[CTRL] Mankind's Unmentionable Secret
-Caveat Lector-
http://www.savethemales.ca/
Mankind's Unmentionable Secret
By Henry Makow, Ph.D.
What would you do?
A family counselor told me that a family's real problem is always the one that is unmentionable.
This applies to humanity today. We have a problem that haunts us but we can't utter its name.
The problem is that our money is created in the form of credit extended by a group of private bankers, who manufacture it out of thin air.
In other words, the United States has given its credit card to a foreign-based private cartel.
As a result, this cartel sets the agenda.
For example, the US finances Israel, which will be the headquarters of the bankers' world government and religion. The attack on Iraq and subsequently Iran is about building their "New World Order."
They try to make opposition to this neo feudal dictatorship a racial issue. They wish to portray resistance as Nazi-like "hatred" and ban it.
While Jews figure prominently, the bankers have intermarried and enlisted all other elites to such a degree that the race issue is a diversion. The New World Order is the latest stage of Western imperialism. (See "The Jewish Conspiracy is British Imperialism" http://www.savethemales.ca/000447.html )
If You Were a Rothschild
If you had the credit cards of the United States and other great nations, what would you do?
Buy the wife a new car and go to Disneyland?
If you had more ambition and fewer scruples, you would be tempted to set yourself up as God. This is what they have done for more than 200 years.
You would adopt a satanic philosophy (called "Illuminism") that justifies your God-like position and depicts the rest of humanity as cattle fit for herding, breeding and slaughter.
Then you would reorganize the world to serve your goals. This is the driving force behind all world events.
First, you would extend credit to your nominees who would buy most of the real wealth of the world for you.
The Rothschilds and their associates have done this. For example, their American front men were the Rockefellers and the Morgans.
You would reorganize the world to protect and expand your untenable position. The "New World Order" is basically a dictatorship of the super rich, most of whom are beholden to you.
You would foster idealistic-sounding political movements dedicated to "economic justice," "brotherhood" and "world government." These movements would infiltrate and overthrow your opposition. Communism is a prime example.
You would instigate a series of horrible wars to traumatize and dispirit mankind. The young would be slaughtered so nations would lack leaders able to organize resistance. The wars would also provide an excuse to set up your world dictatorship in the name of "peace."
You would cause depressions to further degrade people and make them obsessed with money and security. You would infiltrate the Christian church, discredit God and create "disenchanted, cold and heartless communities." ("Protocols of the Elders of Zion" IV http://www.savethemales.ca/000205.html )
You would control the political process by owning the means of communication. You would also control the education system.
You would fill these with misinformation, fads and trivia so people can't figure out what's really happening. You would hire sophisticated people to reassure the masses that talk of "conspiracy" is the domain of "right wing fanatics" and evidence to the contrary is always a "hoax."
(It doesn't matter that this conspiracy is arising before their eyes. The Illuminist symbol (pyramid and eye) is on their money! The Washington Monument is an Illuminist obelisk; the Statue of Liberty is the Illuminist Goddess Isis!)
You would distract humanity with sex and toys while you undermine their nations and families. Thus they will be too fat, dysfunctional and decadent to resist.
You would create a bogeyman like "terrorism" as an excuse to establish a massive security apparatus. This will deal with whatever sporadic resistance arises to your thinly veiled dictatorship.
All this they have done.
No wonder we are like children who cannot talk about incest.
Henry Makow Ph.D. is the inventor of the board game Scruples and the author of "A Long Way to go for a Date." His past articles exposing feminism and the new world order are on his website www.savethemales.ca He welcomes feedback at henryatsavethemales.ca Some of your messages will be posted anonymously.
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be
[CTRL] PORTER GOSS IS SKULL AND BONES
-Caveat Lector- http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com PORTER GOSS IS SKULL AND BONES Dr. Stan Montieith of Radio Liberty (http://www.radioliberty.com/) reported this week that the CIA designate to run the embattled intelligence agency is a member of the secret Yale cult, Skull and Bonesjust like George W. Bush and John Kerry. This provides significant additional evidence that no real reform of the agency is going to be forthcoming. The secret members of this insider group make a pact upon joining Skull and Bones to advance fellow conspirators into high government positions and provide immunity to each other when wrongdoing occurs. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The New Caesars
-Caveat Lector- http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/hart.html The new Caesars The Bush administration's empire building is trampling on who we are and were always meant to be -- a republic. - - - - - - - - - - - - By Gary Hart Aug. 18, 2004 | The cause of imperialism, weakened for a time by the fall of the European and Soviet empires, has found new advocates. The fact that the 21st century imperial power happens to be the United States of America, whose independence from colonialism was declared 228 years ago, seems not to matter. The neoconservatives' project to position the United States as the world's dominant power -- and to use that power to govern in venues chosen seemingly by them alone, and collectively where reasonably easy but unilaterally where necessary -- has been advanced and saluted. A careful review of the statements of President Bush and his administration up to the declaration of victory in Iraq yields little evidence of the true purpose of America's invasion. The world is now familiar with the arguments: Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction; Iraq has or will soon have a "nuclear capability"; Iraq harbors and supports terrorists planning attacks on the United States; Iraq itself is a threat to U.S. national security. All have proved untrue and are no longer offered as justification for America's "preventive" war on Iraq, an action with precedent in U.S. history possibly only in the Philippines more than a century ago. Today the president and his team offer the rationalization that deposing Saddam Hussein was necessary to achieve peace in the Middle East. This argument was never used in the run-up to war for the simple reason that it condoned an act of empire. Leave aside the fact that the argument is severely flawed, as subsequent history has shown. The United States is now bogged down in urban warfare against indigenous militias, a style of warfare for which it is largely unprepared and that causes unsustainable levels of civilian casualties. The war has substantially contributed to anti-American sentiments throughout the region and possibly throughout the Islamic world. Peace in the Middle East is now farther in the distance, not closer. The costs to U.S. taxpayers will ultimately exceed the $200 billion honestly predicted before the war by Bush economic advisor Lawrence Lindsey, who was fired for his candor. Somewhere between 35,000 and 50,000 civilian Iraqi casualties are also among the costs. Much more important to most Americans are the almost 10,000 U.S. combat and noncombat (including psychological) casualties. We don't know the exact number because the Pentagon will not release noncombat casualty figures and the "free" press does not seem capable of finding out. Before the war I predicted that if the Iraqi Republican Guard chose to fight in the cities, American casualties could mount to between 5,000 and 10,000. Gen. Barry McCaffrey predicted as many as 50,000 American casualties under these circumstances. We were both ridiculed by conservative editorial boards and commentators. Instead of the Republican Guard, we are now faced with religious militia carrying out the same strategy. Had the international legal standards for preemptive warfare been met, it could plausibly be argued that America's invasion of Iraq was not imperial in nature. That traditional standard permits preemptive action where a threat is "immediate and unavoidable," a standard clearly not met where Iraq is concerned. So, much else is at work here: the fanciful, but not idealistic, notion that the United States can invade and occupy a nation situated in the center of the complex and troubled Middle East, install a favorable democratic government, and use its position as friendly military occupier to condition the behavior of neighboring nations, introduce "democracy" at the point of a bayonet if necessary, and bring Middle Eastern combatants to the bargaining table. This project has at least two fatal flaws. It is an act of empire. And it was never disclosed to the American people so that they, acting in their capacity as popular sovereigns, could ratify it. Those who applaud this strategy include eminent British historian Niall Ferguson, who basically argues that America is an empire and ought just to get on with it, and writers such as Robert Kaplan, who, as an American, understands the difficulties of selling imperialism to a republican polity and therefore urges empire by "stealth." Why should we care one way or the other? The answer is simple. The United States cannot be simultaneously republic and empire. For evidence, see Rome (circa 65 B.C.). We salute the flag of the United States of America "and the Republic for which it stands." Since the time of the Greek city-states, republics have shared certain immutable qualities: civic virtue or citizen participation, popular sovereignty, resistance to corruption (by special interests) and a sense of the common good. Empires
[CTRL] The Star Chamber Is Back
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=3314 August 17, 2004 The Star Chamber Is Back by Paul Craig Roberts Are George Bush and Tony Blair building democracy in the Middle East or police states at home? There is no sign of democracy in Iraq. Bush has installed a puppet government backed up by U.S. military force. America's hamhanded occupation has resulted in large civilian casualties, prison tortures and a breakdown in public order. Domestic police states, however, are in evidence in the U.S. and UK. During the cold war, Western freedoms were favorably compared to the Soviet national identity card, which increased secret police efficiency. Today, UK Home Secretary David Blunkett says Englishmen are to be issued with national identity cards. This prompted UK Information Commissioner Richard Thomas to remark that the UK is "sleepwalking into a surveillance society." In the U.S. there are plans for identity cards complete with retina scans and DNA information. The biggest threat to freedom, however, is the full-scale assault on what 18th century English jurist William Blackstone called "the Rights of Englishmen" and Americans know as civil liberties. President George Bush and his Attorney General, John Ashcroft, have resurrected the "Star Chamber," made infamous by the Stuart kings in the 17th century for arbitrary, secret proceedings with no right of appeal. Today, American citizens can be arrested and held in secret indefinitely without being charged. The Bush administration has sacrificed the Bill of Rights to its "war on terror." As Elaine Cassel conclusively demonstrates in her forthcoming book, The War on Civil Liberties (Lawrence Hill Books), the "war on terror" is in truth a war on the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth amendments to the Constitution. Cassel shows that Bush and Ashcroft have mobilized patriotism against the Constitution. The coup, Cassel writes, "came when some staffer dreamed up the acronym USA PATRIOT (United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Act for a law that makes a mockery of constitutional protections. To be against the PATRIOT Act makes one unpatriotic." The PATRIOT Act defines terrorism so broadly that any act of protest or civil disobedience can be construed as "terrorism," a charge for which the government can hold a person indefinitely. Thus, the PATRIOT Act permits punishment without conviction. If you think you still live in a free society, consider: The PATRIOT Act overturns the attorney-client privilege, and attorneys who aggressively defend their clients can be indicted for "aiding and abetting terrorism." Internet service providers who move to quash government surveillance of their customers can be charged with "obstructing justice." Parents who object to airport security personnel dragging away a frightened child to be searched can be arrested for "obstructing a federal law enforcement officer." According to Cassel, regulations have been issued that permit federal prosecutors to override federal judges a gross breach of the separation of powers and a classic tool of 20th century police states. Indeed, Cassel herself might be subject to arrest "for aiding and abetting terrorists." Here is what Ashcroft told the Senate Judiciary Committee: "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: your tactics only aid terrorists for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve." Cassel dryly notes that September 11 was caused by intelligence failures, not by civil liberties. Yet, the government's response was to attack civil liberties. All of the police state measures were waiting on the shelf. September 11 was an excuse to grab unconstitutional power just as the Reichstag fire was for Hitler. Cassel says the fate of our free society rests with the judiciary. In her chapter, "The War in the Courts," she assesses whether courts are up to the challenge. Some are and some are not. Ironically, it is the conservative Republican judges who go along with the police state measures. So much for the old saw that we need a Republican president to save us from liberal judges. At the time Cassel's book went to press, the Supreme Court had yet to rule whether the government can indefinitely hold a person without charging him and bringing him to trial. After the Padilla and Hamdi decisions, Cassel concludes that the Court did not consent to being read out of the picture, but did nothing effective to defend civil liberties. Civil libertarian Harvey Silverglate concurs. Where do matters stand? We are all in Abu Ghraib now. If the government declares you "an enemy combatant" or a "material witness" you have no rights. The government can hold you forever without charges or until you admit to some offense in order to escape from isolation and from psychological and perhaps physical torture.
[CTRL] How did Golan Cipel become New Jersey's 'anti-terrorism' czar?
-Caveat Lector- http://antiwar.com/justin/ August 16, 2004 Sex, Lies, and Terrorism How did Golan Cipel become New Jersey's 'anti-terrorism' czar? by Justin Raimondo The self-"outing" of New Jersey Governor James McGreevey and his involvement with Golan Cipel, described as a 30-something Israeli "poet," soon degenerated into one of those the-personal-is-the-political soap operas Americans seem to revel in. After hearing McGreevey's now famous "I am a gay American" speech, some gushed that this put him right up there with rising Democratic star Obama Barack. Gay rights groups were quick to hail McGreevey for spilling his guts to the nation. No sooner had the Gay Guv finished filling us in on the details of his trauma-laden childhood and the burden of a life lived in the "closet," when every cable news station booker was dialing Arianna Huffington's number. Her image flooded the airwaves, and, as she intoned knowledgeably and interminably about the travails of a wife who has been left for a man, it seemed somehow appropriate that Arianna is one of those women who might be plausibly mistaken for a drag queen. The amalgamation of "news" into entertainment never seemed more vivid. But as I half-listened to the former Gingrich groupie-turned-limousine-lefty bibble on in heavily-accented psycho-babble, she suddenly blurted out the truth: "As the day progressed, it became clear that this was a story unfolding on so many levels only a Shakespearean drama or a Verdi opera could do justice to it. There was the personal, the political, possibly the legal, and who knows what else to be revealed by the time we get to Act Five." Act Two unfolded soon thereafter. Cipel denied being gay, and denied having consensual sex with McGreevey: he issued a brief statement through his lawyers that used the word "victim" at least three times. The McGreevey camp struck back, claiming that Cipel had demanded $50 million as the price of his silence, later lowering the price to $5 million, and then a mere $2 mil, with the negotiations continuing right up until minutes before McGreevey went before the cameras. Amid the voyeurism and vulgarity of this media circus, and hints of more revelations to come, I had to laugh out loud at Arianna's remark that the hiring of Cipel "only makes sense as a taxpayer-funded cry for help." McGreevey hiring his boytoy as the state's anti-terrorist chieftain less than a year after 9/11 no doubt makes sense to Arianna, and to the millions of romantic fiction fans for whom nothing is impossible when it comes to love. But for the rest of us, the question is obvious: if McGreevey had to give his boytoy a job, why appoint him to the crucially important post of anti-terror czar? Why not give him a cushy office job in some obscure state agency? Certainly that would have been less obvious, and, as it was, McGreevey did his best to render the appointment invisible. As the New York Times reports: "On Jan. 24, 2002, with great fanfare, Mr. McGreevey announced the creation of an office of counterterrorism and appointed Kathryn Flicker, a respected assistant attorney general, to the post. "But in late February, reporters discovered that there were two Homeland Security officials. Mr. Cipel, who listed Mr. McGreevey's largest contributor, the developer Charles Kushner, as the sponsor on his visa application, and was paid $30,000 a year for a public relations job with Mr. Kushner's company in 2000, had actually been hired, with no fanfare, on Jan. 15, a full week before Ms. Flicker." To characterize McGreevey's actions as "a taxpayer-funded cry for help" is one way of looking at it, but a simpler explanation is that he made the appointment because Cipel requested it. But why would the 35-year-old Israeli citizen, whom McGreevey had met on a trip to Israel in 2000, want it in the first place? Certainly Cipel made an effort to block anybody else from getting the job, as the local New Jersey media reported: "Sources close to the task force said Cipel also played a key role in persuading McGreevey not to tap former FBI chief Louis J. Freeh to head the state's Domestic Security Preparedness Task Force, which was created in October. Officials who served in the administration of former acting Gov. Donald T. DiFrancesco said Freeh had agreed to take the unpaid post if McGreevey approved. McGreevey declined to comment on Freeh. Several Democrats said Cipel had argued strongly against the choice, pointing out that the former FBI director would be a part-time volunteer when the governor wanted a full-time terror czar." Whether Cipel asked for the job, or not, McGreevey very much wanted him to have it, as Sandy McClure of the Gannett news agency first reported in December of 2002: "Using the terrorism attacks of Sept. 11 to justify the hiring, the governor's chief lawyer wrote a letter to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service on McGreevey's inauguration day, telling the federal agency that New
[CTRL] Israeli Sexpionage : The McGreevey, Condit and Clinton Affairs
-Caveat Lector- http://www.aztlan.net/israeli_sexpionage.htm Israeli Sexpionage : The McGreevey, Condit and Clinton Affairs by Ernesto Cienfuegos La Voz de Aztlan Los Angeles, Alta California - August 17, 2004 - (ACN) The current Governor James McGreevey homosexual scandal is actually the result of yet another Israeli sexpionage operation targeting "sexually loose" Democratic Party government officials. Two other recent operations, that should be fresh in the memories of the American people, are the Congressman Gary Condit and the President Bill Clinton affairs. In the parlance of the shadowy underworld of international espionage, the use of "sex" by foreign spies to obtain information or concessions from government officials is called "sexpionage". The sexual seduction of high level government officials by foreign spies is usually of the illicit category which provides foreign operatives the added advantage of being able to better bribe the targeted victims which may be married with children. The operation may involve compromising the government officials through the use of professional prostitutes, underage girls (or boys) or providing homosexual lovers to not yet "out-of-the-closet" targets, as was the case with Governor James McGreevey of New Jersey. Sexpionage has a very long history. One of the most notorious cases was that of a Dutch spy known as Mata Hari. The seductress was a "nude dancer" who operated as a double agent for both the French and German armies during World War I. The British Security Service claim that Mata Hari was a Jewess who's real name was Margaretha Geertruida Zelle. She was executed in 1917 by a French firing squad. A more recent "sexpionage" case occurred in 1963 in Great Britain. The scandal brought the entire Harold McMillan government down. The case involved the Secretary of State for War, John Dennis Profumo. Profumo, a Tory and a married man, was compromised by an illicit affair with a London cabaret showgirl by the name of Christine Keeler. The problem was that Christine Keeler was also sleeping with Eugene Ivanov, a naval attache at the Soviet Embassy. It was widely claimed, at the time, that Keeler was passing British defense secrets, obtained from Profumo, to the Soviets. Today, after the "Cold War against the Soviets" and the beginning of the "War of Civilizations against Islam", Israeli covert sexpionage operations are on the increase in the USA and around the globe. In fact, a significant number of ex-Soviet sexpionage agents of Jewish descent who once worked for the KGB and the Stasi, have emigrated to Israel. They now work for the Zionist government. These sexpionage agents were well trained in special Soviet spy schools, a practice that continues to this day in Israel. A secret training ground for these Zionist sexpionage agents is the Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa. Among the papers in the archives of the Israel Institute of Technology is one authored by Golan Cipel, Governor McGreevey's lover, titled "Shabtai Shavit Identified as Outgoing Mossad Chief". In the parlance of the Israeli intelligence services, female sexpionage agents are called "Swallows" and males who are trained to compromise women or other men are called "Ravens." Under this nomenclature, the Israeli who was former "Chief of Homeland Security" for New Jersey, Golan Cipel, can be properly called a "Raven", and the Jewesses Chandra Levy and Monica Lewinsky, which I will discuss later, can be called "Swallows". Zionist Israel places great importance in its "symbiotic" relationship with the USA. In fact, the State of Israel would be unable to exist without the vast amounts of aid, both military and social welfare, that is sent yearly to prop up the Zionist government. This total amount is estimated to be more than 5 Billion dollars per year. In addition, Israel survives and depends on critical technology transfers that are obtained both through cooperation and covertly. For example, Israel now possess thermonuclear bombs and missiles, thanks to an American Jew, Jonathan Pollard, who stole the "nuclear secrets" while working as a US Naval Analyst. Pollard, it was admitted by the Israeli government, was a MOSSAD spy. He is presently doing a life term in a US Federal Prison for his crime. The success and effectiveness of the Israel/USA symbiotic relationship depends on many factors. One is massive propaganda through the US based Zionist press that keeps the American people in a constant stupor about certain political and economic realities. Another is the near total subserviency of corrupt politicians, especially of the Democratic Party, who do not speak up because they are on the take. Another is the massive infiltration into government of what are nothing less than Israeli agents. Israeli agents in the Pentagon, for example, has caused the USA dearly in terms of the costs of the "War on Iraq" and in terms of its "hated image" around the world. Lastly, a factor that is very
[CTRL] Another Hate Crime Hoax Unveiled
-Caveat Lector- http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1click_id=24art_id=qw1092717362620B216 Man held for racist attack craved attention August 17 2004 at 04:49PM Lyon, France - A 24-year-old unemployed Frenchman has told investigators he desecrated a Jewish cemetery and attacked a man of North African origin with an axe because he craved media attention, judicial officials said on Monday. An investigating judge in Lyon put Michael Tronchon under investigation for "attempted murder with racist intent" and "degradation of property in a religious place". He turned himself in to police in Paris on Saturday and admitted the attack and the desecration, the officials said. "This is a man who is fascinated by the media. He read or watched everything that was reported about him," one source close to the investigation said. "You get the feeling that he gave himself up so he would be in the spotlight." Tronchon, who lived alone in a suburb of Lyon in eastern France, was driven by racism and a fascination with the media, said Lyon public prosecutor Xavier Richaud. "Our understanding is that he acted alone and is not linked directly to a group," Richaud told a news conference. "He is methodical, organised and openly and profoundly anti-Arab." Under a new anti-racism measure in France, Tronchon faces life in prison if found guilty of attempted murder with racist intent. Official investigation is one step short of pressing charges in France. Tronchon daubed swastikas and "SS" on 56 graves in the Jewish cemetery in Lyon last week after the axe attack on the North African man the week before attracted little press interest, Richaud said. The victim was seriously injured. More than 300 tombs or graves have been desecrated in eastern France since April - many in Jewish cemeteries but also some Muslim and a few Christian graves - despite a drive led by President Jacques Chirac to eradicate racism. In the latest desecration in France, vandals drew a swastika and wrote "death to the Jews" on a low wall in front of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris early on Saturday, the first such act in the French capital after the recent attacks in eastern France. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11
-Caveat Lector- http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2004/08/coincidence-theorists-guide-to-911.html The Coincidence Theorist's Guide to 9/11 I posted an earlier version of this last week at Democratic Underground. I've added a number of more entries, and links for all. Happy coincidenting! That governments have permitted terrorist acts against their own people, and have even themselves been perpetrators in order to find strategic advantage is quite likely true, but this is the United States we're talking about. That intelligence agencies, financiers, terrorists and narco-criminals have a long history together is well established, but the Nugan Hand Bank, BCCI, Banco Ambrosiano, the P2 Lodge, the CIA/Mafia anti-Castro/Kennedy alliance, Iran/Contra and the rest were a long time ago, so theres no need to rehash all that. That was then, this is now! That Jonathan Bushs Riggs Bank has been found guilty of laundering terrorist funds and fined a US-record $25 million must embarrass his nephew George, but it's still no justification for leaping to paranoid conclusions. That George Bush's brother Marvin sat on the board of the Kuwaiti-owned company which provided electronic security to the World Trade Centre, Dulles Airport and United Airlines means nothing more than you must admit those Bush boys have done alright for themselves. That George Bush found success as a businessman only after the investment of Osamas brother Salem and reputed al Qaeda financier Khalid bin Mahfouz is just one of those things - one of those crazy things. That Osama bin Laden is known to have been an asset of US foreign policy in no way implies he still is. That al Qaeda was active in the Balkan conflict, fighting on the same side as the US as recently as 1999, while the US protected its cells, is merely one of history's little aberrations. The claims of Michael Springman, State Department veteran of the Jeddah visa bureau, that the CIA ran the office and issued visas to al Qaeda members so they could receive training in the United States, sound like the sour grapes of someone who was fired for making such wild accusations. That one of George Bush's first acts as President, in January 2001, was to end the two-year deployment of attack submarines which were positioned within striking distance of al Qaeda's Afghanistan camps, even as the group's guilt for the Cole bombing was established, proves that a transition from one administration to the next is never an easy task. That so many influential figures in and close to the Bush White House had expressed, just a year before the attacks, the need for a "new Pearl Harbor" before their militarist ambitions could be fulfilled, demonstrates nothing more than the accidental virtue of being in the right place at the right time. That the company PTECH, founded by a Saudi financier placed on Americas Terrorist Watch List in October 2001, had access to the FAAs entire computer system for two years before the 9/11 attack, means he must not have been such a threat after all. That whistleblower Indira Singh was told to keep her mouth shut and forget what she learned when she took her concerns about PTECH to her employers and federal authorities, suggests she lacked the big picture. And that the Chief Auditor for JP Morgan Chase told Singh repeatedly, as she answered questions about who supplied her with what information, that "that person should be killed," suggests he should take an anger management seminar. That on May 8, 2001, Dick Cheney took upon himself the job of co-ordinating a response to domestic terror attacks even as he was crafting the administrations energy policy which bore implications for America's military, circumventing the established infrastructure and ignoring the recommendations of the Hart-Rudman report, merely shows the VP to be someone who finds it hard to delegate. That the standing order which covered the shooting down of hijacked aircraft was altered on June 1, 2001, taking discretion away from field commanders and placing it solely in the hands of the Secretary of Defense, is simply poor planning and unfortunate timing. Fortunately the error has been corrected, as the order was rescinded shortly after 9/11. That in the weeks before 9/11, FBI agent Colleen Rowley found her investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui so perversely thwarted that her colleagues joked that bin Laden had a mole at the FBI, proves the stress-relieving virtue of humour in the workplace. That Dave Frasca of the FBIs Radical Fundamentalist Unit received a promotion after quashing multiple, urgent requests for investigations into al Qaeda assets training at flight schools in the summer of 2001 does appear on the surface odd, but undoubtedly there's a good reason for it, quite possibly classified. That FBI informant Randy Glass, working an undercover sting, was told by Pakistani intelligence operatives that the World Trade Center towers were coming down, and that his repeated warnings
[CTRL] Video Link --- Tour Of Israel's Nuclear Weapons Factory
-Caveat Lector- http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/files/videos/Dimona.wmv Large file (29.3MB)...dial-uppers forget about it. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Finally! A Movie EXPOSES The Neocons!!
