[cia-drugs] Fwd: [ganglovers] Unity
Note: forwarded message attached.The most powerful planet in the world would seem to be the USA if you believe what you are told. But the US has always been controlled from London and still is. America has never been the land of the free and it is time it was. David Icke "The Biggest Lie Ever told". Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. __._,_.___ Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM SPONSORED LINKS Independent broker dealer Independent director Central intelligence agency Central intelligence agency employment Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___ --- Begin Message --- In October of 1966, in Oakland California, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale founded the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense. The Panthers practiced militant self-defense of minority communities against the U.S. government, and fought to establish revolutionary socialism through mass organizing and community based programs. The party was one of the first organizations in U.S. history to militantly struggle for ethnic minority and working class emancipation a party whose agenda was the revolutionary establishment of real economic, social, and political equality across gender and color lines. > > The Ten-Point Program > > Rules of the Black Panther Party Original six Black Panthers (November, 1966) Top left to right: Elbert "Big Man" Howard; Huey P. Newton (Defense Minister), Sherman Forte, Bobby Seale (Chairman). Bottom: Reggie Forte and Little Bobby Hutton (Treasurer). Black Panther Theory: The practices of the late Malcolm X were deeply rooted in the theoretical foundations of the Black Panther Party. Malcolm had represented both a militant revolutionary, with the dignity and self-respect to stand up and fight to win equality for all oppressed minorities; while also being an outstanding role model, someone who sought to bring about positive social services; something the Black Panthers would take to new heights. The Panthers followed Malcolm's belief of international working class unity across the spectrum of color and gender, and thus united with various minority and white revolutionary groups. From the tenets of Maoism they set the role of their Party as the vanguard of the revolution and worked to establish a united front, while from Marxism they addressed the capitalist economic system, embraced the theory of dialectical materialism, and represented the need for all workers to forcefully take over the means of production. Black Panther History: On April 25th, 1967, the first issue of The Black Panther, the party's official news organ, goes into distribution. In the following month, the party marches on the California state capital fully armed, in protest of the state's attempt to outlaw carrying loaded weapons in public. Bobby Seale reads a statement of protest; while the police respond by immediately arresting him and all 30 armed Panthers. This early act of political repression kindles the fires to the burning resistance movement in the United States; soon initiating minority workers to take up arms and form new Panther chapters outside the state. > > The Black Panther: [off-site link] Articles from 1968-69 In October of 1967, the police arrest the Defense Minister of the Panthers, Huey Newton, for killing an Oakland cop. Panther Eldridge Cleaver begins the movement to "Free Huey", a struggle the Panthers would devote a great deal of their attention to in the coming years, while the party spreads its roots further into the political spectrum, forming coalitions with various revolutionary parties. Stokely Carmichael, the former chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and a nationally known proponent of Black Power, is recruited into the party through this struggle, and soon becomes the party's Prime Minister in February, 1968. Carmichael is adamantly against allowing whites into the black liberation movement, explaining whites cannot relate to the black experience and have an intimidating effect on blacks; a position that stirs opposition within the Panthers. Carmichael explains: "Whites who come into the black community with ideas of change seem to want to absolve the power structure
[cia-drugs] Observatory on data protection in the EU
Privacy and surveillance Observatory on data protection in the EU- the protection of personal data in police and judicial matters- full-text documentation on all the secret discussions in the Council Introduction The EU is currently discussing a draft Framework Decision on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The European Commission produced a draft proposal on 4 October 2005. The European Parliament finally adopted its report on 27 September - a "partial vote" in July voted through all 60 amendments agreed by the Committee on Civil Liberties (LIBE). On this issue the parliament is only "consulted" - which means that its views can be disregarded by the Council of the European Union (the 25 EU governments). The Council has taken months looking at the Commission proposal and have changed it substantially in favour of "self-regulation" by the agencies and removing the rights of data subjects to information held on them and the possibility to correct it.The proposal is being discussed in the Council by the Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime (MDG) whose primary interest is to ensure the greatest possible powers to exchange any and all data between all agencies - at the national, European and