Re: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set
dear Bob, Why continue to misdirect/confuse the initial subject (Mary's mistaken-assumption suggesting I posted a post I did not post) into further disinfo? Please recall, that when I asked: 'MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? You responded with the following (further misdirecting/confusing the initial-issue/confusion): From: muckblit Subject: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set Rating == meriting. -Bob --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, ruxpert homepu...@... wrote: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I am not aware of 'Rating' Any Post, by Anyone! Please be clear, the initial issue/confusion, we've now clarified, is not a semantic/meaning issue regarding the word 'Rating', but instead: that I Did Not post the post Mary referenced in the following: From: Mary Hartman hartmanmar...@yahoo.com To: Bob D muckb...@yahoo.com Sent: Thu, November 19, 2009 10:03:12 PM Subject: Fw: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set Wow! You and ruxpert rated a post by Michael Aquino!? I can't believe he would expect anyone here to believe that the DOD has any respect for any restrictions on psyops being conducted on US citizens. (if need be, see here, Mary elaborates on her post mistake): Mary, Please Stop! Re: Re:Aquino http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47904 So, Bob, your providing a synonym for 'Rating', was a misdirection from the answer/clarification that Mary later finally provided: That Mary mistakingly assumed I posted a post, That I Did Not Post! Ok Clear? Now, if Bob Mary would be so kind, I would rather we no longer intertwine, as this disinfo romp was rather time consumingly tiresome; which I hope your compassionate understanding might see) (the first one was when you/Bob, out of the blue, accused me of being a troll; to which Mary personally emailed me to apologize for you, telling me what a good guy you normally were ;-) Please, would you/Bob Mary be the good guys you both know you are, and give me some RR? Please ;-) - Original Message - From: muckblit To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 9:06 PM Subject: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set We can't read Aquino's mind. Don't worry about it unless you have an elephant shaped asteroid in your backyard. -Bob --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, ruxpert homepu...@... wrote: dear Bob/Mary, I did not post that! How might such constitute an example of me 'Rating/Meriting' a post by Michael Aquino!? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47843 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47847 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47853 Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM Yahoo! Groups Links
[cia-drugs] Smart Dust
Smart Dust is already in our environment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v5_TdZ4f7Q
Re: [cia-drugs] Good news.
does this set a precident for civil suits being opened against the USA by the families of people who died in our hands under torture? Can you remember when 'torture' was something we were disgusted by? On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 8:50 AM, micha...@midcoast.com wrote: Sherri Sullivan, member of Families of Lost CIA, wins her case. This is the second case won. In the first she gets almost a million. Now, in the second, it is 21 million and she is already starting to get paid. This came about with help of Senator Collins of Maine member of both the Homeland Security Committee and the Armed Forces Committee. God bless Collins! Sherri's dad was sheepdipped and 'under identity'. Though a high rank in military he was transferred to just a private in army for mission. When he went missing military claimed no knowledge. Others came to Sherri's help and got papers showing he was in service and took it to Senator Collins. All back insurance with 30 years interest etc. paid..., that was first case. Second was against Cuba as her dad died under torture. Cuba did not go to court case. Monies will be paid out of funds held back from Cuba after Bay of Pigs. I know Sherri and some others involved. Wow..., this is a heart warming story. All Sherri ever wanted was her dad's remains so she could bury him. m
Re: [cia-drugs] Who Needs Trials? Kill Terror Suspects!
PS...sorry! I misread your post! On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:37 PM, John Stroebel john.stroe...@gmail.comwrote: Hey I think YOU are a terror suspect. Who is going to protect YOU when I say YOU need to go first? WHY THE CONSTITUTION THAT IS WHO the SAME ONE that applies to these people you are so generously handing out death to. TRY being more 'American' from here on. On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:34 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: *Who Needs Trials? Kill Terror Suspects!* *By Nat Hentoff* Is it possible that the CIA would actually commit alleged war crimes - and the U.S. government would not hold the CIA and itself accountable in any way? Is water wet? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23995.htm Bush memos parallel claim 9/11 mastermind’s children were tortured with insects http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22440.htm http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/04/17/bush-torture-memos-align-with-account-that-911-suspects-children-were-tortured/ === *William Fisher | Military Tribunals - Justice Lite? *William Fisher, Truthout: While Sarah Palin and other right-wing opportunists create a cottage industry in drumming up public hysteria about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other terror suspects from Guantanamo coming to New York for trial, many legal experts and human rights groups are being equally outspoken in their criticism of the 'new and improved' Military Commissions designated to try five other detainees. Read the Articlehttp://messenger.truthout.org/ss/link.php?M=215142N=375C=f23e950814f44a1603d5b8b23b163ffaL=3327 http://www.truthout.org/1120091 ### The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47906 -- Trial of the Century the Long Shadow of 9/11 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871 -- *video: Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed - The War on Truth* http://www.911blogger.com/node/16232 http://messenger.truthout.org/ss/link.php?M=215142N=375C=f23e950814f44a1603d5b8b23b163ffaL=3327
Re: [cia-drugs] Who Needs Trials? Kill Terror Suspects!