-Caveat Lector- http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski89.html Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear and the Selling of American Empire by Karen Kwiatkowski Better than anyone to date, the Canadian Media Education Foundation has quietly and accurately documented the most important history of 21st century thus far in their recent video and DVD release, Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear, and the Selling of American Empire. Hijacking Catastrophe is powerful, understated, straightforward and educational. In a single meticulously organized hour of evidence and analysis, viewers are treated to a thoughtful explanation of modern American empire, neo-conservatism as a driving force for the current Bush administration, and something I have not seen before, a real economic analysis of what is driving some of our current "global war on terror." The film examines the Bush Administrations investment in neo-conservatism, and the early, and already horrific, results. While past performance is no guarantee of future earnings, Hijacking Catastrophe shows exactly why Americas "new conservatism" is a pyramid scheme of inhumane proportions. The film examines eight aspects of the current situation of American foreign policy. The film provides an explanation for the obvious continuity between Cold War policies and those of the present. It examines long-term neoconservative thinking and how this peculiar version of Jacobin utopianism ascended from its rather inauspicious political roots. The film explores the dangerous territory of how the post 9-11 national shock was carefully cultivated by neoconservatives in Washington to support their own long-held objectives in the Middle East. Hijacking Catastrophe then documents the Pentagon and White House process of disinformation, exaggeration, and media-supported propaganda between 9-11 and Americas March 2003 invasion of Iraq. It describes the neoconservative vision of military dominance over a supine, energy-rich Middle East, not only for its own sake, but as a warning to other potential international rivals. Hijacking Catastrophe describes the cost of empire in a way so comprehensive that it becomes clear that neo-conservatism, as a foreign policy guide, comes with a very real moral, political and financial garnishment of every American, and of American children yet unborn. The cost is shown not only as a current financial outlay or in lives unlived on the part of soldiers and marines, but in terms of an alarming debt burden, loss of domestic freedom, the growing and invasive state, a permanent tattering of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. There are some critical darts thrown in the film, but the few that can be discerned relate to the facts. For example, the general lack of military experience among neo-conservatives is discussed in the context of their most interesting fascination with the use of military force, and their unbelievable disregard for the horrific cost of war both physically and psychologically, on our soldiers, on the purported battlefield enemy, and upon the countries in which they reside. Unlike the Michael Moore treatment in Fahrenheit 9-11, where images of the Deputy Secretary of Defense combing his hair with fresh spittle cheapen our horror while turning our stomachs, Hijacking Catastrophe is a working mans treatment of 21st century American foreign policy what it is, where it comes from, what it wants, what it costs, and how Americans might deal with it. In this regard, the final segments of the film focus on the need to fight fear domestically by engaging in a public debate on the war in Iraq, post 9-11 policies in general, and engendering a real national discussion about what America stands for and how she might more wisely relate to the world, and solve problems instead of creating them. Hijacking Catastrophe, in my view, has only one weakness, and that is the possibility that those who follow commentary may incorrectly conclude, because Noam Chomsky and Immanuel Wallerstein are among those interviewed, that this expos of the war in Iraq and neo-conservatism is from the political left. In a day and age when ex-Trotskyite democratic socialists, big government-huggers and naked empire-worshipers find a safe and happy home in the Republican Party a party once popularized as advocating small decentralized government at home and non-interference and trade abroad one might wonder if left, right and center are not pass. But for old-timers, the libertarian right, the American center, the military backbone, academia and economists are all represented, with interviews of Scott Ritter, Dan Ellsberg, Chalmers Johnson, Stan Goff, Ben Barber, Shadia Drury, Norm Mailer and Stan Goff and many others. Im there as well. When the video team came out to the farmhouse to ask me some questions, I didnt expect the net result of their work would be so informative, fair-minded, and at times, poignant. Parts of the film show my former
[CTRL] We The Protocols Right After All?
-Caveat Lector- http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2137 Maybe the Protocols were right after all? This websites comments follow Washington Post Says Iraq Coverage Flawed Associated Press - Thursday August 12, 2004 WASHINGTON - Editors at The Washington Post acknowledge they underplayed stories questioning President Bush's claims of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein in the months leading up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. In the story published Thursday in the newspaper, Post media critic Howard Kurtz writes that editors resisted stories that questioned whether Bush had evidence that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction. "We did our job but we didn't do enough, and I blame myself mightily for not pushing harder," assistant managing editor Bob Woodward says in the story. "We should have warned readers we had information that the basis for this was shakier" than many believed. Pentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks told Kurtz, "There was an attitude among editors: Look, we're going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?" Executive editor Leonard Downie Jr. said, "We were so focused on trying to figure out what the administration was doing that we were not giving the same play to people who said it wouldn't be a good idea to go to war and were questioning the administration's rationale." In his more-than-3,000-word story, Kurtz writes, "The result was coverage that, despite flashes of groundbreaking reporting, in hindsight looks strikingly one-sided at times." A number of critics have faulted the American news media for not being more skeptical about the Bush administration's claims before the beginning of the war in March 2003. In the year and a half since Saddam was toppled, U.S. troops have yet to discover any weapons of mass destruction. In a study published in March by the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland, researchers wrote: "If the White House acted like a WMD story was important, ... so too did the media. If the White House ignored a story (or an angle on a story), the media were likely to as well." In May, The New York Times criticized its own reporting on Iraq, saying it found "a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been" and acknowledging it sometimes "fell for misinformation" from exile Iraqi sources. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storyu=/ap/20040812/ap_on_re_us/post_iraq_coveragecid=519ncid=1480 COMMENT Rixon Stewart -- August 13, 2004 Admitting that coverage "was not as rigorous as it should have been" is all very well. It gives the impression that the mainstream media makes mistakes sometimes, but when alerted is honest about them and accountable. However, nothing could be further from the truth. What Woodward fails to acknowledge is that errors in reporting in the run up to the invasion were not confined to that one particular topic. They apply to media coverage across the whole spectrum of events; it is indeed the very nature of the beast. The media is used to shape and condition public perception on behalf of the media owners and a small, hidden ruling elite. Even if the media is ostensibly publicly owned, it still follows the same rules. For example there is no real difference in coverage between the British Broadcasting Corporation and any of its commercial rivals. They might have different priorities and reporters and slight nuances in tone and emphasis. But essentially the same picture is presented: be it of Iraqs Weapons of Mass Destruction or the latest terrorist outrage. In other words, there might be different media outlets but their coverage is all but interchangable. So the media has been caught out over Iraq and Bob Woodward says, in essence, "I'm sorry, we'll learn from our mistakes". But his apologies are meaningless and only divert attention from the media's role in the whole debacle, which was to prepare public opinion for the invasion of Iraq. Woodward's apologies notwithstanding, his admission is also an attempt to restore the media's beleaguered credibility. Now that it's served its purpose it will, given time, be able to perform a similar function in future. Or it will until people realise how the press and media in general are used to influence the public's perception of events. Here it is worth quoting from The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Despite being dismissed as an "Anti-Semitic forgery", they have nonetheless prefigured events long before they happened. So regardless of their origin, they are worth taking note of. According to The Protocols: the press "serves to excite and inflame those passions which are needed for our purposes." Like the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and his Weapons of Mass Destruction, which were prior to the invasion, a staple topic of the mainstream media. Protocol 12 continues: "I beg you to note that among those making attacks upon us will also be organs
[CTRL] Bush's CIA Pick 'Business as Usual'
-Caveat Lector- http://www.lewrockwell.com/ips/lobe119.html Bush's CIA Pick 'Business as Usual' by Jim Lobe After endorsing an appeal from the bipartisan 9/11 Commission to drastically overhaul the U.S. intelligence community, President George W. Bush on Tuesday nominated as his next director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) the longtime chair of a congressional panel that the commission called complacent in the run-up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The choice of Rep. Porter Goss, who has chaired the Intelligence Committee of the House of Representatives since 1996, drew skepticism from a number of sources, who said Goss' tenure had been marked primarily by his coziness with former CIA Director George Tenet, at least until the administration decided it would try to blame all its pre-war claims about Iraq on the agency. "When George Tenet announced his retirement I made it clear that I thought his replacement should be someone of unquestioned capability and independence who could restore the credibility of America's intelligence community," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the ranking opposition Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which must now hold confirmation hearings on the Goss nomination. "I said then and I still believe that the selection of a politician any politician, from any party is a mistake," Rockefeller added, noting that the nominee "will need to answer tough questions about his record and his position on reform, including questions on the independence of the leader of the intelligence community." Others were more blunt. Stansfield Turner, the CIA director under former President Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) described the nomination as the "worst in the history of the post," while Mel Goodman, a former top CIA analyst, currently at the Center for International Policy (CIP), said the Florida congressman "has all the wrong credentials," including a nine-year stint in the 1960s as a covert CIA operative in Latin America and Europe. Still others described Goss as a "cat's paw" for Vice President Dick Cheney, whose office, according to a number of retired intelligence officials, played a key role in corrupting the intelligence process in the run-up to Washington's attack on Iraq in March 2003. The nomination, which is also for the position of director of central intelligence (DCI), comes amid an increasingly intense debate sparked by the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission to urgently reorganize the intelligence community in light of its total failure, despite numerous opportunities, to detect and prevent the 9/11 attacks. The most far-reaching of the proposals include the creation of a White House-based national intelligence director (NID) who would allocate the $40-billion-a-year budget among the 15 different agencies that make up the intelligence community, and hire and fire the directors of each one. While the DCI is supposed to oversee all 15 agencies, only the CIA falls under his direct control, and about 90 percent of the intelligence budget goes to agencies that are controlled by the Pentagon. After considerable pressure from the 9/11 Commission itself, Bush accepted the notion of creating a NID but rejected giving the post such far-reaching powers. His reaction drew scorn from reform proponents in Congress, which last month created a special committee to draft legislation that would put most of the commission's proposals into practice. The fact that the intelligence community's future is so uncertain made Goss' nomination for a position whose job description may be substantially altered in the coming months particularly remarkable, especially because the administration recently retreated from signs that it was in a hurry to replace Tenet with a political appointee. But White House concern that Bush would be blamed for not providing new leadership to the flagship spy agency in the event that a new terrorist attack takes place on U.S. territory before the November elections apparently forced the decision. Having nominated Goss, the administration would be able to shift blame onto the Democrats if a terrorist attack does in fact occur and its nominee has not yet been confirmed. Goss, who has long been mentioned as a leading candidate for the job and has actively campaigned for it, has spent 16 years in the House, where he acquired a reputation as a relatively moderate Republican and Bush family loyalist who was primarily interested in intelligence and the environment. Like Bush himself, Goss, who is 65, was born into wealth in Connecticut and graduated from Yale University before joining the CIA. First as a member and then chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Goss made himself a champion of the CIA and Tenet on Capitol Hill, until the moment in June when Tenet announced his resignation and then Goss transformed himself virtually overnight into one of the agency's fiercest and most partisan critics. That "abrupt shift," as the
[CTRL] 'Speak Hebrew or shut up'
-Caveat Lector- http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1280376,00.html 'Speak Hebrew or shut up' Israel's official code of ethics says troops can only use force if threatened. But at a checkpoint near Nablus, Israeli author Etgar Keret witnessed another code of behaviour in operation... Wednesday August 11, 2004 The Guardian A few days ago, the philosopher Assa Kasher, who had just finalised the Israel Defence Force's Code of Ethics, paid me a visit on the television screen in the dentist's waiting room and explained to me, in a nutshell, how it really works. The Code of Ethics, if I understood it right, says that a soldier can exert force and, under certain circumstances, can even cause suffering if he does it to protect his own safety or the safety of the citizens of Israel. An elderly woman sitting next to me, even more bored than I was, stared at the screen and said that was very good and if she wasn't mistaken, the IDF was the only army in the world to take the trouble to "commission", in her words, a code like that, and not from just any hack, but from a university professor.If, two weeks earlier, I hadn't gone to the Haware checkpoint, not far from Nablus, I probably would have been quick to agree with her. After all, I was brought up to agree with elderly women. But during that purely chance visit to the checkpoint, more the result of a weak character and my girlfriend's nagging than anything else, I saw a different, rival code, one that might be a little less ethical, but works like a charm. We can call it Udi's Practical Code. Udi was the checkpoint commander at Haware that day, and his Code was very simple - smiling people don't get through. Of course, he didn't formulate it as a Code - it worked more as intuition - but more than once I heard him and his buddies at the checkpoint exchanging intelligence information on all sorts of smilers in the queue. "You see that guy over there, the tall one with the tie?" I heard a soldier say to Udi, "Do you see how he's laughing at us? Don't worry, I'll wipe that smile off his face." Udi nodded his agreement, and the smiler was in fact detained for more than an hour. When he tried to show them the permit that would justify his smile - he was just a man on his way to his own wedding - it was already too late. A happy father who had bought his three-year-old son a birthday cake imprinted with a picture of the child had also violated the code and was detained. The official reason - he didn't wait in line like everyone else. When I tried to explain that the people in the queue had let the father get ahead of them because the cream cake would spoil if he waited in the heat, Udi gave me a smile, and from behind the barrel of his gun, which was pointed in the general direction of my chest, explained that he didn't give a shit. Not a very surprising statement considering that an hour earlier he had been just as stingy with his shit when he ignored the distress of a 70-year-old man who had been discharged from the hospital that day after heart surgery and was finding it difficult to stand in the hot sun for such a long time. There are a lot more clauses in Udi's Practical Code. When a Palestinian student tried to explain to him in English something about a permit he had in his hand, Udi clarified, "This is Israel, so you either speak Hebrew or you shut your mouth." The student immediately recognised the Code he had come up against, and because he didn't know Hebrew, he took the second option, shut his mouth, and was detained for four hours. Udi's Code, by the way, also has a few pointers about Hebrew-speaking Palestinians, especially the ones who argue. I saw him cock his gun, point it at the head of a Palestinian who was talking without permission, and say, "If you don't shut your mouth, you'll get a bullet in the head." And the talkative Palestinian shut his mouth, too, because a Code is a Code. The day after the interview with Professor Kasher on the daily TV news magazine, the host on that programme talked about a soldier who had hit a Palestinian he claimed had called him a liar and then shot and wounded him while he was trying to get away. I don't know that soldier's name, but I can assure you it's not Udi. Because Udi's no idiot. And like a few other soldiers, he knows how to put his Code into effect so it doesn't conflict with the IDF Code. If you are a decent, sensitive person, the IDF won't force you to torture people unnecessarily, but if you are an asshole and you have a good enough grasp of how the system operates, you can abuse to your heart's content without exceeding accepted levels of detaining and cursing, or threatening with a cocked gun, and without getting on the TV news magazine. When I mentioned everything Udi had done that day to his commanding officer - the one the Palestinians called "the good officer," mostly because of his thin-framed glasses and his psychotherapist tone of voice - he nodded empathetically and said that
[CTRL] The Eyes Have It --- Prying in a Terrorized World
-Caveat Lector- http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0432/lee.php Justice Beat by Chisun Lee The Eyes Have It Prying in a Terrorized World August 11 - 17, 2004 ith each new terror update, the tension between security and privacy grows tauter. It seems nuts, in this period of potential helicopter and limo hijackings, to say that government should not engage in every conceivable means of surveillance that might yield any information whatsoever about possible terrorist activity. But the sticky aspect of life in this free country is, the government really isnt supposed to do that. The feds face limits on how far they can snoop, because otherwise democracy starts to look like totalitarianism. In a report released August 9, the American Civil Liberties Union makes the case for personal privacy to a public that is probably less panicked about data mining than about dirty bombs. (Indeed, the tone of the report is very "ACLU" and thus likely to put off or possibly confuse people who are not ardent card carriers. For example, one passage blown up in big print reads, "Law enforcement is increasingly forward-lookingtrying not just to solve crimes but to anticipate and prevent them." Somehow that doesnt sound so horrible at the moment.) But skeptics should check out the 131 footnotes, which mostly avoid editorializing and lay out some primary documents that are difficult to argue with. The overall point of "The Surveillance-Industrial Complex": Through increasing collaboration with the private sector, the federal government has vastly expanded its ability to pry into the lives of ordinary Americans. And an important subsidiary point: Probably more because of carelessness than malice, there is no knowing precisely where all this collected intelligence will end up, or how it might get used far down the line. The report is mainly a compilation of existing news items and discoveries by other rights groups (like the Electronic Privacy Information Center). But by coalescing this material, the authors accentuate the scope of the increase in personal data probingan expansion that might otherwise go unnoticed. Some of the many interesting details: InfraGard is "a partnership between the FBI and private corporations" aimed at encouraging information sharing between government and more than 10,000 profit-driven entities. "The list of participating companies is kept secret," according to the report. == In the month following the 2001 terrorist attacks, nearly 200 colleges and universities turned over private information on their students to the FBI, most without being compelled by any legal requirement. == One particular Internet service provider received 16,000 subpoenasorders to produce informationfrom law enforcement in 2002. ISPs, of course, maintain information on peoples surfing and chats. == The National Security Agency operates a program called "Novel Intelligence From Massive Data," about which "little is known." == Many aspects of the USA Patriot Act raise privacy concernsas the ACLU has doggedly stressedand the Bush administration has just as doggedly denied. == The sophistication of potential privacy invasion can seem overwhelming. But just learning about and forming an opinion on the issues is a major step in self-defense. For, as with all of the 9-11related rights and liberties debates, the key question surrounding privacy is political, not technical. After all, any law can be abused. And most people, lacking the time or paranoia, probably wont go to the trouble of installing all the cookie busters, encryption tools, and firewalls necessary to keep out prying government eyes. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Voice Of The White House 8/9/04