international levels - with the fewest possible obstacles created by data protection rights. Lord Avebury (UK House of Lords Select Committee on the EU) will put it to the European Parliament on 3 October 2006 in the following terms, the MDG's: "primary interest is to make life difficult for criminals, not to have regard to the interests of data subjects" [The full-text of Lord Avebury's speech to the EP on data protection and the principle of availability (pdf)] Peter Hustinx, the European Data Protection Supervisor, expressed similar concerns to the UK House of Lords Select Committee on the EU inquiry (Behind Closed Doors, see below), discussions he said were progressing very slowly, partly because: "national delegations tend to come from law enforcement areas which, up to now, largely prefer to ignore data protection”. The legitimacy of the decision-making process is also of concern on such an important issue. The European Parliament only has powers of "consultation" nevertheless it adopted a report with 60 amendments to strengthen the Commission's proposal - a final vote was delayed from July until September in the hope that the incoming Finnish Council Presidency would be "willing to take into account Parliament's demands", there is little evidence that it has done so. If the final version agreed within the Council is substantially different from that put forward by the Commission the parliament can insist that it is consulted again - unless it does there will be no time at all for a debate in parliaments and outside. Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor, comments: "This is going to be a momentous decision affecting existing national laws on data protection, and the exchange of data within the EU and around the globe. It is also going to the the foundation of the right of data protection in a host of planned and future EU measures, including the new Schengen Information System (SIS II). The Commission draft proposal is being substantially re-written by the Council's Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime including removing the rights of data subjects and obstacles to the passing of data to third countries outside the EU. Until the Council finishes its so-called "second reading" the final text will not been known - when they are intending to simply "nod" it through. If it does so without the opportunity for national and European parliaments and civil society to express their views it will utterly lack legitimacy" Key documents (latest first) Council of the European Union - 13246/1/06 REV1, 9 October 2006. It will be seen in the introduction (p2, pt 4) that the draft "departs from the point of view that the FD will also be applicable to domestic data processing" - 13246/06, dated 27 September 2006. Full-text of the Council's current draft. First six pages set out issues for the Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime to discuss as the Council starts its "second reading" - 12294/06, dated 19 September 2006 - "Issues paper" - 12432/06 - Questions on scope, 6 September 2006 - 11547/3/06 Full-text of the Council's draft at 13 September 2006 "At the meetings of the MDG - Mixed Committee of 8 February, 9 and 31 March, 25 April and 19 May 2006 the first two chapters were discussed in-depth. At the meetings of 20 June, 7 and 25 July 2006, Chapter III was discussed. At the meeting of 4 September 2006, Chapters IV and V were discussed. Delegations are invited to discuss of Chapters VI, VII and VIII." - 11547/2/06 Full-text of the Council's draft at 24 August 2006 - 11547/06 Full-text of the Council's draft at 13 July 2006 - 8175/2/06 - Information on
[cia-drugs] Aerospace|defense: does Russian Investment in EADS|Airbus make sense?
http://www.themanufacturer.com/us/detail.html?contents_id=4658 Aerospace|defense: does Russian Investment in EADS|Airbus make sense? Manufacturing News, Source : The Manufacturer USPublished : 23 Oct 2006 14:30 Vneshtorgbank, a state-owned Russian Bank, has taken an equity position of a little over 5 percent in EADS, the parent of Airbus buying up shares in the open market. Why? And what does this mean for the global aerospace industry, and for the rivalry between Airbus and Boeing? The obvious answer is that the Russians are using their new petrodollars to invest in industries important to them. Clearly they are seeking closer ties to Western aerospace companies, given the difficulty in going it alone, perhaps drawing their newly consolidated United Aircraft Company closer to Airbus. Also, by being a large investor with a stake similar to that owned by the Spanish government, there is an implied obligation to place work share in Russia. Lastly, Vneshtorgbank may view EADS shares as a bargain, taking advantage of equities that they perceive as undervalued, given the 25 percent devaluation of shares after the A380 delivery delay and challenges in management continuity. But it is not a one way street. Airbus has a 10 percent stake in Irkut, the Russian maker of Sukhoi fighter jets. Finmeccanica is an investor and major participant in the new Russian Regional Jet. Finally, Boeing has over 1,300 engineers in Russia providing substantial development work for the new 787 Dreamliner. These companies are taking advantage of Russias highly experienced and low-cost labor pool. The Russian investment in EADS of approximately $1.2 billion was obtained on the open market, thus does not translate directly to a cash infusion into EADS and Airbus in particular. However, Airbus could use the cash, given the over-budget