.
If you want to understand more fully the behavior of Congressional
leadership, watch the disturbing depositions of Los Angeles Cardinal
Roger Mahony and his lieutenants in Deliver Us From Evil. Mahony would
like us to believe that these scandals are all ancient history, but
the Associated Press reported just last week that his archdiocese
could soon sign a $60 million settlement with dozens of alleged
victims of clergy abuse. The cases being settled are but a fraction of
the more than 500 clergy abuse lawsuits filed against the Los Angeles
archdiocese since 2003."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amy-berg/the-mark-foley-scandal-an_b_30999.html
[SNIP]
Allegations against witnesses include false arrest, false
imprisonment, intentional harrassment, attempted murder, blackmail or
bribery, consent with unauthorized persons or parties; property
damage, trespassing, and too many violations that are too numerous to
name and well documented. Head to the "FURTHER REQUEST OF INFORMATION"
for all the names, dates, and other that would be needed in any point.
We say with one voice, that it is time for a GRAND JURY to look at
all of these crimes and an additional GRAND JURY to be impaneled to
inspect the "ENTIRE" Pedophile network.
To all Senators/represenatives: Please see to it Alberto Gonzales
power is rescinded and he is immediately quashed from interfering in
the future regarding any of these investigations into pedophilia,
which so very adamantly, come from the Catholic Church hierarchy.
Thank you for your immediate attention on these matters. The Grand
Jury must deal with this country's massive illness coming out of
Churches who speak for none of us. Please note, that others will be
contacting your (respective) offices from all over to detail evidence
and allegations including in Prime Minister Tony Blair's House of
Lords and Australia. "ONLY" sitting Grand Juries should be prepared,
pressed, and impaneled to deal with the evidence that arise.
Roger http://www.fija.org
_______________________________________________
News-editorials mailing list
http://christiancommonlaw-gov.org/mailman/listinfo/news-editorials_christiancommonlaw...
USAHomePage: http://usa.christiancommonlaw-gov.org
PlaneteryHomePage: http://christiancommonlaw-gov.org
Please Contribute to our Web-Log at:
http://christiancommonlaw-gov.org/GeneralAssembly
=====================================================================================================================================
From: Henri gci.net>
Date: February 14, 2007 11:53:54 PM EST
To: AA Henri the Celt gci.net>
Subject: Emailing: Edwin Vieira, Jr. -- The Shearing is Nearing, Part 1
THE SHEARING IS NEARING!
PART 1 of 2
Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
February 14, 2007
NewsWithViews.com
One reason why patriotic Americans are accomplishing precious little
in reasserting control over their country, while the Establishment
steadily advances its agenda on almost all fronts, is that patriots
are not taking advantage of their overwhelming numerical superiority
in the places where they can best bring it to bear. Instead of joining
together for effectiveindeed, potentially unstoppablepolitical, and
particularly legislative, action in favorable venues at the State and
Local levels, all too many of them are sitting out the contest as mere
spectators.
This is because most Americans are not rabid political animals with
ravenous appetites to dominate, oppress, and exploit others, but
instead are basically decent people who want only to be left alone to
lead their own lives, as they see fit, in peace and quiet. They may be
aware of some of the schemes the Establishment's political Pinocchios
are hatching in the Disgrace of Columbia and various State capitals.
Yet they hope that the worst of these complots will not come to
fruition during their lifetimes, or that in any event they personally
can avoid trouble, remain well employed, and continue to enjoy
reasonably good incomes, live in respectable homes, and eventually
enjoy comfortable retirement. But why do they hope and imagine that
such a scenario is possible?
The notion that a placid and prosperous life for most Americans can
continue indefinitely is unrealistic. There will be trouble. Big
trouble. And sooner rather than later.
An article entitled "Is the United States Bankrupt?," in the Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review of July/August 2006 (page 235),
provides rather disturbing evidence supporting this prediction. The
author shows that the difference between the General Government's
future expenditures and its future receipts over an economically
realistic periodthe so-called "fiscal gap"is some $65.9 trillion
(page 239). Yes, TRILLION. Estimates of this astronomical magnitude
can be confirmed elsewhere. See, e.g., the data collected by John
Williams, Shadow Government Statistics, [Read]. And even the
Comptroller General of the United States (in a letter attached to the
2006 Financial Report of the United States) has calculated that the
government's negative net worth as of 2006which he acknowledges to be
about $53 trillionamounts to an hypothecated burden of debt of some
$170,000 on every single American. This is no "conspiracy theory," but
a set of undeniable financial facts. It is also no smokey
prognostication about an uncertain future, but a fully documented
description of harsh reality right here and now.
This situation raises two questions that every adult American must
answer: (i) Is he ready to assume for himself that huge share of the
General Government's negative net worth, and multiples of it for his
family? (ii) If so, how could he possibly pay it?