-Caveat Lector- http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2131 The Voice of the White House August 9, 2004 TBR News August 9, 2004 In previous issues, we carried comments from a reporter assigned to the White House press corps. Some of these remarks, most especially one about Bushs physical and mental problems, drew an enormous number of viewers and hundreds of inquiries, most especially from foreign press entities. The reporter advised us by email that there was rampant fury in the White House and security was becoming very tight. As a result of this, he decided to lay low for a few weeks and see how the wind was blowing. Yesterday, he sent us the following material which we are now posting. Some of it is outrageous in the extreme but to date, no one has proven him wrong. August 6, 2004: This is going to be the filthiest Presidential campaign in history, bar none. We get serious pep talks from mid-level and even senior White House staff members. Most of these are sick, vicious people who are like the type Hitler loved. (A nice nickname in my newsroom for the Prez is Adolf Bush. My senior editor said, Hitler had his Poland and Bush has his Iraq.) Bush started out filled with arrogance but now he and his boys are running very scared. Real, not faked, polls show him with a below 20% approval rating! They are going to put out a release on Kerry claiming his dad was CIA (which he was) and then tie this to the 9/11 intelligence failings. Remember the Robert Hansen case? The senior FBI official who worked for the Russians? You may not know this but Hansen was the top FBI computer man with access to all the US intelligence systems. He spied on DIA, CIA, the Pentagon, the White House, of course the FBI and a host of other agencies tied in to the DoJ computer system. He became a good personal friend of Judge Freeh which caused that worthy to take a very early retirement. Believe me, this man knew everything, I mean everything, and passed it all on to the Russians. And did you know that the Russians sold him back to the US for double what they had paid him over the years? The CIA bribed an SVR official to give them the dirt on H. just to embarrass the FBI (who had in turn embarrassed them over Ames) If the Company hadnt done this, H. would still be draining away all of our top secret data and passing it to Moscow. The FBI had no intentions of outing him because of the embarrassment and in-house efforts to track down a suspected more were severely discouraged by Freeh himself! These people all hate each other and are not, repeat not, going to work together. They have told Bush to fx*! off with his Intelligence Czar nonsense and that will go nowhere, believe me. Beltway turf wars are bloodier than the Tarawa campaign and there are no prisoners taken. The CIA is threatening to release the bank account information (the black accounts, not the white ones) of top Bush people who have hundreds of millions of stolen bucks stashed in Swiss and offshore banks. The price of silence on this fun and games is to give up any idea, genuine or not, of revamping the Intelligence community. On the other hand, several other alphabet agencies are planning to ambush senior CIA operatives with really nasty leakage. Murders and drug connections are prominent. Someone with CIA -connections is now outing gay Republicans in public and this is causing spastic colon here. So many straight and respectable men are trembling in their clubs now. There are more practicing gays among the Republicans than there are in the entire Frisco Castro district and that is saying something. Bush Co had better be careful about their pit bull attacks on Kerry because that is a sword that cuts both ways. I will send you under separate cover a list of the bank accounts. Everyone is leaking everything now and its a reporters paradise on earth. The barn is on fire and the frantic rats are biting each other trying to escape! Look for some really big-name defections soon.. www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1040.htm#001 www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research
[CTRL] Israel's underground passport factory a threat to US national security
-Caveat Lector- http://antiwar.com/justin/ August 6, 2004 Passport to Terror Israel's underground passport factory a threat to US national security by Justin Raimondo In the world of international terrorism, both privatized and state-sponsored, passports and other identity papers are the coin of the realm. Terrorists targeting America are particularly eager to get their hot little hands on Canadian and New Zealand passports, for a number of reasons, most especially because the holders don't need visas across a wide swathe of the globe, including the United States. Now, as the orange alerts have us wondering when and where the next terrorist strike on American soil will occur, and U.S., British, and Pakistani agents bust up an important Al Qaeda operation, discovering how the terrorists procure travel documents provides important clues as to how they operate and with whose complicity. In April I wrote about the "passport farm" Israeli agents set up in New Zealand, in which four employees of the Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, were caught trying to obtain a New Zealand passport in the name of a housebound paraplegic. (I updated the story here.) Uriel Kelman and Eli Cara were arrested, in a much-publicized case, and jailed, while Prime Minister Helen Clark openly raged against what was undoubtedly an Israeli intelligence operation. Since then there have been a few rather interesting, albeit ominous, developments. It turns out that the ringleader, Ze'ev William Barkan, who fled before New Zealand security could nab him, was and presumably still is a member of the Israeli diplomatic corps, having served at embassies in Vienna and Brussels. He was last seen in North Korea, traveling with a Canadian passport as "Kevin Hunter," where he turned up in Pyongyang as a "consultant" brought on to help the North Korean government build a "security fence" in order to keep their people in. Now that the East Germans have wound up in history's dustbin, the Israelis are the current experts in the field. Barkan is a man of many skills, and one of them, according to an aid worker cited by the Sydney Morning Herald, is this: "'He goes to Laos, Cambodia, Burma and Thailand and deals with gangs who rob tourists of their valuables and passports,' the aid worker said. 'Barkan is mostly interested in passports and there have been a number of Australian passports.' Intelligence analysts in New Zealand believe Barkan, a former navy diver in the Israeli Defence Force, was trying to secure a 'clean' passport for use in a sensitive Israeli undercover operation in the region, less risky than a forged passport." The inner workings of Barkan's New Zealand operation were exposed when the fourth suspect in the case, Tony Resnick, was outed. Mr. Resnick, 35, who fled the day after the arrest of Kelman and Caras, was a paramedic with the St. John Ambulance in Auckland before taking a job as a healthcare lecturer at the Auckland University of Technology. He had previously worked as a paramedic in Israel, and, in his capacity as a paramedic in New Zealand, had possibly visited the home of the targeted paraplegic [be sure to click on this link if you have broadband! And then go here for the fascinating follow-up]. Using Resnick's connections to wheelchair-bound and otherwise incapacitated New Zealanders, Barkan's cabal targeted people who would not likely be traveling abroad, and set up a passport farm by stealing their identities. The Israelis were caught by a suspicious official, who checked their references and laid a trap. But the question that is no doubt haunting the government of New Zealand is how many times did they succeed before they were caught and to what purpose was Israel culling travel documents? The answer to this last question is discernible if we look at Israel's record in this regard. The botched assassination of Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in Jordan caught the Israelis with their pants down on the passport issue: the assassins were outfitted with Canadian travel documents. This incident no doubt came to mind as New Zealand government officials contemplated the meaning and purpose of Israel's underground passport factory. Speaking of Canada, the story of the Mossad's New Zealand hijinks took a Canadian twist when that country's foreign ministry announced that it was investigating the matter of Barkan's passport. New Zealand's foreign minister, Phil Goff, replied: "I have read with interest the Canadians are following up allegations he may have traveled at some point on a stolen Canadian passport. When he came to New Zealand my understanding was he was travelling on a U.S. passport. Clearly there would be co-operation between police forces in different countries to try to get to the bottom of these things." So there's an American twist, too. Barkan reportedly had an American accent, and said he came from Washington, D.C., where his family supposedly was in the "windows and doors" business. The
[CTRL] Attacking Neo-Cons From the Right
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=3248 August 5, 2004 Attacking Neo-Cons From the Right by Jim Lobe Why did the Bush administration invade Iraq? Most left-wing critics epitomized perhaps by Michael Moore's blockbuster documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11 have rather reflexively argued that the economic factor, particularly the interests of Big Oil or "the ruling class," must have been decisive. But many right-wing critics, who know the ruling class from the inside, lean to a different explanation, in part by pointing out that Big Oil, to the extent it took any position at all on the war, opposed it. As evidence, they cite the unusual public opposition to a unilateral invasion voiced quite publicly by such eminent, oil and ruling class-related influentials as the national security adviser under former President George H.W. Bush, Brent Scowcroft, and his secretary of state, James Baker. While they do not deny that some economic interests construction giants, like Halliburton and Bechtel, and high-tech arms companies might have given the push to war some momentum, the decisive factor in their view was ideological, and the ideology, neoconservative." Powered by both Jewish and non-Jewish neoconservatives centered in the offices of Pentagon Chief Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney and by White House deference to the solidly pro-Zionist Christian Right, the neoconservative worldview dedicated to the security of Israel and the primacy of military power in a world of good and evil emerged after 9/11 as the driving force in the foreign policy of current President George W Bush, as well as the dominant narrative in a cowed and complacent mass media. Neoconservatives their worldview, history, networks, strategic alliances, and their role in moving Washington to war in Iraq, as well as the dangerous consequences of their policy prescriptions are the subject of America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge University Press), by far the best study of the neoconservative movement and its relevance to Bush's "war on terror" in the flood of critical books that have poured forth in the aftermath of the Iraq War. The two authors, Stefan Halper, a U.S. policy-maker under past Republican administrations who teaches at Cambridge, and Jonathan Clarke, a retired British diplomat currently based at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank here, describe their political perspective as "center-right." The fortuitous combination of their nationalities and politics helps make their critique particularly compelling in light of the neoconservatives' exaltation of the special "Anglo-American" alliance as the great redemptive force in the world, as it was under British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in World War II. "We set out to demystify the neoconservatives," the authors write at the outset of the book, and over the following 369 pages, including some 1,300 footnotes, they largely succeed. Their motivation is clear from the outset: while consistently measured and reasoned in their tone, Halper and Clarke are clearly outraged that the neoconservative foreign policy pursued by this administration has put Washington's greatest strategic asset its "moral authority" at risk. The book includes well-told, if somewhat familiar, accounts of how the neoconservatives used their many institutional bases, such as the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board (DPB), their formidable political savvy in Congress; their bureaucratic skills within the administration; their ties to the mainstream media, particularly those outlets such as Rupert Murdoch's media empire led by Fox News and the Weekly Standard, right-wing radio talk shows, and the Wall Street Journal editorial page that eagerly recycled their ideas; and their longstanding alliance with the Christian Right to create an "echo chamber" that succeeded in moving public debate after the 9/11 attacks toward the threats allegedly posed by Iraq and the necessity of war against it. Where the book breaks new ground, however, is in its efforts to describe the origins of the neoconservative movement, its ups and downs over the course of the past 40 years, its core beliefs and why it poses serious threats to both U.S. interests as traditionally defined by conservatives and to the health of U.S. democracy itself. To Halper and Clarke, the neoconservative worldview revolves around three basic themes: that "the human condition is defined as a choice between good and evil"; that military power and the willingness to use it are the fundamental determinants in relations between states; and that the Middle East and "'global Islam" should be the primary focus in U.S. foreign policy. These core beliefs create certain predispositions: analyzing foreign policy in terms of "black-and-white, absolute moral categories"; espousing the "unipolar" power of
[CTRL] Sen. Shelby Leaked Classified Intel
-Caveat Lector- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40886-2004Aug4.html Investigators Concluded Shelby Leaked Message Justice Dept. Declined To Prosecute Case By Allan Lengel and Dana Priest Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, August 5, 2004; Page A17 Federal investigators concluded that Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) divulged classified intercepted messages to the media when he was on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, according to sources familiar with the probe. Specifically, Fox News chief political correspondent Carl Cameron confirmed to FBI investigators that Shelby verbally divulged the information to him during a June 19, 2002, interview, minutes after Shelby's committee had been given the information in a classified briefing, according to the sources, who declined to be identified because of the sensitive nature of the case. Cameron did not air the material. Moments after Shelby spoke with Cameron, he met with CNN reporter Dana Bash, and about half an hour after that, CNN broadcast the material, the sources said. CNN cited "two congressional sources" in its report. The FBI and the U.S. attorney's office pursued the case, and a grand jury was empaneled, but nobody has been charged with any crime. Last month it was revealed that the Justice Department had decided to forgo a criminal prosecution, at least for now, and turned the matter over to the Senate Ethics Committee. The Justice Department declined to comment on why it was no longer pursuing the matter criminally. The Senate ethics panel also declined to comment on its investigation. Yesterday, Shelby's press secretary, Virginia Davis, issued this statement: "Senator Shelby served as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee for eight years and as Chairman for five and a half years. He has a full understanding of the importance of protecting our nation's secrets, and he has never knowingly compromised classified information. He is unaware of any evidence to the contrary. "This matter has been under investigation for two years. The Justice Department has not taken any action other than, only recently, to refer the matter to the Senate Ethics Committee. Other than the letter from the Ethics Committee describing the subject of the reference in general terms, Senator Shelby has not been informed of any specific allegations. He looks forward to the opportunity to respond to the Committee's concerns at the appropriate time." The disclosure involved two messages that were intercepted by the National Security Agency on the eve of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks but were not translated until Sept. 12. The Arabic-language messages said "The match is about to begin" and "Tomorrow is zero hour." The Washington Post, citing senior U.S. intelligence officials, reported the same messages in its June 20, 2002, editions. National security officials were outraged by the leak, and moments after the CNN broadcast a CIA official chastised committee members who had by then reconvened to continue the closed-door hearing. Intelligence officials, who consider intercepted communications among the most closely guarded secrets, said the breach proved that Congress could not be trusted with classified information. But experts in electronic surveillance said the information about the NSA's intercepts contained nothing harmful because it did not reveal the source of the information or the methods used to gather it. Vice President Cheney upbraided the Senate and House committee chairmen in separate phone calls the next day, and White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said President Bush had deep concerns about "anything that could harm our ability to maintain sources and methods, and anything that could interfere with America's ability to fight the war on terrorism." The panels' chairmen, Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), responded immediately by requesting a Justice Department investigation into the disclosure, an unusual move that brought criticism from other members of Congress. The FBI asked 17 senators to turn over phone records, appointment calendars and schedules. The FBI probe included an interview with a staff member on the intelligence committee who said that Shelby was trying to leak the information to show the shortcomings of the intelligence community, the sources said. Shelby had called repeatedly for the resignation of then-CIA Director George J. Tenet, whom he said was not up to the job. Cameron confirmed this week that FBI agents interviewed him on several occasions and asked whether Shelby leaked the information to him. He said they also asked if he saw the senator walk off with CNN's Bash after talking to him. "Yes, the FBI and the Justice Department came to me to ask me all that information," he said. "I will confirm to you that I was asked all those questions." But he said he told investigators, "What doesn't go on the air I don't discuss, and we don't disclose our
[CTRL] Bush Sharon: The Oil Connection
-Caveat Lector- http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2004/0405bushsharonoil.html FPIF Commentary Bush Sharon: The Oil Connection By Conn Hallinan | May 26, 2004 Editor: John Gershman, Interhemispheric Resource Center (IRC) Foreign Policy In Focus www.fpif.org On its face, President George Bushs recent endorsement of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharons land grab in the occupied territories makes little sense. The plan, under which Israel would abandon Gaza while permanently annexing most of the West Bank, has met with almost universal condemnation. It has stirred rage in the Arab world, where, according to U.S. ally Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, there exists a hatred of Americans never equaled in the region. European Union (EU) foreign policy spokesperson, Brian Cowen, said that the EU will not recognize any change to the pre-1967 borders other than those arrived at by agreement of the parties. A letter by 52 former senior British diplomats called Prime Minister Tony Blairs support for Washington on this issue, one-sided and illegal, and predicted it will cost yet more Israeli and Palestinian blood. A Financial Times editorial called the letter the most stinging rebuke ever to a British government by its foreign policy establishment. At a time when the U.S. is desperate for an international bailout in Iraq, why would the White House go out of its way to alienate allies? The most popular explanations are: The influence of pro-Israeli lobbies, and a Republican strategy to woo Jewish voters and money away from the Democrats; A bow to the Bush Administrations Christian Evangelical wing, which is rabidly pro-Israel because it is convinced the Second Coming is upon us. There is no question that pleasing evangelicals is an Administration priority, and certainly Republicans would like to cut into traditional Jewish support for the Democrats. But this explanation assumes that foreign policy is all about partisan politics and God. Bush certainly has the inside track with evangelicals. However, there is virtually no difference between Republicans and Democrats on Israel. If anything, the latter are slightly more hawkish. There is a simpler explanation for the White Houses posture, one the Administration laid out four months after taking office. In May, 2001, Vice-President Dick Cheneys National Energy Policy Development Group recommended that the President make energy security a priority of our trade and foreign policy. U.S. Policy and Oil The recommendation was hardly a bolt from the blue, and the Republicans didnt invent the idea. The recent move of oil companies and the U.S. military into Central Asia is a case in point. It was President Bill Clinton, not George W. Bush, who crafted that strategy. It was not the Republicans who brought Halliburton and Cheney into the Caspian region, but Clinton advisor Richard Morningstar, now a John Kerry point man. A flood of future Bush Administration heavies followed in Cheneys wake. Condolezza Rice helped ChevronTexaco nail down drilling rights for Kazakhstans Tenez oil fields. James Baker, who pulled off Bushs Great Florida Election steal, helped British Petroleum get into the area. When it comes to oil, partisan politics stop at the U.S. coastline. And if it is about oil, its about the Middle East. Oil production in the US, Mexico, and the North Sea is declining, and a recent study by the University of Uppsala in Sweden suggests reserves may be far smaller than the 18 trillion barrels the industry presently projects. If the new figure of 3.5 trillion barrels is correct, sometime between 2010 and 2020, worldwide production will begin to decline. Given that most oil geologists think there are few, if any, undiscovered resources left, that decline is likely to be permanent. So the price of oilnow $41.65 a barrel, a jump of $32 since 1997may not be a temporary spike. World pumping capacity is going full throttle, but a combination of economic growth, coupled with cash shortages for investment, have kept supplies tight. Only during the Iranian revolution and the Iran-Iraq War did oil cost more. With U.S. consumption projected to increase 1/3 over the next 20 yearstwo-thirds of which will be imported by 2020the name of the game is reserves. The bulk of those reserves lie in the Middle East. Between Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, the Gulf States control 65 percent of the worlds reserves, or close to 600 billion barrels. In comparison, the U.S. reserves are a little under 23 billion. Whoever controls these reserves essentially controls the worlds economy. Consider for a moment if the U.S. were to use its power in the Middle East and its growing influence in Central Asia to tighten oil supplies to the exploding Chinese economy. China presently uses only 8 percent of the worlds oil, and accounts for 37 percent of consumption growth. Lest anyone think this scenario is paranoid, try re-reading President Bushs
[CTRL] The Bush Bash
-Caveat Lector- http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese103.html The Bush Bash by Charley Reese Books keep pouring off the presses on the subject of why George W. Bush should not be re-elected. I got four in my mailbox recently. Bush might be the biggest boon to book publishing since Harry Potter. The most serious of the four books is The Bubble of American Supremacy, by George Soros. The most superficial is Bush Must Go, by TV personality Bill Press. The most left-wing is The Book on Bush: How George W. (Mis)leads America, by Eric Alterman and Mark Green. It is also the most tedious. My God, but progressive writers do need a sense of humor. The best of the bunch by far is The Bush Betrayal, by one of my favorite writers, James Bovard. Bovard is a scrupulously accurate researcher of facts. His philosophical framework is the same as that of Thomas Jefferson. Press, Alterman and Green are mad at Bush for being too far to the right for their socialist tastes. Bovard points out Bush's betrayal of conservative and libertarian principles. Though far more leftist than Bovard, Soros also points out Bush's betrayal of the principles of an open society. Bovard, however, in addition to being a fine writer, has not allowed the mess in Washington to plunge him into pessimism. He can still see the humor in much of the mayhem, goofiness and outright stupidity that characterizes so much of government bureaucracy. His tactic is to quote Bush or Bush's step-and-fetchers and then simply point out the great gap between what Bush and his people say and what the facts are. These gaps are so many and so deep that one can fairly conclude that nothing Bush ever says should be taken at face value. Like Bovard, I deeply resent a phony conservative a politician who talks one way and acts exactly the opposite. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney might fairly be called reactionaries, but they are not conservatives in the traditional sense of that word. Being a big spender, a despoiler of the environment, a fearmonger, an ally-alienator, a reckless warmonger and an imperialist does not qualify for the title "conservative." Practicing secrecy and deception and displaying an open contempt for the Constitution and international law are likewise not the characteristics of a conservative. As Bovard says: "Dying for Bush's lies should not be considered a lofty cause. ... Bush is still expecting to be cheered and revered for his courage in 'making a tough decision.' It is as if the more Americans who die for Bush's folly, the more undeniable his greatness becomes." Bovard's suggestion, in case we are misfortunate enough to have Bush for four more years, is to greet his grandiose delusions with catcalls and laughter. Bush, he says, is as qualified to talk about freedom as Bill Clinton is to talk about chastity. An enormous factual database exists documenting the folly of the Bush administration not only in these books but in others that have been published. Clearly the job of president is over Bush's head. He has proven himself to be dangerously incompetent. He has surrounded himself with ideologues totally disconnected from reality. The Pentagon's Paul Wolfowitz, considered the architect of the Iraq War, showed in recent testimony before Congress that he had no idea how many American lives had been lost. So much for this administration's concern for the troops. Bush's re-election depends entirely on willful ignorance. He might well ride the sea of ignorance right back into the White House. It would not be the first time Americans have chosen the demagogue over the competent. But if you intend to vote for Bush, you should at least read the record and not depend on the Republican propaganda machine. The current Republican Party's almost total reliance on character assassination, guilt by association and outright distortions of the truth remind one of what was going on in the 1930s in Europe. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory
[CTRL] PLAN DAISY
-Caveat Lector- http://www.muslimamerica.net/lf/plandazy.htm Plan Daisy Article Censored by Moderator "Mr Nuke Buzzcut" at LibertyForum.Org A tempest is raging at the Web's premiere Libertarian discussion forum. Here is some biased explanation. [From a post to Liberty Forum:] Every discussion forum on the Web is monitored by Israeli loyalists. This is an organized and, where necessary, supported effort that is perfectly reasonable given the situation of Jews and Israel in the world not only today, but throughout history. Just as the ADL and the JDL and other organizations are properly watchful for those inimical for whatever reason to the well-being of Jews, and are very good at what they do, so we have among us at Liberty Forum not only those who advocate Israel's interests but those who simply watch for dangers. I support this, I have never not supported it, and firmly advocate that any discrete and identifiable grouping on whatever basis of association should do likewise. What people do with what they learn is another question altogether, the world is full of danger for everybody and everybody should stay on watch for it. There is nothing "tinfoil hat" about it, ask any mother whether she feels right in ignoring the possibility of dangers to her babies. And if she has to sneak around and eavesdrop when her daughter is talking on the phone to the guy next door who looks to everybody else like a saint, then more power to her. I pretty much ignore the possibility of dangers to myself, but only because I've physically watched assassination attempts collapse literally on my doorstep, and every attack on me in the last thirty-five years fail ludicrously and quite often backfire. But I still look around when I step outside, just out of habit. It's a good habit. I have a cordial relationship with Leon Gralnik, who fields the Meshuryan team at Microsoft Networks in their discussion groups related to Middle East issues ~ right out in the open, "Meshuryan" is in his signature and it has the same definition in Hebrew and in Arabic, it's hasbara and agitprop. Leon is an expert, and he's surrounded by extremely competent people. Whenever a discussion begins concerning Israeli atrocities in Palestine, or corruption of American foreign policy in favor of Israeli state terrorism in Palestine or financing or arming it, he and his crew can bring such a flood of obscure details, disinformation reports that opponents are challenged to "disprove" with their own research, and complete and total confusion to the discussion, that they derail just about everything that might disclose something about Israeli state terrorism. They're very good, and they're there twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, with direct lines to the moderators (one of them is a moderator), to protect Israel's image from the realities unknown to the American people. I had a long conversation there with a grandmother working in the GOI Information offices in Tel Aviv (i.e., Mossad). I have a friendly correspondence with the webmaster head of the Jewish Defense Organization, who links to my website and to a newspaper article about me that was linked here at Liberty Forum (I think by Down_South) and has posted some of what I have written to him on their website. One of my former neighbors, whose boys were running buddies with my sons, was a veteran of the Jewish Defense League, and we had pleasant conversations. I support the Jewish organizations that attempt to arm every Jew in America. I'm very big on self-sufficiency when it comes to being able to resist attack and tyranny, for everybody and especially for those who realize the importance of that. And I have a great respect for people who can come together to organize their advocacy in a public discussion forum, and Liberty Forum's Israeli loyalists certainly include some very capable individuals. We even talk to each other privately because each respects the other's right to believe according to his own lights. We prefer not to meet alone in dark alleys, but I would no more harm a faithful Jew treacherously than I would lay a hand on a muslim. And I think my experience supports the belief that my "enemies" are also faithful to their own beliefs. We are arrayed in the marketplace of ideas, each advocating a fervently-held vision of humanity. God Alone will decide what comes of it, "we" are the faithful of all persuasions, and we are all vigilant against the enemies of God and the destroyers of humanity. One of the distinguishing characteristics of Liberty Forum, however, is that such vigilance against dangers to the forum itself is prohibited or, at best, reserved exclusively to [site owner] John Deere himself as and when he feels a need to examine something brought to his attention. Unlike all other discussion forums there is no "nanny brigade" in place at Liberty Forum to arrest discussion that could prove contentious,
[CTRL] The Voice of the White House August 2, 2004
-Caveat Lector- www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1031.htm The Voice of the White House August 2, 2004 TBR News - August 2, 2004 In previous issues, we carried comments from a reporter assigned to the White House press corps. Some of these remarks, most especially one about Bushs physical and mental problems, drew an enormous number of viewers and hundreds of inquiries, most especially from foreign press entities. The reporter advised us by email that there was rampant fury in the White House and security was becoming very tight. As a result of this, he decided to lay low for a few weeks and see how the wind was blowing. Yesterday, he sent us the following material which we are now posting. Some of it is outrageous in the extreme but to date, no one has proven him wrong. July 29, 2004 First there was your posting of my notes on our sick President and then Capitol Hill Blue just did another number on the same theme. You can imagine the mess around the Monkey Palace today! Now, it appears that there are at least three stool pigeons loose here and they have brought in the FBI and the Secret Service to do damage control. Bush is almost literally foaming, Karl Rove and other great lights are threatening the Patriot Act against anyone who is caught! This is a wartime Presidency and anyone passing out secrets will be charged! is the word. All phones are tapped now and all laptops are rudely grabbed and checked for notes, harmless secretaries are bullied and threatened with lie detector tests. In fact, the Head Monkey now want all White House personnel given lie detector tests every week! You can imagine how good this is for morale! Iraq is a mess; Powell says we are in it to stay and that is not a good omen for the November elections. Brother Jeb is setting up another fraud in Florida even though the major media is being very informative. They do not care around here. Legal or illegal, if it will get Bush elected again and guarantee all of them their power-trip jobs, everything and anything goes. Believe me, I know many of the lesser ones around here and the Capitol Hill reportage is accurate and devastating to the entire staff. I understand they are really going in for the lie detector scam and have set up a room in the basement just for this. I am told they are warning the staff that they either take tests or get fired with vague but sinister warnings about violations of national security and long stretches in cells at Atlanta for those who wont make things easy and confess. I and others are not employees and my editor says if they even try that with us, the media will rise up in a body and hang Bush on a White House tree! July 30, 2004 A junior staffer told me this one. It seems her daughter had been injured in a car accident. It was nothing serious and she told no one here about it. One of the senior staff came into her office and asked how her daughter was doing. The woman had only once mentioned this and that on her office telephone to her sister. She compared notes with others and discovered that all incoming and outgoing routine calls are taped and monitored. Ashcroft has been suggesting to the President that somehow the dissident voices in this country need to be silenced. Ashcroft in conjunction with Army Military Police units have prepared a scenario about how to clamp down iron controls here. I have seen a copy of this, which has not been adopted but it does show a mind-set. Certain internet sites should be closed down. These are sites that actively promote : anti-Bush remarks or support abortion, globalism, secular humanism, Satanism, homosexuality, anti-Semitism, or that are anti-Christian, or pro-Muslim and who are critical of such Republican luminary nuts as Tom DeLay and Ashcroft himself. The arrest and expulsion of all Muslim residents of the United States including Americans who may have converted is a strong Ashcroft suggestion. Ashcroft views the Muslim faith as Satanic and evil and claims that the expulsion of these people will start the healing processes in America. Ashcroft strongly dislikes African-Americans as well but there is nothing about putting them back in the cotton fields or deporting them. As a Jew, I was delighted to see that Jews would be tolerated and encouraged but with the understanding that they would all convert to Christianity within a given period of time. Maybe Bush and Ashcroft will take a page from Hitler and make all Muslims wear a yellow crescent on their coats! This has very serious implications for me especially as a Jew whose grandparents were harassed and chased out of Germany in 1936, Do you realize that these people are stone nuts? That the President is a nasty, pill-popping sick man who hates everyone and especially anyone who dares to criticize him or any of his policies? At one time, and I have been a witness to this, Bush could be very outgoing and pleasant with staff but not now. Mean looking and snappish with everyone, he uses really filthy language
[CTRL] Children killed by Israeli fire
-Caveat Lector- http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,10349408%5E1702,00.html Children killed by Israeli fire >From correspondents in Gaza City 05aug04 THREE Palestinians, including two children, were shot dead and nearly 20 wounded early today as Israel stepped up a deadly campaign to end militant rocket attacks launched from the northern Gaza Strip. As Israel bolstered its forces in the northern town of Jabaliya, nine-year-old Mohammed Hisham Salem died after being hit by a bullet in the chest, Palestinian medical sources said. Family members identified him as a son of a senior member of the radical Islamic Jihad movement and said he was from Beit Lahiya, just north of Jabaliya. Minutes earlier, 17-year-old Wael Abul Jedyan also died after being hit in the chest by an Israeli bullet when soldiers opened fire from a tank. Earlier in the day, Kassem al-Mutawaq, 18, was also shot dead by soldiers manning tanks inside the centre of Jabaliya, witnesses said. Hospital sources said a total of 25 Palestinians had been wounded during the Jabaliya raid. Twenty were suffering from gunshot wounds, seven of whom were said to be in serious condition. Five more were wounded when Israeli helicopter gunships launched two separate air raids in and around the small town. An army spokesman said troops had opened fire from the ground and from an overflying helicopter on two separate groups of youths who were seen trying to set up and launch two Qassam rockets from the area. "Troops identified several hits," he said, adding that at least one of the rockets had also been destroyed. But he denied that any missiles had been fired from a helicopter. In reference to the earlier incident, he said soldiers had opened fire at three gunmen and hit one of them. Army chief of staff General Moshe Yaalon said troops would remain in the area as long as rocket attacks continued. "As long as the Palestinians fire Qassam rocket towards Israeli areas, we will reinforce and enlarge our activities on the ground to not only prevent these attacks but also to strike the workshops and manufacturers," he said. Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz has given the army carte blanche to put an end to the firing of Qassam rockets after they caused the death of two Israelis in the southern Israeli town of Sderot in late June. But so far the operation around Jabaliya and the nearby town of Beit Hanun has failed to end the strikes. Military radio said that 60 Qassams had been fired from northern Gaza since the start of the offensive, 42 of which landed in Israeli territory. Further violence in the southern Gaza town of Rafah saw another Palestinian shot dead by Israeli forces and another three wounded, one seriously. Jihad el-Bess, a 20-year-old civilian, was killed during an Israeli operation to uncover cross-border weapons smuggling tunnels, medical sources said. Troops in Rafah said they had discovered a 10-metre deep tunnel concealed underneath a house which was later demolished. Today's violence raised the overall toll since the September 2000 start of the Palestinian intifada, or uprising, to 4218 people killed, including 3221 Palestinians and 926 Israelis. Under terms of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan, Israel is due to completely withdraw from Gaza by the end of next year, but the territory has become increasingly volatile in recent weeks with armed groups vying for power ahead of the pullout. As a result of the violence and the recent intra-Palestinian clashes, the UN relief agency for Palestinian refugees (UNWRA) decided temporarily to move all international staff at its Gaza City headquarters to Amman. "Faced with a further escalation in the level of insecurity faced by UNRWA staff, I have decided to relocate temporarily to Amman all remaining international staff working at UNRWA headquarters with the exception of my own office and that of the deputy commissioner-general," UNRWA chief Peter Hansen said. The move would affect 19 staff, a spokesman said. Meanwhile in Cairo, a Hamas delegation led by overall leader Khaled Meshaal was expected to meet Egyptian officials later today to discuss an Egyptian plan to provide security in the Gaza Strip after the Israeli pullout. Cairo has offered to send up to 200 police officers to train a 30,000-strong Palestinian force to maintain law and order after the withdrawal. In other violence, a 29-year-old Palestinian civilian was shot dead during exchanges of fire between an Israeli undercover unit and Palestinian militants in the northern West Bank town of Nablus, security and medical sources said. Awad Hashash was shot in the head when the clashes broke out in central Nablus, the sources said. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy
[CTRL] Iraqi Oil To Israel? What A Shocker!
-Caveat Lector- Published on Monday, August 25, 2003 by Ha'aretz (Israel) US Checking Possibility of Pumping Oil from Northern Iraq to Haifa, via Jordan by Amiram Cohen The United States has asked Israel to check the possibility of pumping oil from Iraq to the oil refineries in Haifa. The request came in a telegram last week from a senior Pentagon official to a top Foreign Ministry official in Jerusalem. The Prime Minister's Office, which views the pipeline to Haifa as a "bonus" the U.S. could give to Israel in return for its unequivocal support for the American-led campaign in Iraq, had asked the Americans for the official telegram. The new pipeline would take oil from the Kirkuk area, where some 40 percent of Iraqi oil is produced, and transport it via Mosul, and then across Jordan to Israel. The U.S. telegram included a request for a cost estimate for repairing the Mosul-Haifa pipeline that was in use prior to 1948. During the War of Independence, the Iraqis stopped the flow of oil to Haifa and the pipeline fell into disrepair over the years. The National Infrastructure Ministry has recently conducted research indicating that construction of a 42-inch diameter pipeline between Kirkuk and Haifa would cost about $400,000 per kilometer. The old Mosul-Haifa pipeline was only 8 inches in diameter. National Infrastructure Minister Yosef Paritzky said yesterday that the port of Haifa is an attractive destination for Iraqi oil and that he plans to discuss this matter with the U.S. secretary of energy during his planned visit to Washington next month. Paritzky added that the plan depends on Jordan's consent and that Jordan would receive a transit fee for allowing the oil to piped through its territory. The minister noted, however, that "due to pan-Arab concerns, it will be hard for the Jordanians to agree to the flow of Iraqi oil via Jordan and Israel." Sources in Jerusalem confirmed yesterday that the Americans are looking into the possibility of laying a new pipeline via Jordan and Israel. (There is also a pipeline running via Syria that has not been used in some three decades.) Iraqi oil is now being transported via Turkey to a small Mediterranean port near the Syrian border. The transit fee collected by Turkey is an important source of revenue for the country. This line has been damaged by sabotage twice in recent weeks and is presently out of service. In response to rumors about the possible Kirkuk-Mosul-Haifa pipeline, Turkey has warned Israel that it would regard this development as a serious blow to Turkish-Israeli relations. Sources in Jerusalem suggest that the American hints about the alternative pipeline are part of an attempt to apply pressure on Turkey. Iraq is one of the world's largest oil producers, with the potential of reaching about 2.5 million barrels a day. Oil exports were halted after the Gulf War in 1991 and then were allowed again on a limited basis (1.5 million barrels per day) to finance the import of food and medicines. Iraq is currently exporting several hundred thousand barrels of oil per day. During his visit to Washington in about two weeks, Paritzky also plans to discuss the possibility of U.S. and international assistance for joint Israeli-Palestinian projects in the areas of energy and infrastructure, natural gas, desalination and electricity. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] 20 Months and 585 Pages Wasted Your Government at Work for You!
-Caveat Lector- http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski88.html 20 Months and 585 Pages Wasted Your Government at Work for You! by Karen Kwiatkowski Reading through the official 9/11 report, I quickly lost my focus apparently emulating the 9/11 commission over the past 20 months. The prequel of 9-11 gets the novella treatment, the intended chills and thrills landing somewhat flat. The aftermath of the attack features heroism and dedication, performance under fire and stress. Good stuff, but weve seen it before in far more detail, long before the overdue commission report. The report also provides abbreviated and sweetly presented 9-11 event timelines apparently still being debated in spite of being sold for $10 each by the Government Printing Office. The report might have been original in its recommendations, yet even these mirror last months "How We Went to War in Iraq on False Pretenses, Part I." More bureaucracy, more centralization, more superficial accountability and no real accountability. Failing government agencies and departments should have been eliminated. Industries, like those relating to public air transportation, should have been brutally weaned from the federal teat. Numerous senior bureaucrats should have lost their jobs. Instead, we augmented and poured funds into the poor performers, increased the federal coddling of the transportation industry, and added new bureaucratic layers typified by the Department of Homeland Security, so everyone gets their piece of the tax- and debt-funded action. The 9/11 Commission "discovered" the main problem is not technology or information or even leadership it was the government rule-set. The rules they used didnt allow our Jabba the Hutt commanders in Washington to properly predict and then respond to the millions of possibilities that constitute daily reality. If only the government could have more rules and regulations, more mandates and controls, if only we could centralize control, things would be much better, so says the 9/11 Commission. One wonders if the entire commission wasnt secretly replaced by pod people from the old Soviet Central Committee. I navely expected more constructive and useful information in the report. A detailed discussion of FBI whistleblower Coleen Rowley and how her observations and actions led to change would be nice. She merited a brief mention in footnote 94. That is all. I expected to hear how WTC 7 collapsed. The leaseholder of the building told the media it was "pulled." I expected to see more discussion of the mechanics of that presumably unplanned demolition in the evening of 9-11 as well as the collapse of the both 110-story towers, both impacted differently, both falling almost identically. Do we have an engineering design flaw no one knew about? It didnt come up in the report. The Commission concluded that the FAA was not really capable of giving the military what it needed to know. Things have certainly gone downhill since 1999, when Payne Stewarts twin engine Learjet quietly drifted off its flight plan, and was escorted by military jets from Eglin AFB and Tyndall AFB in Florida, ANG out of Tulsa, and out of Fargo, for several hours across several states before it ran out of gas and crashed in South Dakota. The difference was that Stewart was just a guy in a single private plane off course with no explanation, while on 9-11, it was one, no two, wait three, I mean four jumbo passenger jets. Unlike Stewarts plane which simply left its flight plan and was unresponsive, the FAA actually had hijack warning on AA 11 at 8:19 a.m., UA 175 at 8:52 a.m. After two hijack warnings, AA 77 made an unauthorized turn at 8:54 a.m. The Herndon Control Center knew UA 93 was hijacked at 9:34 a.m. The commission reports the first fighter jets from Otis ANG Base were scrambled for AA 11 thirty-four minutes after the first hijack alert and again, from Langley AFB, a half hour or so later. At 10:38, fighter jets from Andrews AFB were airborne. None had a visual on any of the four planes plane until it was too late. In 1999, more military jets were on the job watching a lone Learjet over the Midwest than in the 2001 response to multiple hijacks on the densely populated East Coast. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz should have both been fired at the time, saving us the trouble and expense of criminal trials for their roles in fomenting the unjustified and gratuitous Iraq war. The report refers to the many cell phone calls that were made from the speeding airplanes, yet most people who have tried to do this find that reception, cell switching software, and other factors often prevent even a connection, much less a conversation. The 9/11 commission should have taken the opportunity to clear up that technological debate. It did not. Why were the only gas stations mentioned those where terrorists were spotted before 9-11 and not the Citgo directly in line with the Flight path of AA 77 as it aimed for the Pentagon?