performance on the A380 launch, the estimated $10 billion needed for the A350XWB redevelopment, let alone the need to respond to Boeings expected next-generation single aisle airplane necessitating a replacement for Airbus A320 in the next 5 -10 years. Airbus has State launch aid available to them, but is hesitant to use it due to a pending WTO trade dispute case. Airbus appears to also have unused debt capacity at its disposal, but a major shareholder with ever-growing financial capacity and the desire to participate is an opportunity that Airbus could avail itself of. The more informed answer to the question is that a minority investment in EADS by the Russian government is not the start, but a continuance of a trend that has been playing out for years. The trend is continuing its pace from fractionalization to rationalization and alliance making in the global aerospace & defense industry. Some examples: The original Airbus consortium of private industry and the governments of Spain, Germany, France and the UK The United Space Alliance as well as the pending United Launch Alliance partnership of Lockheed Martin and Boeing Boeing outsourcing of some of its design authority and manufacturing of major components to Kawasaki, Mitsubishi and Fuji Heavy industries The recapitalization of US Airways by Airbus, Air Canada Maintenance, credit card companies and private equity investors The reason for this trend is that there is not enough market for several Prime contractors to exist. The risk of not capturing market share is too great. Also, customer countries typically have enough influence to capture work share, and equity investments over time can achieve that. In the world of fewer prime contractors, less differentiation in product, higher risk of losing market share on large orders, and the trend toward major subassembly outsourcing, it behooves the Russian aerospace industry to get aligned with American and European prime contractors. The Russians are investing in EADS because they want to participate in the global A&D market, thus need to be more closely aligned with the existing mega-players:. it is easier and more fruitful to get on their platforms, than to compete with them. What it means for Boeing is that their investment in the Russian engineering center and outsourcing certain components does not mean the Russian airplane market should be taken for granted. For Airbus, taking on a new investor with expectations of work share means more interference from government entities, which must be managed carefully to minimize duplicate manufacturing and final assembly facilities which would drive the product cost up. Tom Captain, is a Principal and Senior member of Deloitte Consultings Aerospace & Defense industry practice, based in Seattle, WA. __._,_.___ Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM SPONSORED LINKS Independent broker dealer Independ
[cia-drugs] Lithuanian Court Refuses to Extradite Former Yukos Banker
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/10/23/babenko.shtml Lithuanian Court Refuses to Extradite Former Yukos Banker Created: 23.10.2006 20:09 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 20:09 MSK , 4 hours 4 minutes ago MosNews A former Yukos banker wanted in Russia on embezzlement charges will not be extradited, Lithuanias Court of Appeal quoted by RIA Novosti ruled Monday.Lithuania granted provisional asylum last October to Igor Babenko, 55, a former manager of the embattled oil company Yukos Menatep St. Petersburg bank affiliate in southern Russia, and last week the countrys Supreme Administrative Court upheld his political asylum.In Russia Babenko, who was born in Lithuania, is accused of issuing loans worth 119 million rubles ($4.42 million) to two companies in league with their executives, who allegedly pocketed the money. Russian investigators estimated the value of other schemes involving the banker at 214 million rubles (about $8 million). On October 18, a Lithuanian prosecutor released Babenko from custody on condition he not leave the country.Babenko has dismissed the charges against him as political. His lawyer said earlier the banker is being prosecuted only because he headed an affiliate of the bank connected with imprisoned Yukos founder Mikhail Khodorkovskys inner circle. But the Trust bank, formerly known as Menatep St. Petersburg, said the case is not politically motivated. Yekaterina Tolkunova, the banks marketing director, said earlier the case is a felony, pure and simple. An in-house probe into the missing loans has revealed that controversial local businessmen were behind the firms that received them, Tolkunova said. Lithuanian authorities arrested Babenko in July 2005 after a Russian court issued an arrest warrant and put the banker and his associates on an international wanted list. In September, a Vilnius district court ruled to extradite Babenko to Russia, saying Russian authorities had provided convincing evidence. But an appeals court in the Baltic state put the extradition order on hold pending an asylum ruling.Meanwhile, prosecutors have searched the country house of a vice president of the bankrupt company, RIA Novosti adds.The search of [Mikhail] Shestopalovs dacha was conducted October 18. Investigators did not find the two pistols he had been presented with while working in the Interior Ministry, but they confiscated other arms, Boris Kuznetsov said.He said Shestopalov was not in Russia, and that prosecutors broke into the house, prohibiting the vice presidents wife from entering.Kuznetsov added that he has filed a complaint against investigators and has proposed handing over the pistols they failed to find, but the Prosecutors General Office refused to accept them. He said the search was illegal and suggested that it was related to the case of Leonid Nevzlin, Yukos core shareholder, who is currently living in Israel and is on the international wanted list.Nevzlin has been charged with fraud and involvement in a number of contract killings, and was put on the international wanted list July 21, 2004. Israel has refused to extradite him to Russia.The Prosecutors General Office has offered no comment on the search so far. __._,_.___ Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM SPONSORED LINKS Independent broker dealer Independent director Central intelligence agency Central intelligence agency employment Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___
[cia-drugs] Expanding Surveillance Authority
Expanding Surveillance Authorityby William F. JasperOctober 30, 2006 The surveillance power demanded by President Bush would not necessarily provide any better protection from terrorism, but it would certainly expand executive branch power. On December 17 of last year, during his weekly radio address, President Bush confirmed reports by the New York Times and CNN that, following the 9/11 attacks, he had given the National Security Agency (NSA) authorization to eavesdrop on Americans communicating with people overseas. The president said that ordering such electronic surveillance without judicial warrants is "fully consistent" with his "constitutional responsibilities and authorities," and charged that the media exposure of this secret program is illegal and "damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk." The NSA, which eavesdrops on billions of communications worldwide, is barred from domestic spying without a warrant, as required in the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights. The Justice Department can get warrants from a special court called the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Court, a 10-judge panel established in 1978 expressly for that purpose. In emergencies, the NSA may even conduct domestic surveillance for 72 hours without a warrant. But by the end of that three-day period, it must obtain a warrant. Over the past nearly 30 years, the FISA Court has denied only a handful of the thousands of warrant requests. And there is no indication that the 72-hour emergency provision has been inadequate to deal with serious terrorist threats. On August 17 of this year, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that the president's warrantless searches are unconstitutional. The administration immediately appealed the decision and on October 4, a three-judge panel ruled that the NSA may continue its eavesdropping while awaiting a final ruling from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Interestingly, during the December 17, 2005 radio address, President Bush cited the case of 9/11 hijackers Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi as a prime example of the need for warrantless surveillance. This duo, he said, "communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al Qaeda who were overseas, but we didn't know they were here until it was too late." It would be difficult for the president to come up with a worse example to make his point. The various official 9/11 investigations showed that the FBI, CIA, and NSA all were monitoring Hazmi and Mihdhar. In San Diego, the duo even lived with Abdussattar Shaikh, an acknowledged undercover asset of the FBI. The two also had regular contacts with San Diego area militant jihadists under FBI surveillance, such as Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Mustafa. FBI Agent Stephen Butler made repeated efforts to have them arrested, but he was overruled from above. Moreover, a review of the 9/11 hijackers' visa applications by a panel of former consular officials revealed that all 15 of the publicly available applications, including Mihdhar's, had been issued in violation of existing law, despite blatant red flags that should have disqualified all of them. Thus, there is no reason to believe that the kind of extraordinary power demanded by President Bush would have provided any more needed intelligence or that it would have been acted on any better than the abundant data that was already available. The House and Senate GOP leadership cynically adopted the White House strategy of using the issue before the November elections to paint the Democrats as weak on national security if they didn't vote for legislation to gut our Fourth Amendment. However, although the House passed its version of the bill (H.R. 5825) on September 28 (see House vote #40 in the "Conservative Index," page 26), the Senate did not vote on its version (S. 3931) prior to adjournment. It is very likely that Congress will try to enact some kind of expansion of executive surveillance authority, in line with what the White House is demanding, during the lame-duck session. Readers are encouraged to contact their senators in opposition to this legislation. To send an online letter, go to: http://www.capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=9090566 http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/publish/article_4270.shtml ~~~ Are YOU the Enemy?by Joe Wolverton II, J.D.October 30, 2006 Under the Military Commissions Act of 2006, you could be.The Military Commissions Act of 2006 allows the executive branch to circumvent the Constitution, endangering the due process of law for all Americans, not just terrorists. On September 28, by a vote of 65-34, the Senate formally passed S. 3930, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA). The next day, the House of Representatives followed suit, passing the act by a vote of 250-170, and the affixing of the president's signature is now a formality.* This legislation is being highlighted by the Bush