Hey I think YOU are a terror suspect. Who is going to protect YOU when I say YOU need to go first? WHY THE CONSTITUTION THAT IS WHO the SAME ONE that applies to these people you are so generously handing out death to. TRY being more 'American' from here on. On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:34 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: *Who Needs Trials? Kill Terror Suspects!* *By Nat Hentoff* Is it possible that the CIA would actually commit alleged war crimes - and the U.S. government would not hold the CIA and itself accountable in any way? Is water wet? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23995.htm Bush memos parallel claim 9/11 mastermind’s children were tortured with insects http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22440.htm http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/04/17/bush-torture-memos-align-with-account-that-911-suspects-children-were-tortured/ === *William Fisher | Military Tribunals - Justice Lite? *William Fisher, Truthout: While Sarah Palin and other right-wing opportunists create a cottage industry in drumming up public hysteria about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other terror suspects from Guantanamo coming to New York for trial, many legal experts and human rights groups are being equally outspoken in their criticism of the 'new and improved' Military Commissions designated to try five other detainees. Read the Articlehttp://messenger.truthout.org/ss/link.php?M=215142N=375C=f23e950814f44a1603d5b8b23b163ffaL=3327 http://www.truthout.org/1120091 ### The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47906 -- Trial of the Century the Long Shadow of 9/11 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871 -- *video: Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed - The War on Truth* http://www.911blogger.com/node/16232 http://messenger.truthout.org/ss/link.php?M=215142N=375C=f23e950814f44a1603d5b8b23b163ffaL=3327
Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials
Sir: If you are suggesting in your post that they shold NOT be given trials in the USA then you are ABSOLUTELY against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. ARE you suggesting that? I am not insinuating, I am stating infatically that ANYONE who would deny them a fair and public trial as defined by OUR CONSTITUTION when they were kidnapped and imprisoned BY US is most definately standign against our Constitution. quote; *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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.* Now, do you support their fair public trials or do you not? On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: Dear John, I am for the Constituation, and Bill of Rights. Why would you try to insinuate otherwise? Please stop trying to instigate superfluous conflicts of misdirection divisiveness Thank you please - Original Message - *From:* John Stroebel john.stroe...@gmail.com *To:* cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, November 22, 2009 9:27 PM *Subject:* Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials They were arrested by OUR COUNTRY and illegally at that. They were denied ALL RIGHTS and were abused and tortured like we were Nazis. It was decided to try them. SINCE WHEN IS THE USA AGAINST TRIAL BY JURY? TO be so is COMPLETELY Unamerican. So since they are being tried in the USA THEY ARE ENTITLED TO ANY DEFENSE OF THEIR CHOOSING. Or do you wish to go against our Constitution? On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:01 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: *The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials*http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/20 November 20, 2009 by Salon.com Glenn Greenwald commentary: http://www.911blogger.com/node/21922 === *NYC 9/11 Trial Will Shine the Lights on the Roots of Terrorism*http://www.alternet.org/story/144014/ By Ray McGovern, Consortium News Posted on November 17, 2009, Printed on November 21, 2009 http://www.alternet.org/story/144014/ commentary http://www.911blogger.com/node/21923 == Lawyer: 9/11 Defendants Want Platform For Viewshttp://www.911blogger.com/node/21932 http://www.911blogger.com/node/21932 http://www.911blogger.com/node/21932 -- *video:* *Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed - The War on Truth* http://www.911blogger.com/node/16232 == Trial of the Century the Long Shadow of 9/11 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871
Re: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set
Again, I'm baffled as to why you are so fixated on something that is nothing. --- On Tue, 11/24/09, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: From: ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net Subject: Re: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 12:37 PM dear Bob, Why continue to misdirect/confuse the initial subject (Mary's mistaken-assumption suggesting I posted a post I did not post) into further disinfo? Please recall, that when I asked: 'MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? You responded with the following (further misdirecting/ confusing the initial-issue/ confusion) : From: muckblit Subject: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set Rating == meriting. -Bob --- In cia-dr...@yahoogrou ps.com, ruxpert homepu...@.. . wrote: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I am not aware of 'Rating' Any Post, by Anyone! Please be clear, the initial issue/confusion, we've now clarified, is not a semantic/meaning issue regarding the word 'Rating', but instead: that I Did Not post the post Mary referenced in the following: From: Mary Hartman hartmanmary98@ yahoo.com To: Bob D muckb...@yahoo. com Sent: Thu, November 19, 2009 10:03:12 PM Subject: Fw: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set Wow! You and ruxpert rated a post by Michael Aquino!? I can't believe he would expect anyone here to believe that the DOD has any respect for any restrictions on psyops being conducted on US citizens. (if need be, see here, Mary elaborates on her post mistake): Mary, Please Stop! Re: Re:Aquino http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/cia- drugs/message/ 47904 So, Bob, your providing a synonym for 'Rating', was a misdirection from the answer/clarificatio n that Mary later finally provided: That Mary mistakingly assumed I posted a post, That I Did Not Post! Ok Clear? Now, if Bob Mary would be so kind, I would rather we no longer intertwine, as this disinfo romp was rather time consumingly tiresome; which I hope your compassionate understanding might see) (the first one was when you/Bob, out of the blue, accused me of being a troll; to which Mary personally emailed me to apologize for you, telling me what a good guy you normally were ;-) Please, would you/Bob Mary be the good guys you both know you are, and give me some RR? Please ;-) - Original Message - From: muckblit To: cia-dr...@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 9:06 PM Subject: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set We can't read Aquino's mind. Don't worry about it unless you have an elephant shaped asteroid in your backyard. -Bob --- In cia-dr...@yahoogrou ps.com, ruxpert homepu...@.. . wrote: dear Bob/Mary, I did not post that! How might such constitute an example of me 'Rating/Meriting' a post by Michael Aquino!? http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/cia- drugs/message/ 47843 http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/cia- drugs/message/ 47847 http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/cia- drugs/message/ 47853 - - -- Complete archives at http://www.sitbot. net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM Yahoo! Groups Links Traditional (Yahoo! ID required) cia-drugs-fullfeatu r...@yahoogroups. com
Re: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set
An elephant shaped asteroid? How cool would that be?! --- On Tue, 11/24/09, muckblit muckb...@yahoo.com wrote: From: muckblit muckb...@yahoo.com Subject: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 5:06 AM We can't read Aquino's mind. Don't worry about it unless you have an elephant shaped asteroid in your backyard. -Bob --- In cia-dr...@yahoogrou ps.com, ruxpert homepu...@. .. wrote: dear Bob/Mary, I did not post that! How might such constitute an example of me 'Rating/Meriting' a post by Michael Aquino!? http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/cia- drugs/message/ 47843 http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/cia- drugs/message/ 47847 http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/cia- drugs/message/ 47853