[CTRL] Jewish Journalists Grapple W/ Doing The Write Thing...
-Caveat Lector- http://www.jewishsf.com/bk011123/us16.shtml Jewish Journalists Grapple with 'doing the write thing.' DO Jewish journalists have more obligations than others? Are they responsible first to their communities, and do they need to represent Israel in their newspapers? These questions and others were raised by the 50 participants of 'Do the Write Thing,' a special program for student journalists sponsored by the Jewish Agency for Israel and the World Zionist Organization at the General Assembly of the United Jewish Communities held here last week ... 'On campus there is already so much anti-Israeli sentiment that we have to be careful about any additional criticism against Israel,' said Marita Gringaus, who used to write for Arizona State University's newspaper. 'This is our responsibility as Jews, which obviously contradicts our responsibilities as journalists.' Gringaus explained her position by saying that in the campus media, 'groups are set against each other rather than as objective views.' Uzi Safanov, a writer at the Seawanhaka newspaper of Long Island University in New York, agreed. 'I'm a Jew before being a journalist, before someone pays me to write,' he said. 'If I find a negative thing about Israel, I will not print it and I will sink into why did it happen and what can I do to change it.' Safanov said that even if he eventually wrote about negative incidents that happen in Israel, he would try to find the way 'to shift the blame.' Others among the participants felt uncomfortable with these suggestions. "They reinforce that, as Jews in the media, you have responsibly to help Israel. This is not reporting; this is PR," she said. "I am Zionist, but it doesn't mean you can't be critical of what happens in Israel." Still, Meyers feels a loyalty to Jewish values. "It doesn't matter if you are a journalist or in another profession," she said. "Our Jewish values influence every aspect of our lives. Nobody can be totally objective because we all come with our own perspective, our own biases, and that is going to come through in the writing." Leni Reiss, the American Jewish Press Association liaison to the conference, said one can never be 100 percent objective, "but (as a Jew) you can bring your unique knowledge, your unique sensitivity to the job that you do, and it's not necessarily a bad thing." www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] VANUNU SPEAKS
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/vanunu.html VANUNU SPEAKS Israeli Nuclear Whistleblower Risks Jail to Talk Exclusively to AFP By Christopher Bollyn Mordechai Vanunu, Israels most famous dissident free after 18 years in prison, is ready to defy the severe restrictions imposed upon him by the Israeli military and tell the western media everything he knows about the Middle Easts largest secret arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. However, because the hidden stockpiles belong to Israel, no American news outlet is interested in discussing this, except American Free Press. I have sacrificed my freedom and risked my life in order to expose the danger of nuclear weapons, which threaten this whole region, Vanunu said in an exclusive interview with American Free Press on July 28. Vanunu spent 18 years in an Israeli prison11 and a half of them in solitary confinementfor providing evidence of Israels nuclear arsenal to a British newspaper in 1986. I acted on behalf of all citizens and all of humanity, said Vanunu. In October 1986, Vanunu, a nuclear technician who had worked at the Dimona Nuclear Power Plant in the Negev Desert for 10 years, traveled to London and gave photographic evidence to The Sunday Times that Israel was secretly developing nuclear weapons. Two months earlier he had converted to Christianity while traveling in Australia. After having learned about the secret production of plutonium for nuclear weapons at Dimona, in 1985 Vanunu believed it was his responsibility to inform the citizens of the world that an arsenal of nuclear weapons was being created in Israel. Vanunu provided evidence and described how Israel had built an arsenal of over 200 nuclear bombs and neutron bombs. Before The Timess story was even published, however, Vanunu had been lured to Rome and kidnapped by Israeli secret service agents. A secret trial followed, and Vanunu was locked in a tiny, windowless cell for more than a decade. When Vanunu was released from an Israeli prison on April 21, the Israeli military authorities imposed severe restrictions on his freedom. He is banned from leaving the country, confined to an assigned residence and denied the right to be in contact with journalists or foreigners. The human rights organization Amnesty International (AI) protested the restrictions imposed on Vanunu saying on April 19: Vanunu must not be subject to arbitrary restrictions and violations of his fundamental rights on the basis of pretexts or suspicions about what he may do in the future. The restrictions on Vanunus movement, speech and association violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Israel has ratified and is obliged to uphold, according to AI. While Israeli officials contend the restrictions are to prevent Vanunu from divulging information about Israels nuclear arsenal, AI sees it differently: Israels determination to curtail Vanunus freedom and contact with the outside world seem to be intended to prevent him from revealing details of his abduction by Israeli secret service agents 18 years ago in Rome in what was clearly an unlawful act, AI said. According to Jonathan Cook of The Guardian in Britain, Vanunus brother, Meir, who lives with him at St. Georges, says there is another motive for the restrictions and confinement of Israels most famous dissident: Vanunus release brings attention to Israels nuclear arsenal at precisely the moment when the justification for attacking Saddam Husseins Iraqhis possession of weapons of mass destructionis shown to have been hollow. If Vanunu were free to talk, he might remind the world that the greatest threat to Middle East peace comes not from Baghdad but from Tel Aviv, Cook wrote. That is a message neither America nor Britain wants to hear right now. The same controlled U.S. media networks that sent embedded reporters into combat in Iraq and published false reports about that nations alleged weapons of mass destruction, are seemingly afraid to go to St. Georges Cathedral in East Jerusalem and interview Vanunu, Israels most famous dissident and peace activist, for fear of crossing a line drawn by the Israeli military. American Free Press, however, and the London-based Arabic language newspaper Al Hayat have interviewed Vanunu recently from St. Georges, where he has sought asylum in the Anglican church compound a short distance from the U.S. Consulate in East Jerusalem. BEHIND THE JFK ASSASSINATION Comments made by Vanunu during an interview with Al Hayats weekly magazine Al Wassat, published on July 25, made headlines around the world but were completely ignored in the United States, where they could have caused immense political damage to Israel. As The Jerusalem Posts article headline read, Vanunu: Israel behind JFK assassination. Russias Pravda article of July 27 began: Israel may be implicated in the biggest crime of the past century, which took place in Dallas in 1963. Irans Tehran Times, writing from
[CTRL] Israel's Secret War Against America
-Caveat Lector- http://www.liesexposed.net/nfp/issue0207/secwar.htm Israel's Secret War Against America In December of 2001, Fox News publicized a little known truth about the Israeli intelligence network. Fox News correspondent Carl Cameron reported to Brit Hume that approximately 60 Israeli intelligence officers were arrested and detained for questioning about the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center. According to sources, since the broadcast of the program, Fox News pulled the transcripts from theirs and related websites under pressure. A quick search of the Fox News website at foxnews. com, shows no reference to the story except one article from March 08, 2002, which begins: "News that a group of Israelis detained by the United States may have had prior knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks and not shared it with the U.S., 'Suspected Israeli Spies Held by U.S.,' provoked a rapid but divided response from readers. Readers expressed many views on the different sides of the issue. While some said Israel should not be spying on the U.S. because of they [sic] are an ally, others feel that Israel's intentions were compatible with U.S. interests - to seek out Arab terrorists." What follows that quote on the website are several letters defending the Jews, save a few, one of which reads: "I think the Israel Moussad (sic) knew about 9-11, they have the best spy organization in the world. They had knowledge and failed to warn those who have been their only friends. I think you are on the right track by investigating this." Other websites publishing transcripts from the broadcast report that Carl Cameron further stated that prior to the arrest, detention, and/or deportation of some 60 Israelis who allegedly had prior knowledge information regarding 9-11, another group of 140 Israelis were arrested "in what the government documents describe as 'an organized intelligence gathering operation,' designed to 'penetrate government facilities.'" Most of the detainees had served in the military in Israel and had intelligence expertise. Many had worked for a firm based in Israel called Amdocs. Amdocs "generates billing data for virtually every call in America, and they do credit checks" according to Cameron, and were also investigated in connection with a drug ring in 1997 which centered around Israeli organized crime members suspected in dealing in cocaine and ecstasy trafficking, as well as credit card and computer fraud. While Amdocs denied any involvement, investigators believed that the company was leaking information which allowed the Israeli criminals to evade arrest. How? The Israeli suspects had access to the police's beepers, cell phones, and home phones and were surveilling them. Additionally, the Israeli "organized" criminals had access to communications "between organized crime intelligence division detectives, the FBI and the secret service." These connections and surveillance activities allowed the criminals to evade arrest. Furthermore, they revealed a significant security breech that put not only local law enforcement agencies at risk, but even top government officials in the FBI, CIA, and other offices. Regarding Amdocs, Cameron reported: "Most directory assistance calls, and virtually all call records and billing in the U.S. are done for the phone companies by Amdocs, Ltd, an Israeli-based private telecommunications company. Amdocs has contracts with the 25 biggest phone companies in America, and more worldwide. The White House and other secure government phone lines are protected, but it is virtually impossible to make a call on normal phones without generating an Amdocs record of it. In recent years, the FBI and other government agencies have investigated Amdocs more than once. The firm has repeatedly and adamantly denied any security breaches or wrongdoing. But sources tell Fox News that in 1999, the super secret National Security Agency, headquartered in northern Maryland, issued what's called a Top Secret sensitive compartmentalized information report, TS/SCI, warning that records of calls in the United States were getting into foreign hands - in Israel, in particular." [emphasis added] Cameron further reported that: "There's real pandemonium described at the FBI, the DEA and the INS." What this report tells us is that Israelis have long had the capabilities and the desire to spy on America, and that these capabilities have long been known to US officials. Fox News also reported that Israeli spy networks, however they obtained the information, appeared to have had prior knowledge regarding the attacks on September 11, which they failed to share with US officials. Carl Cameron reported that the government documents revealed that the Israeli spies "'targeted and penetrated military bases.' The DEA, FBI and dozens of government facilities, and even secret offices and unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelligence personnel. The majority of those questioned - quote - 'stated they
[CTRL] Berlin Wall vs. Israel's Apartheid Wall
-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om inline: Untitled01
[CTRL] Let's Dump The American Empire
-Caveat Lector- http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20040728/index.php Let's Dump The American Empire by Charley Reese There is an American Empire, but we should dump it, because we Americans are woefully incompetent when it comes to maintaining empires. One mistake that seems to be a permanent feature of our foreign policy is mirror-imaging. So many American politicians, most of them poorly educated and ignorant of other people and their cultures, tend to think other people are just like us. A great many are not. Lyndon Johnson failed in Vietnam because he thought he could treat the Vietnamese the same way he treated members of the U.S. House and Senate. Johnson always used a stick and a carrot. Vote with me, and you'll get pork-barrel rewards; vote against me, and I'll find a way to punish you. That worked with American politicians, most of whom are nothing more than officeholders with "for sale or rent" signs on their foreheads. Johnson told the North Vietnamese, make peace, and I'll give you billions of dollars in American aid; don't make peace, and I'll bomb you. Unfortunately for Johnson, the North Vietnamese, whatever their other faults, were not for sale, nor were they willing to succumb to threats. They wanted to unify their country, and they were willing to fight as long as necessary to achieve that. As it turned out, we were not willing to fight as long as necessary to prevent it. So, despite billions of dollars, despite 57,000 dead, despite a quarter of a million wounded, Vietnam is today a unified communist country. President George W. Bush has offered a $25 million reward for Osama bin Laden. He thought, apparently, that like most Americans, the Afghans and Pakistanis were for sale. Despite Afghanistan being one of the poorest countries in the world, the American millions have not produced a single traitor willing to rat out bin Laden. Let's face it we have become a secular and materialistic society. The two kinds of people we have real trouble believing actually exist are people of true religious faith and people to whom honor means more than money. Years ago, an understandably irate chiropractor said of medical doctors, "If they can't drug it or cut it, they don't know what the hell to do." Similarly, if we can't bribe with our dollars or intimidate with our bombs, we don't know what to do. That disqualifies us to run an empire, so we ought to cut our losses and go back to being a republic. Now, returning to our republican roots doesn't mean we try to live in splendid isolation. Not at all. It just means that we stop trying to run other people's countries and concentrate on running our own. We can have trade relations with the whole world cultural exchanges, tourism, the whole ball of friendly wax. We just make sure the CIA and the military don't do any dirty work inside other people's countries, such as interfering in their elections or overthrowing their governments. And we don't take sides in other countries' wars and feuds. Armed neutrality should be our position. That, to me, would be the best of all possible worlds for Americans. This is not pie in the sky. It was once American policy, and the United States was widely loved and respected during that period of time. Now, with our troops in more than 100 foreign countries, we are widely disliked, if not hated and feared. The cluster blunders in Iraq and Vietnam, not to mention many smaller cluster blunders we have made around the world, should convince any reasonable person that we Americans are simply not competent imperialists. We don't know much about other people; we resist learning other languages; we love our own country so much we are frankly not very interested in the rest of the world. We have all the qualifications to be a mind-our-own-business republic, and none of the qualifications to be a world empire. We should start bringing our troops home from the far-flung corners of the world, establish a sensible self-defense posture and use the billions of dollars we would save to tackle all the really serious domestic problems we have. Unfortunately, for that to happen you'd probably have to elect Pat Buchanan or me as president, and neither one of us is running. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives
[CTRL] Israels Deceit Knows No Bounds
-Caveat Lector- http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7section=0article=48987d=27m=7y=2004 Tuesday, 27, July, 2004 (10, Jumada al-Thani, 1425) Israels Deceit Knows No Bounds Shakir Husain, Arab News There is always something extraordinary about Israels deceitful behavior. When the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Mohamed El-Baradei visited Tel Aviv recently to talk about Israels arsenal of nuclear weapons, he ended up discussing Irans nuclear program. What was the point in letting the Israelis distract attention from their own nuclear weapons? With more than 200 ready-to-use nuclear bombs, Israel poses the single gravest threat to Middle East and North Africa. Americans and Europeans do not even call Israeli bombs weapons of mass destruction. The Western obsession with WMDs is fundamentally flawed and outrageously racist. Non-Western countries need weapons of defense and have every right to protect themselves. China and India have shown great foresightedness in developing strong defense systems. The hypocrisy of big Western powers has encouraged Israel to threaten Arab and other Islamic countries with its nuclear ambiguity. The Zionist state has shown for more than 50 years that it can live as a lawless entity, thumbing its nose at every international rule of behavior. Iran and Syria were supposed to be the next target in the American crusade for making Middle East devoid of any country that could stand up to Israel. Talk of threats to Israels security is pure fantasy that thrives in the minds of American and Israeli warmongers. Not surprisingly, these elements see Irans nuclear program as an issue that helps the Israeli policies of military domination in the Middle East. Ask Americans for one reason why Iran should not work on a peaceful program to develop atomic energy and they tell you that Iran is a nation rich in hydrocarbons. The United States has huge petroleum reserves, too. Why does the US use nuclear power? It keeps its own petrol safe for future use and fights wars in every corner of the world for oil. Iran is not a tiny nation. It has a population of 70 million with big industrial and consumer energy demand. The oil is not going to last forever. Iran must harness atomic power technology for the future of coming generations. Now, El-Baradeis IAEA has become a pawn in Israels game of dirty politics. They (Israelis) are expressing concern about Iran, El-Baradei told reporters in Israel. What happened to the IAEAs own concern about Israel? He had no reason to go along Israeli wishes to discuss Iran while on a job to ask Israel to come clean on its nuclear arsenal. His campaign for a Middle East free of nuclear weapons will succeed only if he puts sufficient pressure on Israel, the only state that has nuclear weapons in the region. Iran has repeatedly said that it wants to acquire atomic power facilities, not nuclear weapons. Unlike Israel, it has allowed the IAEA to visit and inspect its facilities. Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but Israel has not. The IAEA possesses every detail on Irans atomic program. Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu, who was freed in April after serving 18 years in jail for revealing some of Israels nuclear secrets, urged El-Baradei to insist on visiting the Dimona nuclear plant, used for reprocessing plutonium. Now, after 18 years that my revelation was told to all the world and I have come out of prison, he (El-Baradei) too must go and demand to be inside Dimona and report to the IAEA and all the world, Vanunu said. But the IAEA head and his delegation satisfied themselves with a mere glimpse of the plant, viewing it from a plane flying over the area. We could see Dimona in the distance. It was a brown dot, a diplomat is said to have remarked after the aerial trip, conducted to stress the strategic danger to Israel one border to another in three-and-a-half minutes. The IAEA can continue its futile pleadings with the Israelis to clear up the nuclear ambiguity of neither admitting nor denying the existence of weapons. Israeli policies are based on a kind of doggedness that suppresses every morality, decency, humanity and rule of law. Despite having committed heinous war crimes, Ariel Sharon remains a man of peace to the American president. American journalists are always willing to believe Israeli propaganda sometimes more than the Israelis themselves. Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, who talked about Irans nuclear program with his US counterpart Colin Powell this month in Washington, made an interesting statement: Iran is the country that has announced that one missile toward Israel will destroy the Jewish state. So we should be concerned about the Iranians efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Scare-mongering again. Powell pitched in by saying Washington would make sure the international community stands unified behind the effort to stop Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons development, or worse,
[CTRL] The Committee on the Present Confusion
http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=3188 July 26, 2004 The Committee on the Present Confusion by Patrick J. Buchanan With full-page ads in The Washington Post, The New York Times and The Washington Times trumpeting its slide down the spillways, The Committee on the Present Danger has been relaunched. The 1970s committee of Republican hawks and neoconservatives denounced dtente and called for clarity, courage and perseverance in the Cold War against a Soviet empire that had overrun Southeast Asia and was on the march in Africa and close to strategic superiority. The declaration of principles and purposes of the new committee, however, help explains why support for Bush's war is crumbling. It is pure mush. It reads like the final communique, negotiated in some all-night session of deputies, of a contentious meeting of the G-8. "America faces its greatest threat in a generation," declares CPD. "An organized global movement assisted by rogue regimes has adopted mass terror as a weapon to achieve political goals." OK, fine. But nowhere is this "organized global movement" even named. If it is al-Qaeda, why not say so? But if it is al-Qaeda, it is hard to think of any regime, rogue or not, that supports it. Even the Iranians, whose diplomats were murdered by the Taliban, helped us finish them off. Who, then, are the rogue regimes? And what are the "political goals" this "global movement" hopes to achieve? Of late, al-Qaeda has been targeting the Saudis. Perhaps CPD did not wish to name this political goal of the terrorists, because so many of the neocon signers of the CPD ad share a similar desire to see the Saudi monarchy dumped over. "We are joined together," the ad declares, "by the recognition that no accommodation can be made with terrorists..." But terrorism is a tactic, a weapon used in wars of liberation by the IRA, the Irgun, the Stern Gang, the Mau Mau, the Algerian FLN, the Viet Cong, the ANC and a dozen other movements. Not only have we made accommodations with the regimes that came out of these movements, we are giving most of them foreign aid. And some of the ex-terrorists, like Menachem Begin and Nelson Mandela, have gotten Nobel Peace Prizes. One imagines most signers of the CPD declaration would consider Arafat a terrorist. But not only does Yasser share a Nobel Prize with Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, he was handed Hebron by Benjamin Netanyahu and offered 95 percent of the West Bank and co-tenancy of Jerusalem by Ehud Barak. Can it be that four Israeli prime ministers have engaged in accommodation with terrorists? Was FDR wrong to accommodate Stalin to defeat Hitler? Was Nixon wrong to go to Beijing and accommodate Mao Tse-tung in the Shanghai Communique? Were not Stalin and Mao two of the greatest terrorists of the 20th century? Bush's father made an accommodation with Hafez al Assad, who had slaughtered thousands of Muslims in Hama, for help in ousting Saddam from Kuwait. Was he wrong to do so? In ousting the Taliban, George W. Bush enlisted a Northern Alliance of warlords whose hands were soaked in blood. Was he wrong to do so? "No accommodation can be made with terrorists ..." OK. Why, then, does CPD not denounce Bush for trumpeting his deal with Muammar Gaddafi and letting this instigator of the Berlin discotheque bombing and Lockerbie massacre out of the sanctions box? Is President Bush not accommodating a terrorist in return for his surrender of WMD? The new CPD calls for "strategic clarity" and for "educating the American people on the nature of the danger." But what CPD is offering is none of the clarity of the Cold War, nor any of the passionate certitude of "Remember Peal Harbor!" The closest it comes to educating us about the enemy we face is this line: "Victory over terror inspired by radical Islamists fought in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere will also be a long struggle." But Saddam Hussein was "not inspired by radical Islamists." He was a secular despot. He despised Islamists. He fought an eight-year war with the leading Islamist state, Iran. And why is there not a single mention of Israel and Hamas in the entire ad? Is this the dog that didn't bark? Something is fishy here. While that CPD ad has 40 signers, only three are big name Republicans: Sen. John Kyl, Jack Kemp and Ed Meese. The rest of the list reads like the head table at the annual American Enterprise Institute dinner. Yet, Pete Hannaford, a former Reagan aide, told the Post he put this all together after talking with a "variety of friends." No way. This is a front group. Somebody had to pony up the hundreds of thousands of bucks to pay for these ads. Who's behind it? Says the Post, "Initial costs have been made from a grant from two businessmen whom he (Hannaford) declined to identify..." Now we're getting somewhere. As Deep Throat said, "Follow the money!"