Why, though, should average Americans accept and assume
responsibility for the gargantuan profligacy represented by the
predicted $65.9 trillion shortfall in the fiscal gap? After all,
muchperhaps even mostof this amount has been and will be incurred
for unconstitutional programs and expenditures. Therefore, no matter
its source in supposed statutes of Congress, implemented by the
President and approved by the Judiciary, and no matter how large it
may be, that unconstitutional increment is not a legitimate obligation
of the United States at all, and cannot legally be imposed by the
General Government, or its supposed creditors, on We the People. As
the Constitution states, "[n]o Money shall be drawn from the Treasury,
but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." Article I, Section
9, Clause 7. And no "Appropriations" can be "made by Law" if the
statutes supposedly authorizing them violate the Constitution. Article
VI, Clause 2. So, the parties liable in justice to make good on these
unconstitutional obligations are: first, the thievesthat is, the
politicians, bureaucrats, and judges who originally arranged for or
permitted the funds to be stolen; and, second, the receivers of the
stolen goodsthat is, the special-interest groups that have gorged on
these payoffs in the recent past and will continue to do so in the
near future.
The politicians, bureaucrats, and judges are in an especially
difficult position, because the Constitutionwhich provides the sole
basis for their authorityalso supplies the primary and conclusive
evidence against them. Simply laying the terms of the various programs
and expenditures against the text of the Constitution will prove who
is at fault.
To be sure, elected officials will claim that they are innocent of
any wrongdoing, because the voters have authorized or ratified their
actions by electing and re-electing them. The flaw in this "we were
just following orders" argument, however, is that the voters cannot
authorize, ratify, or in any other way approve the least violation of
the Constitution. Even if, during an election-campaign, politicians
ran explicitly on the platform that once in office they would engage
in specifically delineated unconstitutional actions, and were elected
on that very basis, their subsequent behavior in fulfillment of such
pledges would nevertheless be legally void. For, as soon as they took
office, they would be required to take an "Oath or Affirmation, to
support this Constitution." Article VI, Clause 3. Their "Oath or
Affirmation" would not be to fulfill thieves' bargains they may have
negotiated with voters (or, more realistically, with the
special-interest groups that deceive and manipulate the voters), but
to follow "this Constitution," no matter what contrary promises they
might have made to anyone. As the Constitution recites, public
officials "shall be bound by [their] Oath or Affirmation." They are
not "bound" by their campaign promises, let alone absolved from their
"Oath or Affirmation" by those promises. Quite obviously as well,
"bound" means that public officials can be held legally responsible
and accountable, in their own persons, for violating their "Oath or
Affirmation." And where that violation involves illegal expenditures
of undoubted public moneys and the illegal amassment of supposed
"public debt," the perpetrators of those illegalitiesnot their
victims and dupes among the general publicare liable, and should be
made to pay damages to the fullest extent of their estates and abilities.
Every American can be sure, however, that these miscreants will never
willingly accept responsibility for their fiscal wrongdoing, let alone
bear its financial burden when the bill comes due. Even though they
know perfectly well who is at fault, and why, they will bend their
best efforts to impose all of the costs of their criminal careers on YOU.
The article "Is the United States Bankrupt?" suggests that, in an
attempt to wash away the red ink with which they have filled the
General Government's books, the politicos in the Disgrace of Columbia
will perpetrate the further mega-crime of hyperinflation: the Federal
Reserve System's massive "monetization" of new debts emitted by the
General Government (see pages 241-242). Obviously, the author of that
article was not indulging in a "conspiracy theory," but was making an
informed prediction of how the Money Power, operating through the
Federal Reserve System and the Department of the Treasury, will
endeavor to save itself, its political marionettes, and its
special-interest clients at every other American's actual expense.
And actual expense it will be! All debts are always paidif not by
the debtors, then by the creditors, or by some third parties.
Hyperinflation will fill the fiscal gap through a vast redistribution
of wealth from society as a whole. And not simply a redistribution of
wealth, but also a confiscation of wealth, because the transfer will
be imposed under color and especially by force of law (the
"legal-tender law," 31 U.S.C. ' 5103, coming foremost to mind). And
not simply a confiscation of wealth, but a surreptitious confiscation,
because most Americans will have no idea what is going on, and who is
benefiting from itany more than sheep at the shearers, or the
slaughterhouse, have any idea of who benefits from the marketing of
their wool or their meat.
True, the politicos will benefit from hyperinflation, because tens of
millions of minnows in the General Government's sea of creditors will
lose the real value of their claims by being forced to receive
worthless currency in payment. But, precisely because it is so
promiscuously destructive, hyperinflation will not serve the interests
of the sharks: the General Government's most politically influential
domestic creditors, and especially its foreign creditors who can make
trouble in international arenas. Anyone compelled to accept a rapidly
rotting currency in payment of a debt can expect some, and probably a
significant, real financial loss on the transaction. So a "conspiracy
theorist" (that is, a monetary and political realist) must anticipate
that the big-money boys, both here and overseas, will design a
financial escape hatch through which they and their cronies can
wriggle when the ship of state sinks in an hyperinflationary tsunami.