[cia-drugs] UK Inquiry: Blair Conspired with Bush as Early as February 2002 to Plot Iraq Invasion
UK Inquiry: Blair Conspired with Bush as Early as February 2002 to Plot Iraq Invasion By dlindorff 11/24/2009 - Most Americans are blissfully in the dark about it, but across the Atlantic in the UK, a commission reluctantly established by Prime Minister Gordon Brown under pressure from anti-war activists in Britain is beginning hearings into the actions and statements of British leaders that led to the country's joining the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Even before testimony began in hearings that started yesterday, news began to leak out from documents obtained by the commission that the government of former PM Tony Blair had lied to Parliament and the public about the country's involvement in war planning. Britain's Telegraph newspaper over the weekend published documents from British military leaders, including a memo from British special forces head Maj. Gen. Graeme Lamb, saying that he had been instructed to begin working the war up since early 2002. This means that Blair, who in July 2002, had assured members of a House of Commons committee that there were no preparations to invade Iraq, was lying. Things are likely to heat up when the commission begins hearing testimony. It has the power, and intends to compel testimony from top government officials, including Blair himself. While some American newspapers, including the Philadelphia Inquirer, have run an Associated Press report on the new disclosures and on the commission, key news organizations, including the New York Times, have not. The Times ignored the Telegraph report, but a day later ran an article about the British commission that focused entirely on evidence that British military leaders in Iraq felt slighted by arrogant American military leaders who, the article reported, pushed for aggressive military action against insurgent groups, while British leaders preferred negotiating with them. While that may be of some historical interest, it hardly compares with the evidence that Blair and the Bush/Cheney administration were secretly conspiring to invade Iraq as early as February and March 2002. Recall that back in the fall of 2002, the Bush/Cheney argument to Congress and the American people for initiating a war against Iraq was that Iraq was allegedly behind the 9-11 attacks and that it posed an imminent danger of attack against the US and Britain with its alleged weapons of mass destruction. Of course, such arguments, which have subsequently been shown to have been bogus, would have had no merit if the planning began a year earlier, and if no such urgency was expressed by the two leaders at that time. Imminent, after all, means imminent, and if Blair, Bush and Cheney had genuinely thought an attack with WMDs was imminent back in the early days of the Bush administration, they would have been acting immediately, not secretly conjuring up a war scheduled for a year later. (The actual invasion began on March 19, 2003). As I documented in my book, The Case for Impeachment (St. Martin's Press, 2006), there is plenty of evidence that Bush and Cheney had a scheme to put the US at war with Iraq even before Bush took office on Jan. 20, 2001. Then Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill in his own tell-all book, The Price of Loyalty, written after he was dumped from the Bush Administration, recounts that at the first meeting of Bush's new National Security Council, the question of going to war and ousting Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was on the agenda. Immediately after the 9-11 attacks, NSC anti-terrorism program czar Richard Clarke also recalled Bush ordering him to find a link to Iraq. Meanwhile, within days, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was ordering top generals to prepare for an Iraq invasion. Gen. Tommy Franks, who was heading up the military effort in Afghanistan that was reportedly closing in on Osama Bin Laden, found the rug being pulled out from under him as Rumsfeld began shifting troops out of Afghanistan and to Kuwait in preparation for the new war. It is nothing less than astonishing that so little news of the British investigation into the origins of the illegal Iraq War is being conveyed to Americans by this country's corporate media-yet another example demonstrating that American journalism is dead or dying. It is even more astonishing that neither the Congress nor the president here in America is making any similar effort to put America's leaders in the dock to tell the truth about their machinations in engineering a war that has cost the US over $1 trillion (perhaps $3 trillion eventually when debt payments and the cost of veterans care is added in), and over 4000 lives, not to mention as many as one million innocent Iraqi lives. Source URL: http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/?q=node/421 Links: [1] http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/71316362.html
Re: [cia-drugs] UK Inquiry: Blair Conspired with Bush as Early as February 2002 to Plot Iraq Invasion
Somewhere in this may be information regarding the untimely and bizarre death of UNSCOM Inspector David Kelly, who was allegedly going to blow the whistle on the Blair/Bush game plan. The world was safer with David Kelly watching the bioweapons production and trafficking. --- On Tue, 11/24/09, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: From: ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net Subject: [cia-drugs] UK Inquiry: Blair Conspired with Bush as Early as February 2002 to Plot Iraq Invasion To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 7:14 PM UK Inquiry: Blair Conspired with Bush as Early as February 2002 to Plot Iraq Invasion By dlindorff 11/24/2009 - Most Americans are blissfully in the dark about it, but across the Atlantic in the UK, a commission reluctantly established by Prime Minister Gordon Brown under pressure from anti-war activists in Britain is beginning hearings into the actions and statements of British leaders that led to the country's joining the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Even before testimony began in hearings that started yesterday, news began to leak out from documents obtained by the commission that the government of former PM Tony Blair had lied to Parliament and the public about the country's involvement in war planning. Britain's Telegraph newspaper over the weekend published documents from British military leaders, including a memo from British special forces head Maj. Gen. Graeme Lamb, saying that he had been instructed to begin working the war up since early 2002. This means that Blair, who in July 2002, had assured members of a House of Commons committee that there were no preparations to invade Iraq, was lying. Things are likely to heat up when the commission begins hearing testimony. It has the power, and intends to compel testimony from top government officials, including Blair himself. While some American newspapers, including the Philadelphia Inquirer, have run an Associated Press report on the new disclosures and on the commission, key news organizations, including the New York Times, have not. The Times ignored the Telegraph report, but a day later ran an article about the British commission that focused entirely on evidence that British military leaders in Iraq felt slighted by arrogant American military leaders who, the article reported, pushed for aggressive military action against insurgent groups, while British leaders preferred negotiating with them. While that may be of some historical interest, it hardly compares with the evidence that Blair and the Bush/Cheney administration were secretly conspiring to invade Iraq as early as February and March 2002. Recall that back in the fall of 2002, the Bush/Cheney argument to Congress and the American people for initiating a war against Iraq was that Iraq was allegedly behind the 9-11 attacks and that it posed an imminent danger of attack against the US and Britain with its alleged weapons of mass destruction. Of course, such arguments, which have subsequently been shown to have been bogus, would have had no merit if the planning began a year earlier, and