[cia-drugs] Paraguay in a spin about Bush's alleged 100,000 acre hideaway
Some have speculated that he might be trying to wrestle control of the Guarani Aquifer, one of the largest underground water reserves, from the Paraguayans. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1928928,00.html Paraguay in a spin about Bush's alleged 100,000 acre hideaway Tom Phillips in CuiabMonday October 23, 2006The Guardian Meeting the new couple next door can be an anxious business for even the most relaxed home owner. Will they be international drug traffickers? Have they got noisy kids with a penchant for electronic music? As worries go, however, having the US president move in next door must come fairly low on the list. Unless of course you are a resident of northern Paraguay and believe reports in the South American press that he has bought up a 100,000 acre (40,500 hectare) ranch in your neck of the woods. The rumours, as yet unconfirmed but which began with the state-run Cuban news agency Prensa Latina, have triggered an outpouring of conspiracy theories, with speculation rife about what President Bush's supposed interest in the "chaco", a semi-arid lowland in the Paraguay's north, might be. Some have speculated that he might be trying to wrestle control of the Guarani Aquifer, one of the largest underground water reserves, from the Paraguayans. Rumours of Mr Bush's supposed forays into South American real estate surfaced during a recent 10-day visit to the country by his daughter Jenna Bush. Little is known about her trip to Paraguay, although officially she travelled with the UN children's agency Unicef to visit social projects. Photographers from the Paraguayan newspaper ABC Color tracked her down to one restaurant in Paraguay's capital Asunción, where she was seen flanked by 10 security guards, and was also reported to have met Paraguay's president, Nicanor Duarte, and the US ambassador to Paraguay, James Cason. Reports in sections of the Paraguayan media suggested she was sent on a family "mission" to tie up the land purchase in the "chaco". Erasmo Rodríguez Acosta, the governor of the Alto Paraguay region where Mr Bush's new acquisition supposedly lies, told one Paraguayan news agency there were indications that Mr Bush had bought land in Paso de Patria, near the border with Brazil and Bolivia. He was, however, unable to prove this, he added. Last week the Paraguayan news group Neike suggested that Ms Bush was in Paraguay to "visit the land acquired by her father - relatively close to the Brazilian Pantanal [wetlands] and the Bolivian gas reserves". The US presence in Paraguay has been under scrutiny since May 2005 when the country's Congress agreed to allow 400 American marines to operate there for 18 months in exchange for financial aid. At the time many viewed the arrival of troops as a sign that Washington was trying to monitor US business interests in neighbouring Bolivia, after the election of Evo Morales, a leftwing leader who promised to nationalise his country's natural gas industry. __._,_.___ Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM SPONSORED LINKS Independent broker dealer Independent director Central intelligence agency Central intelligence agency employment Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___
[cia-drugs] Drug firms' lobby tactics revealed
Drug firms' lobby tactics revealed Documents show how companies try to get new medicines fast-tracked Rob Evans and Sarah BoseleyThursday September 28, 2006The Guardian Multinational drug companies have been lobbying ministers in an attempt to subvert the independent appraisal process and get their expensive new medicines approved for large-scale use in the NHS, the Guardian can reveal. Over the eight months from October to May this year, senior executives from 10 drug companies met ministers to press for favourable decisions on their products. The executives were highly critical of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (Nice), an independent expert body set up to decide which drugs are cost-effective for use in the NHS. Documents obtained by the Guardian under Freedom of Information legislation reveal that: · The world's biggest drug company, Pfizer, warned ministers that it could take its business elsewhere. "Pfizer ... noted that there is complacency in some quarters of Whitehall regarding their continued investment in the UK," the minutes of the meeting record. Ministers later agreed to a special meeting where six companies could lobby for their drugs for Alzheimer's disease. · Two companies lobbied ministers for wider access by patients to their drugs, both of which were later turned down by Nice on the grounds that they were not effective enough and too expensive. The pharmaceutical industry is a major contributor to the UK economy. Its total investment in research and development was more than £3.4bn in 2004, which, a Whitehall briefing note points out, "represents around a quarter of the UK's total manufacturing industry expenditure". Decisions by Nice, set up seven years ago, are crucial for the companies. It decides whether a drug should be universally