After all, who can imagine that the porcine special-interest groups
that pull the politicians' strings would ever permit their marionettes
to force them to settle their claims against the General Government
for hyperinflated currency the purchasing power of which is many
orders of magnitude less than its nominal value?!
Besides, even if the General Government arranges to pay off the $65.9
trillion fiscal gap through the Federal Reserve System's
"monetization" of that amount of new "public debt," the Treasury's
books will then show a $65.9 trillion liability to the banks and other
holders of the new Treasury paper. How will that mountain of principal
(and the interest owed on it) be paid when they come due? Through the
Treasury's direct issuance of $65.9 trillion of "greenback"
irredeemable, legal-tender fiat currency, in another round of
hyperinflation that wipes out the banking system and the powerful
special interests that control it? Will the bankers and their allies
sit still for that?
No, whatever the sequence of events in the coming financial meltdown,
the small but powerful set of knowledgeable, skillful, and above all
ruthless parasites that fatten off the General Government will
demandand through their political Pinocchios will attempt somehow to
arrange to receiveREAL wealth, measured and delivered in REAL things,
the value of which cannot be hyperinflated away by politicians',
bankers,' and governmental bean-counters' accounting tricks and
printing presses. And that necessarily will entail takingby main
force, if necessary, where deception failsreal things from the real
people who now have them.
Of course, the special interests will not loot themselves, their
families, their friends, their political cronies and clients, and
their other partisans. No, indeed. What sense would robbing Peter to
pay Peter make? Rather, they will arrange to loot YOU, demanding that
the General Government confiscate YOUR valuable things in order to pay
the part of the $65.9 trillion shortfall that you, as a member of "the
public," supposedly owe to them. And steeped in the confidence that
derives from having successfully corralled the sheeple in the pens of
political apathy, sloth, and impotence these many years, they will
throw all moderation to the winds, and attempt to shear common
Americans to their very skins.
So, as larger and larger installments of the $65.9 trillion bill come
due, in addition to hyperinflation Americans might well expect public
officials in the General Government to initiate programs of "taxation
in kind" through direct physical confiscation: that is, seizures of
real and personal propertysuch as common Americans' businesses,
houses, land, securities, gold and silver, or such "luxuries" as one's
second automobilethat will simply be taken outright and then turned
over to the government's favored domestic and foreign creditors to
pony up the $170,000 or more that each American allegedly owes as his
share of the General Government's negative net worth. Or, invoking
"eminent domain," officials might well "condemn" common Americans'
property, and then transfer it directly to favored creditors, with the
original owners being paid off in currency hyperinflating at such a
rate that, just weeks or days later, they ended up with paper notes or
bank balances of so little of real value that for all intents and
purposes they had been "taxed in kind," too.
In the face of these possibilitieswhich the fiscal gap of $65.9
trillion makes strong likelihoodswhat do YOU intend to do? Will you
persist in imagining that fiscal push will never come to financial
shove? Will you insist on assuming that the crisisabout which even
the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review warns this countrywill
never impact you, personally? Will you desist from making any
defensive preparations, in the belief that, should all Hell break
loose, it will nonetheless be more prudent to be taken for a sheep
than a goat, and quietly to endure your and your family's shearing? Or
will you resist, in every constitutionally permissible manner?
Rest assured that what you decide today you will be required to live
with tomorrow. For the fiscal gap is a national trap that is
inexorably closing. Once the financial swallows come home to the
Disgrace of Columbia, there will be no going backonly "forward," into
the New World Disorder of economic dislocation and deprivation
enforced by a thoroughgoing police state.
So, what can and should be done? That question Part Two addresses.
For part 2 click below.
Click here for part -----> 2,
) 2007 Edwin Vieira, Jr. - All Rights Reserved
Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard
College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and
Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).
For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on
constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he
successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark
decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union
v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which
established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to
which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may
apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their
employment.
He has written numerous monographs and articles in scholarly journals,
and lectured throughout the county. His most recent work on money and
banking is the two-volume Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and
Disabilities of the United States Constitution (2002), the most
comprehensive study in existence of American monetary law and history
viewed from a constitutional perspective. www.piecesofeight.us
He is also the co-author (under a nom de plume) of the political novel
CRA$HMAKER: A Federal Affaire (2000), a not-so-fictional story of an
engineered crash of the Federal Reserve System, and the political
upheaval it causes. www.crashmaker.com
His latest book is: "How To Dethrone the Imperial Judiciary"
He can be reached at:
13877 Napa Drive
Manassas, Virginia 20112.
E-Mail: Not available
=========================================================================================================================================
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prez_usa_exile/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prez_usa_exile/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:prez_usa_exile-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:prez_usa_exile-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
prez_usa_exile-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