if no such urgency was expressed by the two leaders at that time. Imminent, after all, means imminent, and if Blair, Bush and Cheney had genuinely thought an attack with WMDs was imminent back in the early days of the Bush administration, they would have been acting immediately, not secretly conjuring up a war scheduled for a year later. (The actual invasion began on March 19, 2003). As I documented in my book, The Case for Impeachment (St. Martin's Press, 2006), there is plenty of evidence that Bush and Cheney had a scheme to put the US at war with Iraq even before Bush took office on Jan. 20, 2001. Then Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill in his own tell-all book, The Price of Loyalty, written after he was dumped from the Bush Administration, recounts that at the first meeting of Bush's new National Security Council, the question of going to war and ousting Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was on the agenda. Immediately after the 9-11 attacks, NSC anti-terrorism program czar Richard Clarke also recalled Bush ordering him to find a link to Iraq. Meanwhile, within days, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was ordering top generals to prepare for an Iraq invasion. Gen. Tommy Franks, who was heading up the military effort in Afghanistan that was reportedly closing in on Osama Bin Laden, found the rug being pulled out from under him as Rumsfeld began shifting troops out of Afghanistan and to Kuwait in preparation for the new war. It is nothing less than astonishing that so little news of the British investigation into the origins of the illegal Iraq War is being conveyed to Americans by this country's corporate media-yet another example demonstrating that American journalism is dead or dying. It is even
Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials
dear John, I have already responded to your insinuations suggesting I might not be for the Constituation: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47915 please stop suggesting I am suggesting somethingk that you are infact suggesting, that you then use to continue harrassment routine, even after I have answered directly Your Suggestion's interrogation's core inquiry: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47915 Please discontinue divisive hypocritical harrassment routine! - Original Message - From: John Stroebel To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 1:35 PM Subject: Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials Sir: If you are suggesting in your post that they shold NOT be given trials in the USA then you are ABSOLUTELY against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. ARE you suggesting that? I am not insinuating, I am stating infatically that ANYONE who would deny them a fair and public trial as defined by OUR CONSTITUTION when they were kidnapped and imprisoned BY US is most definately standign against our Constitution. quote; 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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Now, do you support their fair public trials or do you not? On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: Dear John, I am for the Constituation, and Bill of Rights. Why would you try to insinuate otherwise? Please stop trying to instigate superfluous conflicts of misdirection divisiveness Thank you please
[cia-drugs] Kseniya Simonova - Sand Animation
Kseniya Simonova - Sand Animation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=518XP8prwZo
[cia-drugs] JUDGE SAYS: KATRINA DID NOT FLOOD NEW ORLEANS
video: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/736.html Subject: JUDGE SAYS: KATRINA DID NOT FLOOD NEW ORLEANS KATRINA DID NOT FLOOD NEW ORLEANS - It was the result of Incompetent work by the US ARMY CORPS of ENGINEERS. In October, 2009 a judge agreed with members of LEVEES.ORG, who ran a 3-year relentless campaign to end the media's false assertion that Katrina Flooded New Orleans. The record now shows that: ...the flooding of New Orleans was the result of systematic failure of the multi-billion dollar tax payer federal levee system. - From: Brasscheck TV Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 11:18 PM Subject: Brasscheck TV: Not natural Mark Twain said it best: A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. Turning a lie around after it's gone halfway around the world is not easy - but it can be done. Here's an example of a small, grass roots group that's been relentless in getting the truth out about a so called natural catastrophe. After four years, their effort is finally getting support from the courts. Video: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/736.html - Brasscheck # Breaking: Judge: Corps' negligence caused Katrina flooding 18 Nov 2009 A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the Army Corps of Engineers' failure to properly maintain a navigation channel led to massive flooding in Hurricane Katrina. U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval sided with five residents and one business who argued the Army Corps' shoddy oversight of the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet led to the flooding of New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward and neighboring St. Bernard Parish. Duval awarded the plaintiffs $720,000, or about $170,000 each, but the decision could eventually make the government vulnerable to a much larger payout. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iIy4xSxWMklRKM-ko9fXC2sW3_XgD9C2ANT01 == video: America Betrayed - the movie trailer http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/597.html New Orleans: A Geopolitical Prize By George Friedman http://www.stratfor.com/new_orleans_geopolitical_prize New Orleans - Still Under Water http://www.gregpalast.com/new-orleans-still-under-water-a-buzzflash-interview == From: Kathy Subject: Re: America Betrayed | New Orleans See: Floodwalls Stuffed with Newspaper-- http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.viewpageId=62741 Also: Army Corps to Cut Down Trees Near Levees-- Ironic the corps wants to remove trees when vegetation is often credited with streambank stabilization. http://bluelivingideas.com/topics/freshwater-ecosystems/army-corps-engineers-plans-cut-trees-levees/
[cia-drugs] Fw: Building Momentum for an Exit Strategy
--- On Tue, 11/24/09, broali4x broali...@suddenlink.net wrote:
From: broali4x broali...@suddenlink.net
Subject: Fw: Building Momentum for an Exit Strategy
To: the_zetaheaven_gr...@yahoogroups.com, broali...@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 1:59 PM
- Original Message -
From: Ethan Nadelmann, DPA Network
To: broali...@suddenlink.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:00 AM
Subject: Building Momentum for an Exit Strategy
#yiv1199244980 P, #yiv1199244980 OL, #yiv1199244980 UL, #yiv1199244980 LI,
#yiv1199244980 DIV
{
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif;color:#33;font-size:11px;line-height:13px;}
#yiv1199244980 TABLE, #yiv1199244980 TD, #yiv1199244980 TH, #yiv1199244980 TR
{
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif;color:#33;font-size:11px;
}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 TH {
text-align:left;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 H2 {
font-size:16px;color:#C77529;
font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:0px;}
#yiv1199244980 H3 {
font-family:Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif;color:#66;
font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:0px;}
#yiv1199244980 H4 {
color:#CC6600;font-size:12px;font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:0px;}
#yiv1199244980 H5 {
font-size:16px;color:#C77529;
margin-bottom:0px;line-height:16px;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 .subheader {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif;color:#00;font-size:11px;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 HR {
height:1px;}
#yiv1199244980 .important {
font-weight:bold;color:#cc;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 .dirHead {
COLOR:#FF;FONT-WEIGHT:bold;FONT-SIZE:12px;
FONT-FAMILY:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;}
#yiv1199244980 .dirSubHead {
COLOR:#33;FONT-WEIGHT:bold;FONT-SIZE:11px;
FONT-FAMILY:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 form {
margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-top:0px;}
#yiv1199244980 .formheader {
color:#996600;}
#yiv1199244980 .formheaderbold {