available to patients in the NHS. Chaired by Prof Sir Michael Rawlings, Nice draws on scientific experts and consults doctors, patients, drug companies and the Department of Health. The government invariably accepts its final recommendations. Although ministers say they cannot influence Nice, the documents reveal a constant stream of high-level visitors from drug companies. Manufacturers, led by Pfizer, have been complaining to ministers about Nice's position on their controversial Alzheimer's drugs. Originally Nice decided to allow them, then it reversed its position, saying they should be used only for a minority of patients with moderate disease. At a meeting in October with the minister, Pfizer executives made it clear they "were unhappy with the Nice decision ... and thought their processes were flawed". They requested a special meeting with ministers where all the companies making Alzheimer's drugs could put their case. The documents prepared by civil servants for the Pfizer meeting outline the wealth and scale of the US company, which in 2004 had revenue of $52.5bn (£28bn) and a net income of over $11bn. But, Pfizer executives warn the minister, it could always take its business elsewhere. "Pfizer ... noted that there is complacency in some quarters of Whitehall regarding their continued investment in the UK," the minutes record. "Pfizer asked for more public support from the government for a robust pharmaceutical industry in the UK and more consultation/dialogue with the government." The subsequent meeting with all the companies took place in December. The minister, Jane Kennedy, was confronted by eight managing directors, vice-presidents and senior executives from six drug companies. The executives lobbied hard for the Nice ruling to be overturned by the government. A memo reports the summing-up of Johnson & Johnson's vice-president David Brickwood: "Nice should take into account what the companies see as the overwhelming views of patients, carers and clinicians on the efficacy of the drugs." In a statement, Pfizer said it "regularly meets with key stakeholders, including government ministers, to keep them up to date with issues relating to our business". A variety of topics were discussed, it said. "Nice and health technology assessment remains a topical issue coupled with the proposed ban on medicines for mild Alzheimer's disease. We believe this is the wrong decision and have appealed along with other manufacturers of anti-dementia medicines." In February, Eli Lilly lobbied hard for its drug Alimta, designed to treat the asbestos-linked cancer mesothelioma. Its executives gave a presentation to Ms Kennedy, incorporating newspaper cuttings claiming that cancer victims were dying for want of the drug. The minister agreed that there should be a high-level meeting between her ministry and the Department for Work and Pensions. But in June, Nice said there was insufficient evidence to show that Alimta was better than other cheaper treatments, recommending that the NHS should not use it. A Lilly spokesman said it was legitimate for the company t
[cia-drugs] Don�t Make Nice: PAUL KRUGMAN - If They Win... ; The Obama Bandwagon: BOB HERBERT
DonÂt Make Nice: PAUL KRUGMAN - If They Win... ; The Obama Bandwagon: BOB HERBERT by PAUL KRUGMAN, BOB HERBERT - The New York Times Monday Oct 23rd, 2006 - Krugman: If They Win... Now that the Democrats are favored to capture at least one house of Congress, many people are urging them to walk and talk softly if they win. I hope the Democrats donÂt follow this advice(the complete article). - ABC News: Electronic Voting Machines Could Skew Elections and More OP-ED COLUMNIST DonÂt Make Nice By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: October 23, 2006 What the make-nice crowd wants most of all is for the Democrats to forswear any investigations into the origins of the Iraq war and the cronyism and corruption that undermined it. But itÂs very much in the national interest to find out what led to the greatest strategic blunder in American history, so that it wonÂt happen again. WhatÂs more, the public wants to know. A large majority of Americans believe both that invading Iraq was a mistake, and that the Bush administration deliberately misled us into war. And according to the Newsweek poll, 58 percent of Americans believe that investigating contracting in Iraq isnÂt just a good idea, but a high priority; 52 percent believe the same about investigating the origins of the war. Why, then, should the Democrats hold back? http://mparent.livejournal.com/13789487.html Lieberman's "petty cash" questioned http://mparent.livejournal.com/13788481.html Obama Is Not a Miracle Elixir: FRANK RICH http://mparent.livejournal.com/13787099.html 8 US troops killed in Iraq http://mparent.livejournal.com/13787931.html ABC News: Electronic Voting Machines Could Skew Elections http://mparent.livejournal.com/13787531.html Coming Up Obama Craze OP-ED COLUMNIST The Obama Bandwagon By BOB HERBERT Published: October 23, 2006 ItÂs a measure of how starved the country is for a sensible leader that a man who until just a couple of years ago was an obscure state senator is now, in the view of many voters, the person we should install in the White House. And More On Today's Newswire http://mparent.livejournal.com/2006/10/23/ MARC PARENT CRIMES AND CORRUPTIONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS http://mparent.livejournal.com/ Homepage http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/14409 Archived http://www.dailykos.com/user/ccnwon Archived mparent MARC PARENT CRIMES AND CORRUPTIONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS http://mparent.livejournal.com/ http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/14409 http://www.dailykos.com/user/ccnwon Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos __._,_.___ Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM SPONSORED LINKS Independent broker dealer Independent director Central intelligence agency Central intelligence agency employment Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___