[CTRL] A President, Not A Date
-Caveat Lector- http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20040726/index.php A President, Not A Date by Charley Reese Here are some things Americans should consider before deciding whom they will vote for in November. You are not going to sleep with the president, become his best buddy or be his favorite pen pal. Therefore, you do not have to vote for someone you think is likable or handsome or charming. Statesmen, in fact, are often not likable, as they often have to make unpopular decisions. And America needs a statesman in the White House, because the years ahead are full of dangers, both from human sources and from environment stresses. It is also impossible to think seriously and smile at the same time. I have always distrusted people who smile perpetually. America, like any other nation or empire, has the potential to self-destruct. Nations and empires self-destruct when their leaders make a series of bad decisions. If you visit Great Britain, France or Spain today, you would never know from their present state that they were once world powers. There is not one single example in world history where any empire ever sustained itself indefinitely. Leaders make wrong decisions when they are shallow-minded, uninterested in the affairs of state and ignorant of the world outside their borders. They make wrong decisions when they depend on advisers who are driven by ideology. An ideologue is by definition a person out of touch with reality. Reality is always fluid, complex and changing from moment to moment. The rigid thinking of an ideologue inevitably loses a clash with reality. Its own internal ideologues drove the once-mighty Soviet Union into the ground. So remember, when it comes to choosing a president, you're not choosing a date, a fishing buddy or someone to spend your vacation with. You will be choosing someone who hopefully will have the brains to keep this country from joining so many others in the ash heap of history. Now, let's look at how people can make a mockery of democracy. You make a mockery of self-government when you choose your candidate strictly on the basis of the party label. Political parties in our country are not based on philosophy. They are merely machines for electing candidates and distributing patronage. The truth is that sometimes the best choice is a Republican; sometimes, a Democrat. It all depends on the human beings, not on the party label. You make a mockery of self-government when you cast your vote based on the candidate's personality. I've already covered that point. You make a mockery of self-government when you vote purely on the basis of your selfish interests. Many Americans make a religion of selfishness, but for self-government to work and to endure, we must all think of the common interests when it comes to choosing the people who will run the government. You make a mockery of self-government if you allow demagogues to influence your vote on the basis of phony issues. The real threats facing the United States are not homosexual marriages or even legal abortions. If you allow people to persuade you to cast your vote based on those two issues, you are wasting your vote, because I guarantee that the politicians, regardless of what they say now, will not do anything about either one of them. These are scarlet fish. Finally, you are making a mockery of self-government if you allow your vote to be influenced by concerns for a foreign country. And yes, I'm directing this to the Israel-first crowd, both Jew and Christian. The election in November is for the president of the United States, not the deputy prime minister of Israel. If you love Israel more than America, then by all means emigrate, join the Israeli Defense Forces and do your part. We need a president who will make his decisions based on the best interests of the United States, not those of Israel (or France, or Japan, or any other country). When one of our Revolutionary forefathers said the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, he meant that liberty is always at risk. It can only be preserved if a sufficient number of Americans care about it enough to take a serious approach to choosing their leaders. This column was inspired in part by some comic quips by Bill Maher. He deserves credit for lighting the spark. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
[CTRL] Terrorists Attacked America Because They Hated Freedom? You Bet They Did
-Caveat Lector- http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2004%20opinions/July/26%20o/Terrorists%20Attacked%20America%20Because%20They%20Hated%20Freedom%20You%20Bet%20They%20Did%20By%20Mark%20Franklin.htm Terrorists Attacked America Because They Hated "Freedom"? You Bet They Did By Mark Franklin Al-Jazeerah, July 26, 2004 Did the Terrorists Attack the U.S. Because They Hated Our "Freedom," as Bush Said? Bush said that the terrorists attacked the WTC because they hate our "freedom." I have to admit that, yes, it's true: The terrorists hated "freedom" all right. They hated the "freedom" that Israel has to routinely bomb dozens of innocent Palestinians' apartments just so the Israelis might possibly kill one "suspected" terrorist. They hated the "freedom" that Israel has to discriminate against Palestinians who have lived there all their lives, while giving special treatment to Jews, including free housing and guaranteed wages--even to those Jews who have just moved there from Russia. They hated the "freedom" that Israel has to use America-made Apache helicopters to indiscriminately shoot at innocent Palestinians in the street just so one person, who might--or might not--be in the crowd can be targeted. They hate the "freedom" that Israel has to routinely bulldoze over Palestinians' homes, like the home of the good medical doctor that they were bulldozing for no good reason (no tunnels!) on that day when they murdered the American citizen Rachel Corrie by bulldozing her over too. They hate the "freedom" that Israel has to build a massive concrete wall, which is about twice as tall as the Berlin Wall was, right through the center of the innocent Palestinians' homes. And they hate America for supporting this "freedom" perpetrated against their kinsmen, with the billions of dollars that the Israelis extort from American taxpayers year after year through our gutless and spineless politicians, who care more about their campaign money than decency and honesty. Article follows, where the head of Al-Quaida network tells that, lo and behold, it wasn't because he hated America's "freedom" but because of our support for the bandit state of Israel http://www.kentucky.com/mld/heraldleader/news/nation/9222612.htm Posted on Fri, Jul. 23, 2004 U.S. policy on Israel key motive for effort PLOTTER INVOLVED BIN LADEN TO GAIN MORE RESOURCES By Terry McDermott LOS ANGELES TIMES Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel, said the final report of the Sept. 11 commission. Mohammed conceived the initial outline of the attack six years before its execution and brought the plan to al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden because he thought he did not have the resources to carry it out on his own. The Sept. 11 report contains the fullest accounting of Mohammed's overarching role from original conception to supervision of details. Bin Laden, too, was fully involved, selecting all or most of the participants, ordering the substance and the location of their training, and contributing to the timing of the attacks and the selection of targets, the report says. The report makes a strong case that al-Qaida accomplished the attacks without any hint of state sponsorship. The report also appears to lay to rest the notion, long alluded to by administration officials including Vice President Dick Cheney, that hijacker Mohamed Atta traveled to the Czech Republic to meet an Iraqi intelligence operative in the spring of 2001. In addition to repeating evidence that Atta was in the United States at the time, the report revealed that the Iraqi agent was not in Prague either when the meeting was alleged to have occurred. Much of the report's detail comes from interrogations of al-Qaida operatives in U.S. custody, including Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh. Some of that information is contradictory; much of it is difficult to corroborate. One CIA analysis cited in the report, for example, is titled "Khalid Shaykh Muhammed's Threat Reporting -- Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies." www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL
[CTRL] Air Attack On US Planned For October 2004?
-Caveat Lector- http://tomflocco.com/modules.php?name=Newsfile=articlesid=69 Air Attack on U.S. Planned for October 2004? Terrorists plan to initiate "Fortress Americas" with several thousand dead on American East Coast Part One, Copyright Joe Vialls, July 16, 2004 [Ed--One of our readers justsent this disturbing informationreported from Australia byJoe Vialls. Given partially confirming worldwide media reports on this issue, we are raising a number of troublesome questions for our forums--also pointed toward our lawmakers;butmore info is needed to determine the validity of this very contoversial information. Also, Vialls has not cited his sources regarding multiple old painted Boeings piloted by Israelis adjacent to Israeli air space while also making other unsubstantiated claims. However, worldwide reports do indicate there is airstrip activity in Africa--probed by the CIA, FBI and Pentagon--surrounding a "lost,"outdated and re-painted Boeing. Thus, we would hope that Vialls will buttress a number of the assertions made in his report by bolstering his sourcing to support the other media reports--OR, perhaps readers of this site may have additional info to contribute: 1)Is Congress aware ofevidence that an old (sold or stolen) Boeing 727 in North West Africa could be used to attack U.S. assets or even East coastcities? (ABC News--June 18, 2003 BBC--June 19, 2003) 2) Will Congress investigate whether old Boeings are being flown around African airstrips by "terrorists"--since elections are approaching and Homeland Security has warned Americans? (Better question: Will they want to touch thisissue with a 10-foot pole?) 3)Will Congress immediately hold hearings to probe who else possesses Dryden/Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and Boeing's "Home Run" counter hijackanalog remote controlflightsystem (which allegedly interfaces with old Boeings)with regard to 9-11 and so-called "imminent attacks designed to disrupt U.S. elections?" 4) Is U.S. foreign policy being "hijacked" by other countries? 5) Will Congress probe U.S. spy satellite photos ofNorth Africa airstrips? 6) Will Congress investigate Florida's Aerospace Sales and Leasing to determine if any U.S. company is selling old Boeing jetsto "terrorists?"] "To comprehend the full magnitude of the threat currently facing America, it is essential to understand the technology used to remotely pilot large multi-engine jets like the Boeing 707 and 727, especially in the context of the planned mock "Al Qaeda" strike on the American eastern seaboard. Dryden is part of a highly secretive group which also includes the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency [DARPA] and Boeing aircraft corporation. Operating in a top secret environment, this group was responsible for the sophisticated "Home Run" counter hijack system developed in the late seventies, designed to enable American authorities to override the flight director on all Boeing 757 and 767 models, in order to remotely recover hijacked aircraft for safe landing at a friendly airport" "When Benjamin Padilla strode purposefully across the tarmac at Luanda Airport in Angola on 25 May 2003, he glanced only briefly at the registration letters of the aircraft he was about to board. Ex American Airlines Boeing 727-223 serial N844AA looked scruffy after 14 months inactivity on the ground in Africa, but looks can be very deceptive. Every two weeks since the aircraft first arrived, Angolan ground engineers had fired up the jet auxiliary power unit, cycled all the onboard hydraulic and electrical systems, and used a tow bar to roll the aircraft backwards and forwards a few feet to ensure the tires developed no flats. Tire pressures were maintained, fuel tanks were regularly topped up, and the powerful tri-jet aircraft was maintained in full operational condition" "Then within 24 hours of this unremarkable and elderly Boeing 727 vanishing from an obscure African airport that almost nobody had heard of, the entire western media inexplicably started speculating that the aircraft might have been stolen by 'terrorists', and in particular by 'al Qaeda terrorists' for use against 'western targets' in a possible 'Rerun of 9-11'. This seemingly accidental mass media coverage was pure public relation gold, because forever afterwards, N844AA would be linked to 'Muslim Terrorists' allegedly planning to attack America" "Anyone with a map will be able to see that the flight track from Conakry to Beirut touches the outer boundary of Israeli airspace, meaning that any one of fifty American taxpayer-funded F15 Eagle air superiority fighters could knock this clumsy 'Al Qaeda' aircraft out of the sky with a single burst of cannon shells. They will not do so of course. 3XGOM is strictly "hands off" to Israeli fighter pilots, because the aircraft is being flown by ex El AL Israeli airline pilots. In fact, depending on the day in question, 3XGOM is one of five totally different
[CTRL] Israeli Agents Arrested in Plot To Forge Passports
-Caveat Lector- http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/israeli_agents.html Updated July 23, 2004 Israeli Agents Arrested in Plot To Forge Passports Mossad Targeted Handicapped; Kiwi PM Breaks Diplomatic Ties By Fred Lingel The jailing of two Israeli Mossad agents in New Zealand for stealing the identities of cerebral palsy victims has exposed a wider international passport scam by the spy agency. On July 14, 2004, two Mossad agents-Uriel Kelman, 31, and Eli Cara, 51-were jailed for six months and fined $100,000 for fraudulently using the Cerebral Palsy Society to obtain passports. The New Zealand authorities are still seeking two other agents. One is Zev William Barkan, 37, who fled New Zealand when the scam was uncovered, and an unnamed man, who is believed to be hiding out somewhere in the country. When the Mossad team was unmasked in March 2004, New Zealand's Prime Minister Helen Clark privately asked Israel for an apology and was rebuffed. To add insult to injury, the Israeli government denied having agents in New Zealand. Within days of the jailing of Kelman and Cara, Clark, under public pressure to retaliate against Israel, launched a verbal and diplomatic assault. She accused Israel of breaching international law, as well as her country's sovereignty. Her greatest worry, she told the media, was that the Mossad actions placed New Zealand passport holders at risk when they traveled abroad. She immediately suspended diplomatic relations with Tel Aviv and instituted a new rule that will require visiting Israeli diplomats to apply for visas before they can enter her country. She also canceled Foreign Ministry consultations between the two nations scheduled for later this year. In a major snub, she declared that a proposed visit by the Israeli president would not be allowed to take place. New Zealanders were equally angered by Jewish organizations that attacked the prime minister and accused the New Zealand government of overreaction and "anti-Semitism." It was not lost on New Zealanders that Israel regards them as anti-Israeli, following the visit last year of the New Zealand foreign minister to Yasser Arafat in Palestine. In contrast, the rest of the world views New Zealand as a small, neutral nation. The Mossad scam began in 2003 when Kelman, Cara, Barkan and an unidentified agent arrived in the New Zealand capital, Auckland. First to arrive was Cara, who had been running a bogus travel agency for three years in Sydney, the Australian capital. Cara had lived in Sydney with his wife and three children, but subsequent inquiries into the travel agency could not turn up an address for the company. Between October 2000 and March 2004, Cara is known to have made several trips to New Zealand, using two Israeli passports, one of them a replacement passport. By all accounts, Cara was the front man for the team, with the task of arranging accommodations and identifying suitable victims to be scammed. Barkan jetted into Auckland in November 2003 with a U.S. passport that identified him as of Israeli origin. Before leaving the country three weeks later, he had acquired from Cara the identity of a cerebral palsy patient. So meticulous was Cara's research into the victim that he had used the married and maiden name of the victim's mother to get a birth certificate, even though she had separated from the victim's father in 2001 and was based in Britain. With the birth certificate, it was easy to acquire Social Security documents. Barkan cleverly used the documents to make a doctor's appointment. The ploy was to get to know the doctor and later exploit him. Barkan left the country after that appointment and Kelman flew into Auckland, rented a car and checked into a hotel owned by the Kiwi International chain. Barkan's role was to help Cara do research on potential handicapped victims, learning where they lived and when they were born. The essential ingredient of their strategy was to choose people who, because of their disabilities, would not have passports and would never travel abroad. Barkan flew back to Auckland on March 6, 2004 and immediately visited the same doctor, pretending he had a minor ailment. His real purpose quickly became apparent. Now that the doctor had seen him a second time and had clearly accepted his bogus identity, Barkan moved to the next level. Barkan told the doctor he was soon to be married in Australia but had never traveled abroad before and urgently needed a passport. He produced a passport form and pleaded with the doctor to witness it. Unwittingly the doctor agreed. Barkan had photos taken of him and, with the passport application and other documents, applied to the Department of Internal Affairs for a passport. Meanwhile, he rented an apartment, telling neighbors he was called "Jay" and was in the country to attend a sailing course. In order to explain his accent, which implied he was Canadian or
[CTRL] No Nationalists on Kemps Shining Hill
http://www.amconmag.com/2004_08_02/buchanan.html August 2, 2004 issue Copyright 2004 The American Conservative No Nationalists on Kemps Shining Hill by Pat Buchanan A struggle is underway for the soul of the Republican Party between a minority of protectionist xenophobes and those who are pro-trade and pro-immigration. Thus does Jack Kemp begin a column in which he jettisons the black conservative running for Congress in North Carolina whom he earlier endorsed. Kemp accuses Vernon Robinson of running a very negative and aggressive anti-immigration campaign ... contrary to the core values of the party of Lincoln. Jack is right about that struggle for the soul of the party. But why is it necessary to demonize disagreement? Websters defines xenophobia as fear and hatred of strangers and foreigners. What evidence is there that Vernon Robinson is not a man of good heart? Jack cites George Washington as having famously quipped in 1788, I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong. But, as James Fulford of VDare.com notes, Washington was talking about a persecuted Dutch community that had supported the American Revolution. Few of the illegal aliens here were victims of persecution and not all are necessarily virtuous. Their only common characteristic is that all have broken our laws. Can Jack seriously believe the Father of our Country would have approved of amnesty for 8-14 million illegal aliens and an immigration policy that will leave America in 2050 with 100,000,000 Hispanics concentrated in our Southwest, with scores of millions not speaking English and loyal to nations not our own? Jack says illegals come for work, not welfare. Most do. But why, then, did Jack oppose Californias Prop. 187, which would have denied welfare benefits only to aliens here illegally? Why, as HUDmeister, did he hand out housing subsidies to illegal aliens? Jack believes being pro-illegal is good politics. But Gov. Pete Wilson overcame a 20-point deficit to win re-election in 1994 by backing Prop. 187. Wilson was the last Republican to win major statewide office before Arnold, whose best issue, pollsters say, was opposition to Gray Daviss handing out drivers licenses to illegals. Even John Kerry now opposes drivers licenses for illegals. The Dole-Kemp ticket unfortunately lost first-time Hispanic voters to Clinton-Gore 91-7. And California, which Nixon carried five times on national tickets and Reagan swept four times, is now routinely written off by the GOP in presidential elections, partly due to the surging Hispanic vote. Since Bush took office, his free-trade policies have produced a net loss of 2.6 million manufacturing jobs, one in every six in the USA. The textile and apparel industries in the Carolinas have been especially hard hit. These jobs have historically been the access ramp to the American Dream for blacks, Hispanics, single moms, and working poor. Is Vernon Robinson wrong to want to stop shipping these jobs off to China? Our open-borders policy is forcing millions of our workers into a Darwinian competition for jobs with desperate immigrant folks willing to work for less than the minimum wage. Unlike Jack, these Americans are not often invited onto the boards of Empower America, the Heritage Foundation, G2 Satellite Solutions, SmartCOP, Oracle, Hawk Corporation, IDT Telecom, ING Americas, Thayer Capital, or Thomas Weisel Partners. After naming all the big men he met with in Mexico recently, Jack thundered, [T]he best way to stop mass migration from Mexico is not to militarize the border. Did Jack ask his Mexican chums why they have militarized their border with Guatemala? Before using derogatory terms like reactionary and protectionist xenophobes, Brother Kemp might read a little more deeply into American history than Carl Sandburgs Lincoln. The first act of Congress Washington proudly signed on July 4 was the Tariff Act of 1789. Abe (Give us a protective tariff and we shall have the greatest country on earth) Lincoln was not only the father of 70 years of Republican protectionism, he raised the Morrill tariff 12 times. And, sorry to report, Jack, the old Rail Splitter spoke openly and often about sending slaves back to Africa. Teddy (I thank God I am not a free trader) Roosevelt called free trade a pernicious doctrine. Jack twice refers to America as a city on a shining hill, Reagans signature phrase. But Reagan slammed import quotas on steel, machine tools, computer chips, and Japanese cars and motorcycles to save the Big Three and the Harley hogwhich Reagan did, God bless him. And as the Gipper said in 1983, This country has lost control of its borders. And no country can sustain that kind of position. By the way, Jack, the phrase is a shining city on a hill.