color:#996600;font-weight:bold;}
#yiv1199244980 input {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-weight:normal;
font-size:11px;
}
#yiv1199244980 select {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-weight:normal;
font-size:11px;
}
#yiv1199244980 textarea {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-weight:normal;
font-size:11px;
}
#yiv1199244980 .button {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif;font-size:11px;color:#6633cc;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 .dividerbg {
background-color:#FFCC00;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 .formText {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;
font-weight:bold;}
#yiv1199244980 .formOptin {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;
font-weight:bold;color:#FF;}
#yiv1199244980 .formField {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;}
#yiv1199244980 .bodyText {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;}
#yiv1199244980 .smallText {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10px;}
#yiv1199244980 .formTextColor {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;
font-weight:bold;
color:#006600;}
#yiv1199244980 .formRequired {
color:red;}
#yiv1199244980 .ongoingText {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Helvetica, Arial,
sans-serif;font-size:11px;color:#993300;
}
#yiv1199244980 .rightText {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
font-size:10px;
color:#33;}
#yiv1199244980 .headline {
color:#996600;font-weight:bold;}
#yiv1199244980 .formSmallcomment {
font-family:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, Geneva, Tahoma,
sans-serif;color:#66;font-size:10px;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 .required {
font-weight:bold;color:#CC;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 .footer {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10px;color:#33;
}
#yiv1199244980 .leftwhite {
font-family:Verdana, Geneva, Helvetica,
sans-serif;font-size:11px;line-height:13px;color:#FF;
}
#yiv1199244980 .actionTitle {
font-size:12px;color:#CC6600;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none;}
#yiv1199244980 .leftinside {
color:#CC6600;font-weight:normal;line-height:15px;text-decoration:none;}
#yiv1199244980 .leftside {
color:#F2BC07;font-weight:normal;line-height:13px;text-decoration:none;}
#yiv1199244980 .headline
{
color:#CC6600;font-size:12px;font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:0px;}
#yiv1199244980
#yiv1199244980 a:link, #yiv1199244980 a:visited {
color:#CC6600;text-decoration:none;line-height:11px;}
#yiv1199244980 a:hover {
color:#CC6600;text-decoration:underline;}
#yiv1199244980 a:active {
color:#66;text-decoration:underline;}
#yiv1199244980 a.leftNav:link, #yiv1199244980 a.leftNav:visited{
Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials
I se that you HAVE complained but you HAVE NOT answered the questions I asked to clear this up. No skin off my nose. On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:12 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: dear John, I have already responded to your insinuations suggesting I might not be for the Constituation: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47915 please stop suggesting I am suggesting somethingk that you are infact suggesting, that you then use to continue harrassment routine, even after I have answered directly Your Suggestion's interrogation's core inquiry: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47915 Please discontinue divisive hypocritical harrassment routine! - Original Message - *From:* John Stroebel john.stroe...@gmail.com *To:* cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Monday, November 23, 2009 1:35 PM *Subject:* Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials Sir: If you are suggesting in your post that they shold NOT be given trials in the USA then you are ABSOLUTELY against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. ARE you suggesting that? I am not insinuating, I am stating infatically that ANYONE who would deny them a fair and public trial as defined by OUR CONSTITUTION when they were kidnapped and imprisoned BY US is most definately standign against our Constitution. quote; *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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.* Now, do you support their fair public trials or do you not? On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: Dear John, I am for the Constituation, and Bill of Rights. Why would you try to insinuate otherwise? Please stop trying to instigate superfluous conflicts of misdirection divisiveness Thank you please
Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials
dear John, I HAVE indeed answered your question (not that I was, nor am required to, but did nevertheless) Dear John, a fair trial requires proper/accountable examination of the evidence: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47915 Why do you insist upon inflicting us with the harrassment hysteria of the angsty hypocritical denial of your unfair behavior? angst makes waste ;-) - Original Message - From: John Stroebel To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 3:15 PM Subject: Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials I se that you HAVE complained but you HAVE NOT answered the questions I asked to clear this up. No skin off my nose. On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:12 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: dear John, I have already responded to your insinuations suggesting I might not be for the Constituation: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47915 please stop suggesting I am suggesting somethingk that you are infact suggesting, that you then use to continue harrassment routine, even after I have answered directly Your Suggestion's interrogation's core inquiry: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47915 Please discontinue divisive hypocritical harrassment routine! - Original Message - From: John Stroebel To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 1:35 PM Subject: Re: [cia-drugs] The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials Sir: If you are suggesting in your post that they shold NOT be given trials in the USA then you are ABSOLUTELY against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. ARE you suggesting that? I am not insinuating, I am stating infatically that ANYONE who would deny them a fair and public trial as defined by OUR CONSTITUTION when they were kidnapped and imprisoned BY US is most definately standign against our Constitution. quote; 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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Now, do you support their fair public trials or do you not? On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, ruxpert homepu...@comcast.net wrote: Dear John, I am for the Constituation, and Bill of Rights. Why would you try to insinuate otherwise? Please stop trying to instigate superfluous conflicts of misdirection divisiveness Thank you please
[cia-drugs] Fw: Unerstanding Afghan-style democracy from an Afghanistani perspective
- From: J. Glenn Evans Subject: Fw: Unerstanding Afghan-style democracy from an Afghanistani perspective Absolutely stunning set of photographs of Afghanistan on the nwscinc.org link. - Original Message - From: Gini Paulsen Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:48 AM Subject: Understanding Afghan-style democracy from an Afghanistani perspective This is a MUST READ article from the point of view of an Afghanistani. Please read and share. Then write Barack Obama to protest his intent to escalate the US war in and against this sovreign nation. http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact Turning to a new chapter in Afghanistan - Khalil Nouri Terry Green (www.nwscinc.org) An expanded military emphasis won't work in Afghanistan, write guest columnists Khalil Nouri and Terry Green. The current Afghan problems are tribal imbalance and the interference of Afghanistan's regional neighbors. Any resolution must address those issues. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2010339675_guest24nouri.html == Copyright (c) 2009 The Seattle Times Company www.seattletimes.com
[cia-drugs] US to give $38.7 million to reduce poppy cultivation