[cia-drugs] Ellsberg: Hastert got suitcases of Al Qaeda heroin cash
http://wotisitgood4.blogspot.com/2006/10/ellsberg-hastert-got-suitcases-of-al.html Saturday, October 21, 2006 Ellsberg: Hastert got suitcases of Al Qaeda heroin cash, should be in jail Over at DU, Randy mentioned an ' untranscribed interview between Ellsberg and Kris Welch of KPFA from Sept. '05'' - I actually hadn't heard it before (dammit!) - so I found it, and it is no longer 'untranscribed' (at least the Sibel related bits.) Daniel Ellsberg said that Dennis Hastert received suitcases of cash at his home from Turkish heroin money and that Hastert should be in jail, along with his friends. He also says that people in the State Department, and in nuclear labs, are paid in 'cold cash' for secrets that are sold on the nuclear black market. He also says that a Dem Congress "could be pressed into holding genuine investigations of the torture, of the corruption, getting rid of Hastert, and starting impeachment proceedings." All errors are mine, some snippage, usual disclaimers, etc. - Kris Welch: I know you just met with Sibel Edmonds - what's the key thing about Sibel Edmonds' case? Daniel Ellsberg: For several years, Sibel has been really hoping to get her case into a court, or into a hearing room in Congress. That's pretty well impossible with Republicans in charge of hearings - they won't hold any. She has told her story on a classified basis to several congressional venues, plus the 911 Commission - none of whom have done anything with it so far - it's too hot for them, essentially. You get a pretty good clue as to why the congressional people haven't pressed it in the article about her in the current Vanity Fair issue. Sibel is not yet in a position to tell all, but has been telling more and more. Let me suggest two interviews with her that have come out since the VF article that go a good deal further than VF chose to print. VF did print ten pages and they got a lot but there was a lot that the reporter had, David Rose, that didn't get into the article, and a lot of that is in these two other interviews - both at antiwar.com, Chris Deliso and Scott Horton. In those interviews she finally reveals more of what she wished that VF had put out. Namely, if I can summarize it quickly, Al Qaeda, she's been saying to congress, according to these interviews, is financed 95% by drug money - drug traffic to which the US government shows a blind eye, has been ignoring, because it very heavily involves allies and assets of ours - such as Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan - all the 'Stans - in a drug traffic where the opium originates in Afghanistan, is processed in Turkey, and delivered to Europe where it furnishes 96% of Europe's heroin, by Albanians, either in Albania or Kosovo - Albanian Muslims in Kosovo - basically the KLA, the Kosovo Liberation Army which we backed heavily in that episode at the end of the century. It was known at the time that the KLA consisted largely of drug-dealers, and they still do. They're dominating the politics, pretty much, of Kosovo right now. Now, all of these people are, for various reasons, allies, or clients, of the US - and the fact that they get a large amount of their income from the heroin trade is something the US just regards as the price of doing business with them. That means that not only is the heroin coming into our markets where it furnishes, according to Sibel based on her FBI experience, some 14% of our heroin - up from 4% before the invasion of Afghanistan. The major effect of that is that terrorist gangs are taking a cut of this, including Al Qaeda, which essentially taxes this traffic as it goes through the various lands where each 'band' pays a percentage as they hand it off. In other words, the US is in effect, endorsing - well, 'endorsing' is too strong a word - 'permitting', definitely permitting, or 'not acting against,' a heroin trade - which not only corrupts our cities and our city politics, AND our congress, as Sibel makes very specific - but is financing the terrorist organization that constitutes a genuine threat to us. And this seems to be a fact that is accepted by our top leaders, according to Sibel, for various geopolitical reasons, and for corrupt reasons as well. Sometimes things are simpler than they might appear - and they involve envelopes of cash. Sibel says that suitcases of cash have been delivered to the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, at his home, near Chicago, from Turkish sources, knowing that a lot of that is drug money. Now these are pretty inflammatory allegations, let's say, and it's note-worthy that they haven't even been picked up by the mainstream press. The Vanity Fair article made that plain, though not in as much detail as the antiwar.com interviews - but not one major newspaper I don't think has picked up her allegations against Hastert which are very specific, and one would think very important. Kris Welch: Dennis Hastert's name is mentioned in