[CTRL] The Present Danger
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 23, 2004 The Present Danger Neocons attempt a comeback by Justin Raimondo The newly reconstituted Committee on the Present Danger (CPD), the War Party's latest high-profile front group, is off to a rocky start. In the face of incoming fire from independent journalist Laura Rozen, what the CPD's founders characterize as "an army of citizens" was forced into an ignominious retreat on the first day of its official reincarnation, as its managing director, Peter Hannaford, was forced to step down. In 1996, Hannaford's public relations firm, the Carmen Group, signed a $40,000-a-year contract to represent Austria's Freedom Party. The party's leader Joerg Haider, you'll remember, became a hate object for the Euro-left because of his views on the EU and immigration he's against both and a thoughtless remark expressing nostalgia for the "good old days" when a "relatively efficient" Nazi regime ruled in Vienna. Poor Hannaford, like Haider, never knew what hit him: "Haider said many silly things and he was trying to live them down," he told the New York Sun. "But Mr. Hannaford also said the party's agenda was quite reasonable. 'Three or four of their Parliament members were quite level-headed,' he said. 'The kinds of programs they supported in the Austrian context were quite sensible.' He said the Freedom Party's primary agenda was to reform the income tax, end immigration, and break what he called the 'patronage stranglehold on government largess of the two major Austrian parties at the time.'" True, but irrelevant. After all, wasn't that Haider who paid a "solidarity visit" to Saddam Hussein just before the bombs began to fall? Rozen had only to point the Haider connection out, and Hannaford was history. But the CPD has some more housecleaning to do, as I'll get to shortly. However, first a word or two about the storied history of the CPD in its various incarnations, and what makes its revival such an auspicious occasion. The original CPD was organized in 1950 to scare the hell out of Americans, or at least frighten them enough so that they wouldn't balk when the bill came in for a massive military build-up. Paul Nitze's seminal NSC-68 memorandum was the theory, and CPD-1 was the practice. In 1951, the Committee took to the airwaves, utilizing the Mutual Broadcasting Network to propagandize on the utter scariness of "the present danger." As the face-off pitting Alger Hiss against Whittaker Chambers revealed the inner workings of a pro-Soviet cabal of spies in the highest reaches of government, and Senator Joseph McCarthy roamed the land, it was in the interests of the Truman administration to divert attention away from the Commie Threat on the home front, and direct American anger and paranoia overseas. The Commies were about to take over the world, and were we going to just sit there watching I Love Lucy? Having recently returned from fighting World War II, the Greatest Generation was certainly inclined to do just that, and, in any case, was hardly in a frame of mind to start fighting World War III so soon. Perhaps the difficulty inherent in this situation is what gave rise to the suggestion, made in March 1950 by assistant secretary of state for public affairs Edward R. Barrett, that it would be necessary to initiate a "psychological scare campaign." Dean Acheson, one of the Committee's founders, wrote in his memoirs: "The task of a public officer seeking to explain or gain support for a major policy is not that of the writer of a doctoral thesis. Qualification must give way to simplicity of statement, nicety and nuance to bluntness, almost brutality, in carrying home the point." The Committee was restarted in 1976, and, although officially bipartisan, was heavily weighted with Democratic party bigwigs, such as Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson (D-Boeing), and, like the original, was linked to the efforts of then currently serving government officials to build popular support for increased arms spending. The infamous "Team B," headed by Nitze, Richard Pipes, a bunch of RAND Corp. types, and Paul Wolfowitz, having wildly overestimated Soviet military capabilities, was trying to build support for what it considered to be a proportionate response. Team B was housed in the same offices as Jackson's "Coalition for a Democratic Majority," the pro-war factional base and lobbying group of Democratic party activists who later became known as the neoconservatives. The third incarnation of the CPD shall we call it CPD-3? resurrects all the familiar rhetoric, and even many of CPD-2's original personnel, although no survivors from CPD-1 have been unearthed. Under the nominal leadership of Senators John Kyl and Joe Lieberman, this latest effort to revive the flagging spirits of the War Party claims to be bipartisan, but is heavily weighted toward the Republicans, reflecting the radical role reversal effected in the last fifty years. The neocons may have
[CTRL] Two sides of the same coin
http://jordantimes.com/wed/opinion/opinion5.htm Two sides of the same coin By Roger H. Lieberman The flagrant illegality of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the flint-hearted brutality with which it was executed should offend every intelligent human being's sense of decency. The imposition of a pro-American client regime in Baghdad through direct foreign aggression was an act as illegitimate as the Soviet take-over of Afghanistan in 1979. Moreover, the devastation to human life wrought by the Bush administration's wanton assault will fuel unprecedented violence and instability in the region for years, perhaps decades, to come. In short, there can be no justification military, economic or moral for George W. Bush's Iraq policy. That being said, however, one should be very careful not to let feelings of outrage at the foreign plunder of Iraq translate into feelings of nostalgia for the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. No honest person can dispute the fact that he was a cruel, despotic and narrow-minded tyrant whose actions resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. His attacks upon the sovereign nations of Iran and Kuwait were motivated by the same kind of selfishness and chauvinism that drove Bush to assail Iraq, and they squandered precious time and resources on naked aggression. Furthermore, his ruthless repression of Iraq's Kurds and Shiite Arabs rendered it impossible for the country to mature into a tolerant, pluralistic nation. Thus, notwithstanding the dubious means by which Saddam is being tried for his crimes, few can argue that a guilty verdict would be unjustified. What ails the prevailing mainstream Western intellectual attitude towards the Middle East is not its condemnation of Saddam's behaviour as Iraqi strongman, but its failure to apply the same moral standard to the rest of the region. Those who have taken it upon themselves to learn the broader scope of modern Middle Eastern history know that Iraq's Baathist regime was hardly alone in perpetrating major atrocities or in alienating large segments of their population. Several hundred kilometres west of Iraq is a country literally drenched in the trappings of militarism; it is presently engaged in the vicious subjugation of illegally occupied lands. That country is Israel, and its prime minister, Ariel Sharon, is a man with a resume as sordid and bloodstained as the grizzled ex-dictator now on trial in Baghdad. The litany of crimes against humanity attributable to Sharon spans half a century, and encompasses nearly the whole length and breadth of the conflict between Israel and its neighbours. In the early 1950s, Sharon commanded a paramilitary brigade known as Unit 101, whose sole purpose was to slip across Israel's borders, and terrorise Palestinians and other Arab civilians under the official rubric of counterterrorism. In October 1953, Sharon's thugs fell upon the Jordanian village of Qibya, and massacred 66 innocent men, women and children. In February 1955, Sharon directed a bloody raid into the Egyptian-ruled Gaza Strip a deliberately provocative act with repercussions that led to the 1956 Suez War. After the occupation of Gaza in the June 1967 war, Sharon led operations to pacify it which meant the wanton destruction of property belonging to thousands of Palestinians, most of them refugees expelled from what became Israel in 1948. In 1982, Defence Minister Sharon orchestrated Israel's infamous invasion of Lebanon and siege of Beirut on behalf of the openly fascist Lebanese Phalange Party a campaign of carnage that left more than 17,000 Lebanese and Palestinians dead, and climaxed in the heinous Sabra and Shatilla massacres. Now, as Israeli prime minister, Sharon has added new ghastly accomplishments to his resume: the ongoing construction of the illegal apartheid wall on confiscated Palestinian land in the West Bank, the wanton destruction visited upon Rafah and Jenin, and the murder of more than 3,000 Palestinian men, women and children. This horrific record would, in any reasonably just world, earn Sharon a reputation as black as that of Saddam's in American eyes. Yet, in today's world, the leader of the world's last remaining superpower tears up 37 years of international consensus in a puerile attempt to legitimise Sharon's unilateral redrawing of Israel's borders. More obnoxiously still, Sharon's regime still enjoys the syrupy devotion of countless politicians, celebrities, think tanks and legions of irrationally exuberant teenagers who go off to find themselves in Israel. The former Iraqi dictator, who never managed to garner loyal support outside of his corrupt clique of military cronies and a smattering of sleazy international notables must have secretly envied Israel's propaganda colossus. It should not be surprising that underneath the superficial labels of nationality, ethnicity and religion, Saddam and Sharon bear such similarity. They are both ugly by-products
[CTRL] US Support For Israel KEY MOTIVE For 9/11
-Caveat Lector- http://www.kentucky.com/mld/heraldleader/news/nation/9222612.htm Posted on Fri, Jul. 23, 2004 THE MASTERMIND U.S. policy on Israel key motive for effort PLOTTER INVOLVED BIN LADEN TO GAIN MORE RESOURCES By Terry McDermott LOS ANGELES TIMES Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who conceived and directed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was motivated by his strong disagreement with American support for Israel, said the final report of the Sept. 11 commission. Mohammed conceived the initial outline of the attack six years before its execution and brought the plan to al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden because he thought he did not have the resources to carry it out on his own. The Sept. 11 report contains the fullest accounting of Mohammed's overarching role from original conception to supervision of details. Bin Laden, too, was fully involved, selecting all or most of the participants, ordering the substance and the location of their training, and contributing to the timing of the attacks and the selection of targets, the report says. The report makes a strong case that al-Qaida accomplished the attacks without any hint of state sponsorship. The report also appears to lay to rest the notion, long alluded to by administration officials including Vice President Dick Cheney, that hijacker Mohamed Atta traveled to the Czech Republic to meet an Iraqi intelligence operative in the spring of 2001. In addition to repeating evidence that Atta was in the United States at the time, the report revealed that the Iraqi agent was not in Prague either when the meeting was alleged to have occurred. Much of the report's detail comes from interrogations of al-Qaida operatives in U.S. custody, including Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh. Some of that information is contradictory; much of it is difficult to corroborate. One CIA analysis cited in the report, for example, is titled "Khalid Shaykh Muhammed's Threat Reporting -- Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies." www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The 9/11 Report: Bad News for Bush
-Caveat Lector- http://www.thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3pid=1594 The 9/11 Report: Bad News for Bush 07/23/2004 @ 07:40am The final report of the 9/11 commission confirms many of the panel's preliminary findings that have--or should have--embarrassed the Bush administration. The commission does note, "Our aim has not been to assign individual blame. Our aim has been to provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11 and to identify lessons learned." And it is true that the report does point to screw-ups and negligent policymaking committed during both the Bush II and Clinton administrations. But George W. Bush is the incumbent president who has to face the voters in November. Although Republicans in recent days have been highlighting the mistakes of the Clinton years, it is not inappropriate for voters to focus on what report tells us about Bush and his administration. As a public service, here is a look at several of those critical portions. * Bush's initial reaction. Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 has made famous--or infamous--the scene when Bush, after having been told that a second airliner had hit the World Trace Center, sits for seven minutes in a Florida classroom, as the kids read a book. The 9/11 report says, The President was seated in a classroom when, at 9:05, Andrew Card whispered to him: "A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack." The President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis. The press was standing behind the children; he saw their phones and pagers start to ring. The President felt he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening. In the Moore film, Bush hardly looks as if he is projecting "calm." To me--and, of course, this is a highly subjective view--he has a what-the-hell-should-I-do _expression_ on his face. But Bush backers and detractors are likely to see what they want to in that seven-minute performance. Bush's reaction, though, cannot be judged on the basis of what is now known about the 9/11 attacks. Consider this: when Bush was told about the second plane, it was obvious that the United States was under attack. Today we know that attack involved four planes. But at the moment that Card whispered into his ear, Bush (and everyone else) had no idea about the full extent of the assault. There could have been twenty airliners hijacked. There could have been WMD attacks coming. Perhaps minutes mattered. So how was it a projection of strength and calm for Bush to remain in a classroom--doing nothing--when who-knew-what was happening? He could have easily excused himself, especially as pagers and cell phones were sounding. His explanation rings hollow. * Terrorism as a priority for the Bush administration. Former counterterrorism Richard Clarke triggered a fierce, partisan debate earlier this year when he wrote in a book that the Bush administration pre-9/11 did not take the threat of al Qaeda seriously enough. The Bush administration challenged Clarke's account and attacked him vigorously. The 9/11 commission's report does suggest the terrorism was not an A-list topic for the Bush White House: Within the first few days after Bush's inauguration, Clarke approached [national security adviser Condoleezza] Rice in an effort to get her--and the new President--to give terrorism very high priority and to act on the agenda that he had pushed during the last few months of the previous administration. After Rice requested that all senior staff identify desirable major policy reviews or initiatives, Clarke submitted an elaborate memorandum on January 25, 2001. He attached to it his [anti-al Qaeda] 1998 Delenda Plan and the December 2000 strategy paper. "We urgently need ...a Principals level review on the al Qida network," Clarke wrote. He wanted the Principals Committee to decide whether al Qaeda was "a first order threat" or a more modest worry being overblown by "chicken little" alarmists. Alluding to the transition briefing that he had prepared for Rice, Clarke wrote that al Qaeda "is not some narrow, little terrorist issue that needs to be included in broader regional policy." Two key decisions that had been deferred, he noted, concerned covert aid to keep the Northern Alliance alive when fighting began again in Afghanistan in the spring, and covert aid to the Uzbeks. Clarke also suggested that decisions should be made soon on messages to the Taliban and Pakistan over the al Qaeda sanctuary in Afghanistan, on possible new money for CIA operations, and on "when and how... to respond to the attack on the USS Cole." The national security advisor did not respond directly to Clarke's memorandum. No Principals Committee meeting on al Qaeda was held until September 4, 2001 (although the Principals Committee met frequently on other subjects, such as the Middle East peace process, Russia, and the Persian
[CTRL] 'Time to put US interests first'
-Caveat Lector- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6542.htm 'Time to put US interests first' By Mazin Qumsiyeh 07/21/04 "Jordan Times" -- Without taking the will and interest of voters (and the rest of the world) into consideration, Congress voted last week to reject the ruling by the International Court of Justice on the illegality of Israel's apartheid wall. More disturbing is the fact that such bills pass within 24-48 hours to avoid discussion and to intimidate House members who might otherwise consider that such bills are not only immoral but also violate basic US laws. US law forbids foreign aid to governments that violate human rights and promote one religion or a religious group at the expense of another. We send Israel nearly $5 billion per year. Every single human rights organisation, and even our own State Department, document gross Israeli violations of human rights. To this day, Israel refuses to comply with international law, violates over 35 UN Security Council resolutions and hundreds of General Assembly resolutions. By extension, US law is violated since the US is signatory to such agreements as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 4th Geneva Convention. This includes the right of native refugees to return, the illegality of making Jewish-only settlements and roads on Palestinian lands, and Israel's basic laws that discriminate based on religion. Now, one should ask why Congress issues more binding and non-binding resolutions in support of Israel than it issued on all other foreign issues combined. This is a question that one would think the media in the US would be interested in exploring and at least presenting one with both sides of the issue. But like Congress, many in the media have a paralysing fear of the tiger (paper or otherwise) known as the Israeli lobby. Congressman Paul Findley analysed this phenomenon in his book They Dare to Speak Out. In it, he explored the tactics used to intimidate and silence debate. But I believe the perception of the Israeli and Jewish lobby power is more than its reality. In 1996, a report by the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS) called for regime change in Iraq to neutralise Syria and Iran. Titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, the study, addressed to Benjamin Netanyahu, was written by neoconservatives like Richard Perle (chair, now chief architect of the war on Iraq), James Colbert (from the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs), Charles Fairbanks, Jr. (SAIS), Douglas Feith (Feith and Zell Associates, now third ranking official in the Pentagon), Robert Loewenberg, (president, IASPS), Jonathan Torop (the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, WINEP an earlier offshoot of AIPAC), and David Wurmser (IASPS, assistant to George Bush's Chief Policy Adviser John Bolton). I believe everyone should study this document and similar ones (like Project for New American Century) to understand the agenda and the people advancing this in 1996 and before. IASPS does not hide its agenda as it even requires its applicants to have bought into the philosophy of the godfather of neoconservatives Leo Strauss. Many Republicans and Democrats are unhappy with this direction of unconditional support for Israeli policies. Yet, as Senator Fullbrigt articulated, fear of the Lobby shapes Washington's policies. President Bill Clinton appointed a lobbyist for Israel as ambassador to Israel. Martin Indyk was an adviser to former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and an Australian citizen. Presidential intervention was needed to speed-up his US citizenship to get appointed. Dennis Ross served as director of WINEP, created by ex-AIPAC President Weinberg, to advance Zionist interests before and after Clinton appointed him as Middle East envoy. Appointing ambassadors, envoys and policy makers selected from the ranks of those who lobbied for a foreign country (Israel) is unprecedented in US history. John Kerry's brother was just sent as an envoy to assure Israel of his unwavering commitments, and Kerry frequently makes comments in support of the apartheid wall and Israeli colonial activities. So one would expect no change in Middle East policy under a Kerry administration. Not all are falling in line, and those like Cynthia McKinney, who were shot down for speaking the truth, are coming back, while others in Congress, like congressmen Kucinich and Conyers and Senators Byrd and Hollinger, speak some truth to power. But it is time the public began to bypass mainstream media to find out what really is happening in Washington and to hold elected officials accountable. It is time to put US interests first. The writer is author of Sharing the Land of Canaan: Human Rights and the Israeli-Palestinian Struggle. He contributed this article to The Jordan Times www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
[CTRL] Gay Porn Star Services Bohemian Grove Members
-Caveat Lector- New York Post: Gay Porn Star Services Bohemian Grove Members New York Post Page Six (Archived Page) | July 22 2004 Comment: The spin here is that the Grove members are unaware of who the porn star is. Point one - porn stars get paid tens of thousands of dollars, it's highly unlikely that 'Chad Savage' needs a part time summer job to earn money. Point two - as the San Francisco Chronicle reported, employees are highly screened, they don't just get in 'by accident.' To get in without them knowing you would have to sneak in like Alex did. Plus there have been numerous reports down the years of how male prostitutes are bused in especially for the members. July 22, 2004 -- THE power-moguls and political heavyweights now luxuriating at ultra-exclusive retreat Bohemian Grove are unaware that they're being waited on hand-and-foot by a famous gay porn star. We're told that "Chad Savage," who has appeared in such carnal classics as "How the West Was Hung," is supplementing his sex job by working as a valet at Bohemian Grove, the all-male annual gathering inside a 2,700-acre redwood forest in Monte Rio, Calif., that has been attended by every Republican president since Calvin Coolidge, as well as by industrial titans and media magnates. "All of us valets in the Grove are tittering about it," says our Bohemian blabbermouth. "To think there's all these powerful conservative guys having their drinks and food served to them by a gay porn star. He makes their beds and attends to their every need and they have no idea who he really is." Bigwigs who have attended the two-week retreat include George H.W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Alan Greenspan, Walter Cronkite, Newt Gingrich, Alexander Haig, Jack Kemp, Henry Kissinger, Colin Powell, John Major, William F. Buckley, and former C.I.A. director William Casey. Savage is at the Grove under his real name which we wouldn't reveal to Grove spokesman Sam Singer, because we didn't want the valet to lose his job. But Singer said the club didn't care about his past. "All that matters is that the valets do good service," he said. "That's really all that matters." Savage sure knows how to provide "service." When he starred in "How the West Was Hung" in 1999, one reviewer wrote that he wore a "beatific grin" while engaging in an orgy, and added that his "youthful enthusiasm is entirely winning." When they're not listening to policy speeches, "Bohos" are known to urinate freely in the redwoods and perform mock-druidic rituals that revolve around a 40-foot-tall stone owl. In one ritual, called "Cremation of Care," members wearing red-hooded robes cremate a coffin effigy of "Dull Care" at the base of the owl altar. While the club has claimed its share of accomplishments Grovers privately boast that the Manhattan Project to develop the atom bomb was conceived on its grounds its oddball activities aren't for everyone. Richard Nixon once famously described the gathering as "the most faggy goddamned thing you could ever imagine." www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Neocons the Real Present Danger