Citizens For Legitimate Government 24 Nov 2009 http://www.legitgov.org The day ends in 'y,' so it's time for another AfPak bl*w job. US to give $38.7 million to 27 Afghan provinces to reduce poppy cultivation --A report published last month in The New York Times identified the brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai as a CIA operative and a major opium dealer. He was also reported to have close ties with the Taliban. 24 Nov 2009 The US government has made a commitment to provide financial aid to Afghan provinces that have reduced or eliminated the production of opium. The United States signed a memorandum of understanding on Monday according to which it agreed to give $38.7 million to 27 Afghan provinces that eliminated or significantly reduced poppy production in the world's biggest supplier country, AFP reported. According to the MOU, the money will be handed over to Afghanistan's counter-narcotics ministry [Flush twice. It's a log way to the Afghan counter-narcotics Ministry.], which will disperse the cash to the 27 different provinces to finance development or alternative crops. [LOL. Am I the only one to observe that the US pays to *cultivate* Afghan opium poppies, while simultaneously paying to *reduce* them? Oh, but we can't get single-payer health care or the public option --too expensive. --LRP] http://www.legitgov.org/price_obusha_afpak_war_031009.html Obomba poised for special Thanksgiving holiday 'bad news' dump: Afghanistan decision to come within days, White House says 26 Nov 2009 President Obama will announce within days whether he will send more troops to Afghanistan, the White House said after he met with his national security team Monday night. After completing a rigorous final meeting, President Obama has the information he wants and needs to make his decision and he will announce that decision within days, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. [Right, Monday night, but the PentaPost leak will likely take place on Thanksgiving.] http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/24/us.afghanistan/index.html Top Democrat warns Afghanistan will bankrupt domestic programs, threatens war surtax if Obama sends more troops 23 Nov 2009 David Obey came to Congress in 1969, a young Democratic congressman from Wisconsin, opposed to the Vietnam War and mindful of the funding it was draining from Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs. Thirty years later, he is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and adamant that Afghanistan is a similar quagmire that could bankrupt President Obama's domestic agenda. There ain't going to be no money for nothing if we pour it all into Afghanistan, House Appropriations Chairman David Obey told ABC News. If they ask for an increased troop commitment in Afghanistan, I am going to ask them to pay for it. Comparing Afghanistan to Vietnam, Obey said that both were long-standing civil wars and that, in each case, the United States found itself with an unreliable partner on the ground. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/top-democrat-warns-afghanistan-will-bankrupt-domestic-programs-threatens-war-surtax-if-obama-sends-m.html Leaked documents reveal No 10 cover-up over Iraq invasion --Inquiry to hear how Blair hid true intentions for war 22 Nov 2009 Military commanders are expected to tell the inquiry into the Iraq war, which opens on Tuesday, that the invasion was ill-conceived and that preparations were sabotaged by Tony Blair's government's attempts to mislead the public. They were so shocked by the lack of preparation for the aftermath of the invasion that they believe members of the British and US governments at the time could be prosecuted for war crimes by breaching the duty outlined in the Geneva convention to safeguard civilians in a conflict, the Guardian has been told. Does this picture show British soldiers broke Geneva Conventions? Public inquiry to be launched into allegations of abuse torture against Iraqi civilians at UK-run detention camp 24 Nov 2009 A photograph handed to The Independent claims to show Iraqi civilians captured in southern Iraq being mistreated by British soldiers in breach of international law and the Geneva Conventions. The incident is to be investigated at a public inquiry to be announced tomorrow by Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth, which will also examine evidence of one of the worst atrocities ever carried out by the British Army. It is claimed that hours after the picture was taken, the four men were transferred to a UK-run detention camp where they were badly beaten and where 20 other civilians were murdered by British soldiers. The covering of a prisoner's face and rear handcuffing on the ground is a breach of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions which prohibits the humiliating and degrading treatment of detainees. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/nov/22/iraq-invasion-no10-cover-up KBR to bid for part of $3B Air Force
[cia-drugs] Re: The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials
The big picture of this type of self-corruption is that by using these high pressure shunts to pragmatism, all the Jack Bauer 24 we're the good guys let's John Wayne the evil incarnate terrorists with a lynch mob, the end result is looking out at the whole world with the same eyes and then we judge and jury millions of civilians to die under our wmd. Somebody makes money. We go on with those closed eyes thinking we're being pragmatic John Wayne against real bad guys. Nobody notices how many civilians we're killing. The argument against looking at how many civilians we're killing is that we have to kill one or two consummate bad guys, we absolutely have to, so whatever, ignore the collateral damage. That's only about profits. Domestically we kill a scapegoat now and then, but again, we trash a lot of innocent or nearly innocent people. Domestically that would take the form of non-violent drug-related crime. The high profile scapegoat always has to be alleged the sole perpetrator. That's part of the hypnotism. He has to be killed without really being proven guilty, or being proven guilty by lies, even if he was guilty, and then he has to be the sole perp, though that is NEVER true in these high profile show trials! Somehow that is part of corrupting people to carry on and judge and sentence thousands or even millions of civilians to die in Indonesia, Palestine, Lebanon July 2006, Iraq DU and white phosphorus, latin american death-squadding. If we can kill one man without a good trial and lying that he was the sole perp, then we have passed the psychological point of reference to do the dirty deeds for profit of a few all over the world. John Muhamed was some kind of bad guy but he was juiced in Virginia on the basis that the bullet went into the big hole and there was no small hole, but there was. He was placed at the scene of the crime by a woman perjuring herself to say that she saw him at a gas station a mile away. That is all just a measure of how corrupt we are and to what extent we have signed on for more mad nazi atrocities worldwide. Apparently we have passed the test again! Here we go! I would like to see it go the other way with KSM in NYC. He killed Daniel Pearl. He really did plan WTCbomb the FBI(Salem ci) operation. If everything about Pak ISI and CIA and FBI running all the ops including killing Pearl that would take things back the other way. -Bob --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, John Stroebel john.stroe...@... wrote: They were arrested by OUR COUNTRY and illegally at that. They were denied ALL RIGHTS and were abused and tortured like we were Nazis. It was decided to try them. SINCE WHEN IS THE USA AGAINST TRIAL BY JURY? TO be so is COMPLETELY Unamerican. So since they are being tried in the USA THEY ARE ENTITLED TO ANY DEFENSE OF THEIR CHOOSING. Or do you wish to go against our Constitution? On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:01 PM, ruxpert homepu...@... wrote: *The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials*http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/20 November 20, 2009 by Salon.com Glenn Greenwald commentary: http://www.911blogger.com/node/21922 === *NYC 9/11 Trial Will Shine the Lights on the Roots of Terrorism*http://www.alternet.org/story/144014/ By Ray McGovern, Consortium News Posted on November 17, 2009, Printed on November 21, 2009 http://www.alternet.org/story/144014/ commentary http://www.911blogger.com/node/21923 == Lawyer: 9/11 Defendants Want Platform For Viewshttp://www.911blogger.com/node/21932 http://www.911blogger.com/node/21932http://www.911blogger.com/node/21932 -- *video:* *Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed - The War on Truth* http://www.911blogger.com/node/16232 == Trial of the Century the Long Shadow of 9/11 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871
MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set
--- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, ruxpert homepu...@... wrote: dear Bob, Why continue to misdirect/confuse the initial subject (Mary's mistaken-assumption suggesting I posted a post I did not post) Just answering your question, that's all. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47843 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47847 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47853
Re: [cia-drugs] Re: The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials
Of the motels you have stayed at over the last 20 years or so what % do you think were run by Pakistanis? Why Remember John Walker in East Ocean View in Norfolk. What was he allowed to do? m The big picture of this type of self-corruption is that by using these high pressure shunts to pragmatism, all the Jack Bauer 24 we're the good guys let's John Wayne the evil incarnate terrorists with a lynch mob, the end result is looking out at the whole world with the same eyes and then we judge and jury millions of civilians to die under our wmd. Somebody makes money. We go on with those closed eyes thinking we're being pragmatic John Wayne against real bad guys. Nobody notices how many civilians we're killing. The argument against looking at how many civilians we're killing is that we have to kill one or two consummate bad guys, we absolutely have to, so whatever, ignore the collateral damage. That's only about profits. Domestically we kill a scapegoat now and then, but again, we trash a lot of innocent or nearly innocent people. Domestically that would take the form of non-violent drug-related crime. The high profile scapegoat always has to be alleged the sole perpetrator. That's part of the hypnotism. He has to be killed without really being proven guilty, or being proven guilty by lies, even if he was guilty, and then he has to be the sole perp, though that is NEVER true in these high profile show trials! Somehow that is part of corrupting people to carry on and judge and sentence thousands or even millions of civilians to die in Indonesia, Palestine, Lebanon July 2006, Iraq DU and white phosphorus, latin american death-squadding. If we can kill one man without a good trial and lying that he was the sole perp, then we have passed the psychological point of reference to do the dirty deeds for profit of a few all over the world. John Muhamed was some kind of bad guy but he was juiced in Virginia on the basis that the bullet went into the big hole and there was no small hole, but there was. He was placed at the scene of the crime by a woman perjuring herself to say that she saw him at a gas station a mile away. That is all just a measure of how corrupt we are and to what extent we have signed on for more mad nazi atrocities worldwide. Apparently we have passed the test again! Here we go! I would like to see it go the other way with KSM in NYC. He killed Daniel Pearl. He really did plan WTCbomb the FBI(Salem ci) operation. If everything about Pak ISI and CIA and FBI running all the ops including killing Pearl that would take things back the other way. -Bob --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, John Stroebel john.stroe...@... wrote: They were arrested by OUR COUNTRY and illegally at that. They were denied ALL RIGHTS and were abused and tortured like we were Nazis. It was decided to try them. SINCE WHEN IS THE USA AGAINST TRIAL BY JURY? TO be so is COMPLETELY Unamerican. So since they are being tried in the USA THEY ARE ENTITLED TO ANY DEFENSE OF THEIR CHOOSING. Or do you wish to go against our Constitution? On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:01 PM, ruxpert homepu...@... wrote: *The Administration Guts Its Own Argument for 9/11 Trials*http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/20 November 20, 2009 by Salon.com Glenn Greenwald commentary: http://www.911blogger.com/node/21922 === *NYC 9/11 Trial Will Shine the Lights on the Roots of Terrorism*http://www.alternet.org/story/144014/ By Ray McGovern, Consortium News Posted on November 17, 2009, Printed on November 21, 2009 http://www.alternet.org/story/144014/ commentary http://www.911blogger.com/node/21923 == Lawyer: 9/11 Defendants Want Platform For Viewshttp://www.911blogger.com/node/21932 http://www.911blogger.com/node/21932http://www.911blogger.com/node/21932 -- *video:* *Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed - The War on Truth* http://www.911blogger.com/node/16232 == Trial of the Century the Long Shadow of 9/11 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47871
Re: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set
dear Bob, Please note: 'The Answer' that you in fact provided regarding subject question: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47922 (rather than misdirect via 3 links you provide below) Please try to find embrace the integrity of literal accountability, so to more simply ascertain so to more simply admit the simple mistake/confusion/misdirection, so to better not 'need' to turn such into somethingk increasingly more corrupt, please; such would be much appreciated! thank you Please ;-) Literacy of Literal Accountability http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47822 - Original Message - From: muckblit To: cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:41 PM Subject: MARY/BOB, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Re: [cia-drugs] Re: First Earth Battalion and Temple of Set --- In cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com, ruxpert homepu...@... wrote: dear Bob, Why continue to misdirect/confuse the initial subject (Mary's mistaken-assumption suggesting I posted a post I did not post) Just answering your question, that's all. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47843 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47847 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/47853 Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM Yahoo! Groups Links
[cia-drugs] Jacob
Jacob, almost seventy, was in the midstages of Alzheimer's disease. A clinical psychologist by profession and a meditator for more than twenty years, he was well aware that his faculties were deteriorating. On occasion his mind would go totally blank; he would have no access to words for several minutes and become completely disoriented. He often forgot what he was doing and usually needed assistance with basic tasks-cutting his food, putting on clothes, bathing, getting from place to place. Jacob had occasionally given talks about Buddhism to local groups and had accepted an invitation to address a gathering of over a hundred meditation students. He arrived at the event feeling alert and eager to share the teachings he love. Taking his seat in front of the hall, Jacob looked out at the expectant faces before him . and suddenly he didn't know what he was supposed to say or do. He didn't know where he was or why he was there. All he knew was that his heart was pounding furiously and his mind was spinning in confusion. Putting his palms together at his heart, Jacob started naming out loud what was happening: Afraid, embarrassed, confused, feeling like I'm falling, powerless, shaking, sense of dying, sinking, lost. For several more minutes he sat, head slightly bowed, continuing to name his experience. As his body began to relax and his mind grew calmer, he also noted that aloud. At last Jacob lifted his head, looked slowly around at those gathered, and apologized. Many of the students were in tears. As one put it, No one has ever taught us like this. Your presence has been the deepest teaching. Rather than pushing away his experience and deepening his agitation, Jacob had the courage and training simply to name what he was aware of, and, most significantly, to bow to his experience. In some fundamental way he didn't create an adversary out of feelings of fear and confusion. *He didn't make anything wrong.* ~ from *Radical Acceptance: Embracing Your Life With the Heart of a Buddha,* by Tara Brach, Ph.D.
[cia-drugs] Mohler case, Ritual Abuse Podcasts http://smart-talks.podomatic.com/
Smart-Talks - Stop Ritual Abuse and Mind Control 2009 Conference Online Podcasts Lowell Routley 2009 – Dissociation and Time Management Hal Pepinsky 2009: Reflections of a Believer DeJoly LaBrier 2009: Life as a Onesie Shamai Currim 2009: From Victim to Survivor to Advocate Neil Brick 2009- Ritual Abuse: In the Trenches of the Stopping Child Abuse Movement _http://smart-talks.podomatic.com/_ (http://smart-talks.podomatic.com/) Many back Missouri incest suspect By Judy L. Thomas, Donald Bradley and Brian Burnes MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS 11/23/2009 KANSAS CITY Mohler's reputation as the strict but good patriarch would come crashing down. He's in jail now, after allegations from at least three grandchildren that sleepovers on his farm often meant incestuous rape, and that when granddaddy sang Itsy-Bitsy Spider, his hands ended up in wrong places. After allegations that their uncles wedded and bedded first-graders in a chicken coop and that their father did unspeakable things to them less than a mile from that little white church. Once the charges - 42 so far - were filed, it seemed the Mohler family was shattered as irreparably as the bad-memory jars the little girls purportedly buried and authorities earlier this month hoped to dig upYet all or nearly all six children of Burrell Ed Mohler Jr. gave credence to the tales of twisted family relationships, according to court documents. Nor did it help the senior Mohler's legal defense or public image as a grandfather when police hauled incest pornography out of his home in Independence, Mo. While some question the validity of the accusations, others may ask why authorities did not investigate earlier. In the 1980s or early '90s, at least some of the grandchildren reportedly went to their mother about the abuse, according to police documents. Instead of going to law enforcement, she told the head of her Mormon church. And nothing happened. An Overland Park, Kan., man, who once shared custody of his 7-year-old son with an ex-wife who married into the Mohler family, said he tried to alert the Lafayette County sheriff, the Missouri Division of Family Services and a court-appointed guardian to what he feared was happening at the Mohler place. I notified everybody I could notify in February 2000 about this. Then, three months ago, an Independence police detective told the man there were multiple victims, and my son was on the list. I said: 'You mean it took them nine years to figure this out?' Many of the allegations directed at the Mohlers defy what experts encounter in sex abuse situations - group encounters involving children within the same family are rare, primarily because they are less apt to be kept secret. Still, there are cases of incest being so ingrained in a household that, for some families, the act becomes normalized ... a family value, as common as Sunday dinners or watching football on TV, said Joseph Beck, a therapy director at Spofford Home, a Kansas City nonprofit that treats children with severe emotional problems. Although it's abnormal, it becomes, 'This is how we do things,' Beck said, adding that victims can be trained early in life not to trust the outside world. Clinicians widely believe that child molestation, especially within a household, is driven more by urges to be violent and exert power than act out instilled sexual practices. It's not about sex. It's about power and control, said Judith Ann Cohen, who specializes in child-rape cases at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh. A man who feels he is king of his castle gets to abuse his children because, well, you can if you're king of your castle. Beck agreed. Usually it revolves around a single patriarch of a family, the man in power. _http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/missouristatenews/story/2 7D98BFDEA8337BA86257677001848AB?OpenDocument_ (http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/missouristatenews/story/27D98BFDEA8337BA86257677001848A B?OpenDocument)
[cia-drugs] Variety of recent FED Legislation related videos
Ron Paul introduces HR1207 as a substitute to the Watt amendment during debate 11/19/2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_jd7E3Pno0 END THE FED - ACTION 11/22/2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-cR0i2YP3A Ron Paul's amendment to audit the Fed brought to voice vote 11/19/2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9PIZFAM9X4 Barney Frank on bringing Ron Paul's Fed Audit bill to committee 11/19/2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sc8XSxq1vxw Ron Paul rebuts criticisms of Federal Reserve audit during markup hearing 11/19/2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIszwajPmxU Ron Paul HR1207 Committee Debate on Watt Amendment: Alan Grayson 11/19/2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9CcdiNs5F8
[cia-drugs] CBS Reporter Blows the Lid Off the Swine Flu Media Hype and Hysteria
-- Forwarded message -- From: Dr. Mercola j...@mercola.com Date: Tue, Nov 24, 2009 Subject: Superstar CBS Reporter Blows the Lid Off the Swine Flu Media Hype and Hysteria video: Superstar CBS Reporter Blows the Lid Off the Swine Flu Media Hype and Hysteria http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/11/24/Superstar-CBS-Reporter-Blows-the-Lid-Off-the-Swine-Flu-Media-Hype-and-Hysteria.aspx === related: - From: Brasscheck TV Sent: November 20, 2009 Subject: Brasscheck TV: Deciphering the Swine Flu scam The most accurate, balanced, non-hysterical account of the ongoing government and media manufactured swine flu scam. video: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/735.html - Brasscheck