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=3139 July 23, 2004 Neocons the Real Present Danger by Paul Craig Roberts President Bush's neoconservatives have announced that they are relaunching the Committee on the Present Danger. The new CPD will be totally different from the original. I was a member of the Committee on the Present Danger. It was a bipartisan private organization consisting largely of former presidential appointees who distrusted naiveté about Soviet intentions. One concern was that the U.S. government, feeling pressured to reduce nuclear arms, would be outmaneuvered by the Soviets, who didn't have similar pressures, with a strategic advantage for the Soviets being the result. The members were patriots committed to liberty, not warmongers. Some of the neoconservative members talked about "rolling back"Soviet gains, but the majority of the members rejected this as a romantic impulse not worthy of discussion. The committee's main concern was that U.S. capabilities not be rolled back more than, or in advance of, Soviet ones. The relaunched CPD consists of neoconservatives who are, in effect, an unregistered lobby group for Israel's Likud Party and its foreign policy. The purpose of the new CPD is to foment war against Islam. Myself and others who sought to maintain a balanced perspective will not be included in the new committee. With its goal of wider war in the Middle East, the neocon CPD is itself the present danger. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Sean Hannity, Neocon Twerp
-Caveat Lector- http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance16.html Deliver Us From Sean Hannity by Laurence M. Vance The book jacket describes him as "the hottest talk-radio personality in the country," the host of "the number one debate program on cable television today," the host of an afternoon radio show "which is heard on four hundred stations and by more than twelve million listeners," and the author of a "New York Times bestseller." Perhaps it was just an oversight, but the publishers forgot to add "militant warmonger," "Republican apologist," and "Bush idolater." Most people first heard of Sean Hannity when he made frequent appearances as a guest host for Rush Limbaugh. More militant, more religious, and without any "baggage" that has dogged Limbaugh (like drug use, questions about military service, and multiple marriages), Sean Hannity has taken the nation by storm. His new book,Deliver Us from Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism (Harper Collins, 2004), is itself evil, for if Hannity?s philosophy is followed, terrorism will increase, despotism will continue, and liberalism will triumph. The title of the book has obviously been appropriated from the "Lord?s Prayer" (Matthew 6:13). Hannity invokes religion early on in the book. He claims that "Islamic extremists" attack us because "we?re a largely Judeo-Christian nation that supports Israel" (p. 15). In the last chapter he terms President Bush?s goals in Iraq "our righteous goals" (p. 242). Hannity?s Quest for Evil Hannity wrote the book because of one thing: the existence of evil. He writes in the beginning of the first chapter: "I decided to write this book because I believe it is our responsibility to recognize and confront evil in the world and because I?m convinced that if we fail in that mission it will lead us to disaster" (p. 2). He also says near the end of the first chapter: "This is a book about the reality of evil in the world, about the importance of acting against it, and about the urgency of confronting and opposing those who won?t" (p. 23). The book ends with an epilogue where Hannity maintains that "the sheer persistence of evil" is a challenge of the future (p. 275). The word "evil" is mentioned so many times in the opening chapters as to render it meaningless. Hannity apparently senses this and gradually uses the word less and less as the book progresses. Forms of the word "evil" appear in each chapter the following number of times: Chapter Occurrences 1 42 2 51 3 19 4 13 5 13 6 4 7 8 8 1 9 3 Sometimes the word "evil" is amplified to "pure evil" (p. 2), "absolute evil" (p. 25), "political evil" (p. 26), "absolute and aggressive evil" (p. 28), "state-sponsored evil" (p. 30), "profound evil" (p. 31), "voracious evil" (p. 39), "group evil" (p. 45), or "pure, conscious evil" (p. 46). In each of the book?s nine chapters, Hannity presents us with a cast of evil characters. In chapter one, Saddam Hussein is evil, Osama bin Laden is evil, Stalin is evil, al Qaeda is evil, the Democratic Party is evil, suicide bystanders are evil, a crooked pharmacist is evil, a pedophile priest is evil, the Iraqi regime is evil, and Bill Clinton is evil. In chapter two, Hitler is evil, Nazis are evil, the Holocaust is evil, Japan is evil, Mussolini is evil, the DC sniper shootings are evil, the kidnaping of a girl is evil, and the murder of a young man is evil. In chapter three, the Soviet Union is evil, Jimmy Carter is evil, communism is evil, Leonid Brezhnev is evil, the Democratic Party is evil, and George Kennan is evil. In chapter four, Jimmy Carter is evil, Bill Clinton is evil, Saddam Hussein is evil, the Ayatollah Khomeini is evil, the Democratic Party is evil, and Ramsey Clark is evil In chapter five, Bill Clinton is evil, Muammar Qaddafi is evil, John Kerry is evil, the Democratic Party is evil, the Iraqi regime is evil, Yassir Arafat is evil, Al Gore is evil, the Taliban is evil, and France is evil. In chapter six, Noam Chomsky is evil, antiwar protestors are evil, Saddam Hussein is evil, Bill Clinton is evil, Martin Sheen is evil, Richard Gere is evil, Sean Penn is evil, Edward Kennedy is evil, Marcy Kaptur is evil, and Dennis Kucinich is evil. In chapter seven, Bill Clinton is evil, Hillary Clinton is evil, Osama bin Laden is evil, Ramzi Yousef is evil, Yasser Arafat is evil, Terry McAuliffe is evil, Madeleine Albright is evil, Warren Christopher is evil, Al-Jazeera is evil, Joe Lockhart is evil, the PLO is evil, Janet Reno is evil, Suha Arafat is evil, and al Qaeda is evil. In chapter eight, the Democratic Party is evil, Jay Rockefeller is evil, Dick Durbin is evil, Barbara Milkulski is evil, and Carl Levin is evil. In chapter nine, Ted Kennedy is evil, Bob Graham is evil, Dennis Kucinich is evil, John Edwards is evil, Al Sharpton is evil, Terry McAuliffe is evil, Howard Dean is evil, John Kerry is evil, Richard Gephardt is evil, Joseph Lieberman is evil, Wesley Clark is evil, and the United
Re: [CTRL] Fwd: McKinney storms to win; Isakson earns Senate bid
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/22/2004 10:40:03 AM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Interesting to see if she hangs tough or kneels before Massa AIPAC. She is one tough cookie and won't be bowing to AIPAC, that's for sure! I don't agree with her on everything but I agree with her enough that I'd vote for her and I consider her a real patriot and a hero who deserves our applaud and help. Bill. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Now that McKinney is (hopefully) back...
-Caveat Lector- I can think of ONE FINAL piece of the puzzle to bring America back to Americans and out of the hands of the Israel Lobby. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om inline: Untitled01
[CTRL] Democracy and the neocons: a marriage of convenience
-Caveat Lector- http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10categ_id=5article_id=6453 Democracy and the neocons: a marriage of convenience By Jim Lobe Special to The Daily Star Wednesday, July 21, 2004 Of all the delusions that American neoconservatives perpetrated in their drive to take the US to war in Iraq, the most durable was the notion that they were committed to the spread of Wilsonian democracy. As someone who has watched the neocon movement over the past 30 years or so, I find this hard to accept. My skepticism is based on several factors, including the obvious selectivity of the neocons. After all, one has only to look at their support for authoritarian regimes in Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Tunisia and Jordan - as opposed to their eagerness to invade Iraq in the name of bringing democratic rule there - to find some glaring inconsistencies. At the same time, it is the neocons who pushed hardest for US President George W. Bush to cease dealing with Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat, though he was elected by a substantial majority of eligible voters in the West Bank and Gaza. Indeed, neocon hard-liners like former Pentagon official Richard Perle believe Palestinians should be denied self-determination altogether. Without doubt, neocons have long professed a devotion to democracy. Indeed, their main argument in favor of a US strategic alliance with Israel - a central and persistent tenet of the neoconservative creed over the past three decades - has been the Jewish state's status as the lone democratic outpost in a region of seething and hate-filled Arab autocracies. The question, however, is whether democracy promotion, especially in the Arab world, ranks anywhere nearly as high in the neocons' policy priorities as their commitment to Israeli security. And to the extent that they may perceive a potential conflict between the two, which one are they inclined to choose as the more important? A brief look at the historical record may help provide an answer. While the neocon movement sprouted wings in the late 1960s and early 1970s, as Israel found itself increasingly isolated at the UN, neoconservatives first tasted real power under former President Ronald Reagan, who was especially taken with Jeane Kirkpatrick's attacks on Jimmy Carter's human rights policies. According to her, these were disastrously undermining "friendly authoritarian" regimes in Iran, Nicaragua, South America, and even apartheid South Africa - all governments enjoying friendly relations with Israel. Instead of hectoring such regimes on reform, she argued, Washington should have provided them with unstinting support as allies in the global struggle against Soviet communism, both because Moscow was the far greater evil, and because authoritarian regimes could become "democracies," while "totalitarian" ones could not. Reagan applied these ideas. During his first term, Washington not only renewed military and other forms of support to "friendly authoritarians," but also began the Reagan Doctrine - the sponsorship of right-wing "freedom fighters," such as jihadists in Afghanistan, tribal nationalists in Angola and ex-National Guard figures in Nicaragua, who distinguished themselves more by fanaticism and brutality than by the democratic arts. At the same time, neocons were ecstatic with Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon - not because it furthered the cause of democracy, but because it meant the expulsion of the PLO from Lebanon and a shift in the regional balance of power against Soviet-backed Syria. So, if neocons were not big democracy boosters during their period of greatest influence under Reagan, when did they discover their religion? Most analysts date their conversion to the last half of the 1980s, when the "people power" movement ousted Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines and when Chilean strongman Augusto Pinochet was defeated in a referendum to extend his rule. In both cases, prominent neoconservatives Paul Wolfowitz and Elliott Abrams were serving at the top of the State Department bureaus dealing with Asian and South American affairs. Neocon pundits were quick to embrace these perceived deviations from the "Kirkpatrick doctrine" as a necessary correction, particularly in light of the winding down of the Cold War. While Wolfowitz and Abrams sided with those who wanted to remove the two "friendly authoritarians," so did a significant number of Republican lawmakers, some of them classic realists like Senator Richard Lugar, who had already broken with Reagan and the neocons over their support for South Africa. In that respect, the neocons were as much fellow travelers as they were in the vanguard, as they like to claim. The neocon record throughout the 1990s reinforced this conclusion. Contrary to myth, neocons, including Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary today who is widely considered the most Wilsonian on the neocon spectrum, did not urge former President George H. W. Bush to plant
[CTRL] Israel A Rogue State --- Sharon against the world
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 21, 2004 Israel A Rogue State Sharon against the world by Justin Raimondo In 1987, a black teenager, Tawana Brawley, claimed to have been abducted and raped by six white cops in upstate New York. In addition to sexually abusing her, she said, they had scrawled racial epithets on her body and smeared her with feces. She later identified Steven A. Pagones, a Duchess County district attorney, as one of the perpetrators, and the case became a cause clbre in the black community, with prominent black leaders demanding that Pagones be prosecuted and the "cover-up" ended. The Reverend Al Sharpton used the case to catapult himself into the center of public attention, and the alleged incident was seized on by some civil rights activists to illustrate a persistent and seemingly inherent "racism" in American society. There was just one problem with this line of argument: the "rape" of Tawana Brawley was a hoax. There was no physical evidence Ms. Brawley had been raped, and so she changed her story to sexual abuse without penetration. But there were so many anomalies in her tale that the whole thing began to fall apart, anyway, and yet still Brawley and her supporters insisted that she had been victimized, instead of the innocent Pagones, who had been falsely accused. It took seven months for a jury to conclude, after examining medical and police records and hearing over 100 witnesses, that Tawana was a liar. The epithets scrawled in charcoal, the smearing of feces, her ripped clothing all of it had been self-inflicted. For the better part of a year, the community had been rent apart by a divisive and increasingly contentious feud, pitting black against white, but the perpetrators of this hoax weren't through. They continued to maintain that the "rape" was real, and called Pagones and virtually every New York politician in the book a "racist." Ten years later, Pagones sued Brawley and her lawyers for defamation: a judge, in awarding Pagones a substantial sum, remarked that "Tawana Brawley appears caught up in her own fiction." The myth of victimization is not easily dispelled by the facts, especially when it is reinforced by ideology. Brawley's camp followers and supporters knew that American society is inherently and unredeemably racist, and therefore the rape of Tawana just had to be true. The line between truth and falsehood is easily blurred where ideology is concerned: if Tawana wasn't literally a victim in this case, then surely her rape at the hands of marauding white cops was figuratively and symbolically true in the sense that it was a plausible story. Or something like that. A similar hoax recently threw all of France into turmoil. This time the author was one Marie-Leonie LeBlanc, a 23-year-old Frenchwoman, who claimed she had been attacked on the Paris subway by six youths of North African appearance. Upon relieving her of her wallet, and discovering her address, one of her alleged assailants had supposedly remarked: "Only Jews live in the 16th arrondissement." The six proceeded to tip over her baby carriage, slash her clothes, and draw swastikas on her stomach all in plain sight of some 20 people in the train car at the time, who supposedly sat passively in their seats while LeBlanc was cruelly abused by these swarthy stormtroopers. The incident provoked a national orgy of outrage and self-recrimination: every public official and newspaper of note bellowed that the whole society stood condemned and wallowed in a luxurious bath of collective guilt. Why hadn't they woken up to the rising threat of a supposedly rampant anti-Semitism earlier? The answer, we were told, lay in the North African minority that was permeated with "hate." Israel's amen corner was quick to point out that this "hate" was fueled by opposition to the Jewish state, not only in the Muslim community but among secular French opponents of Israeli government policies: anti-Zionism, they claimed, was separable from anti-Semitism only in theory. In practice, they averred, the two are almost always indistinguishable. The braying chorus of moralizers kept it up even as Ms. LeBlanc's story began to fall apart with Tawana-like speed: the video surveillance cameras revealed nothing of the surreal scene described by the alleged victim, and not a single witness had come forward. Unlike Tawana, however, it took LeBlanc only four days to admit to the hoax, engineered in cooperation with her boyfriend: an apology was offered, but no explanation. And still the braying of the moralizers only got louder, as in this bizarre account in Time magazine, "No one felt vindicated, however, for the simple reason that the tale had been completely credible France today is a place where such acts of anti-Semitism and racism are commonplace. 'If reaction was so intense, it's because people unfortunately know that such a horrific scenario is plausible,' says Yonathan Arfi, president of
[CTRL] Neocons Revive Cold War Era CDP --- Staffing It With The Usual Suspects.
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=3075 July 21, 2004 Neocons Revive Cold War Group by Jim Lobe A bipartisan group of 41 mainly neoconservative foreign-policy hawks has launched the third Committee on the Present Danger (CPD) whose previous two incarnations mobilized public support for rolling back Soviet-led communism but whose new enemy will be "global terrorism." The new group, announced at a Capitol Hill press conference Tuesday, said its "single mission" will be to "advocate policies intended to win the war on global terrorism terrorism carried out by radical Islamists opposed to freedom and democracy." "The committee intends to remain active until the present danger is no longer a threat, however long that takes," said CPD chairman R. James Woolsey, who served briefly as former President Bill Clinton's Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director and has often referred to the battle against radical Islam as "World War IV." Woolsey appeared with senators Joseph Lieberman, a neoconservative Democrat who was former Vice President Al Gore's running mate in 2000, and Jon Kyl, a Republican from Arizona with strong connections to the Christian Right. In a joint column published Tuesday in the Washington Post, the two senators argued that "too many people are insufficiently aware of our enemy's evil worldwide designs, which include waging jihad against all Americans and reestablishing a totalitarian religious empire in the Middle East." "The past struggle against communism was, in some ways, different from the current war against Islamist terrorism," they wrote, evoking the two past CPDs. "But ... the national and international solidarity needed to prevail over both enemies is ... the same. In fact, the world war against Islamic terrorism is the test of our time." At the press conference later, Lieberman said the purpose of the new group is "to form a bipartisan citizens' army, which is ready to fight a war of ideas against our Islamist terrorist enemies, and to send a clear signal that their strategy to deceive, demoralize and divide America will not succeed." The two senators also claimed that the new CPD consists of "citizens of diverse political persuasions," although the vast majority of the 41 members are well-known neoconservatives who have strongly helped lead the drive to war in Iraq and have long supported broadening President George W. Bush's "war on terrorism" to include Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia, as well. Prominently represented are fellows from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), such as former United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, Joshua Muravchik, Laurie Mylroie, Danielle Pletka, Michael Rubin and Ben Wattenberg. Members from Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board (DPB) include Kenneth Adelman, Newt Gingrich, and Woolsey himself. Committee members from the Center for Security Policy (CSP), include CSP President Frank Gaffney, Charles Kupperman, William Van Cleave, and Dov Zakheim, who just stepped down as an undersecretary of defense under Rumsfeld. Board members or fellows of several other right-wing or mainly neoconservative think tanks have also joined the new CPD, including the Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institution, the Manhattan Institute, Freedom House, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, the former Committee to Liberate Iraq, the National Institute for Public Policy and Americans for Victory Over Terrorism. The majority of members are associated with policy statements by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) whose charter members in 1997 included Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney and a number of other men and women who have pushed for hawkish positions on the Middle East and China, particularly from their perches at senior levels in the Bush administration. The original CPD was formed in 1950 with the help of anti-Communist hawks in the administration of former President Harry Truman as a "citizens' lobby" by a high-powered group of Wall Street businessmen, public-relations specialists and university administrators to raise public concern about Soviet and Chinese threats and mobilize support for a huge military budget aimed at maintaining U.S. military supremacy. CPD-2, which was officially launched immediately after the election of President Jimmy Carter (1977-81), was created as a coalition of neoconservatives mostly hawkish Democrats who had supported the unsuccessful presidential candidacy of Senator Henry Jackson of Washington State (organized as the Coalition for a Democratic Majority, or CDM) and aggressive Republican nationalists, such as Rumsfeld, opposed to the policies of dtente pursued by Henry Kissinger under former presidents Richard Nixon (1969-1974) and Gerald Ford (1974-77). During the Carter administration, CPD-2 essentially served as a "shadow" foreign-policy cabinet churning out position papers and opinion columns, holding conferences, appearing on
[CTRL] Sharon Favors Bush Over Kerry
-Caveat Lector- THE HOFFMAN WIRE Dedicated to Freedom of the Press, Investigative Reporting and Revisionist History Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Michael A. Hoffman II, Editor Israel for the elephants A victory for Bush would allow Sharon to continue with his limited plan. John Kerry might want a larger withdrawal. Therefore, Sharon is praying for Bush to win. by Ya'akov Ahimeir Maariv (Israeli newspaper) 21 July, 2004 http://www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=articlearticleID=9961 It is strange how much Israel, which was built on socialist foundation, has become a Republican stronghold, from the perspective of many Israeli prime ministers. The first was Yitzhak Rabin. During his first term as prime minister, he admired President Nixon and Secretary of State Kissinger. The first American president that Menachem Begin met was Democratic Jimmy Carter. Begin compared him to Jabotinsky, which is not a insignificant comparison coming from someone who, in his youth, headed the Beitar movement in Poland. Although Carter created Camp David, Begin found that he had more a common language with Republican Ronald Reagan, who was angered by the bombing of the Iraqi reactor, but nothing more. The elder Bush caused a lot of trouble for Yitzhak Shamir and his explicit intervention in the Israeli election facilitated Rabin's second election. Now Sharon is praying for the younger Bush to beat John Kerry, the Democratic candidate. Why Bush? I will attempt to answer on his behalf, without being privy to his inner thoughts. I can image Sharon saying to himself, "I already know Bush Jr. He rubber stamps our policy. I have not evacuated the illegal outposts, despite my promise, and his advisor Condoleezza Rice commented on it but nothing more. This Texan president understands the language of power and because of him, Israel does not have a problem on its eastern front. If we were to bomb the Iranians' nuclear complex, he would understand. After he, too, invaded a country where weapons of mass destruction are yet to be found, which might, heaven forefend, cost him his second term. Even if delegates at the Democratic Convention in Boston promise that Kerry will move the Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, who would believe them? There have been promises in the past and the lot on Allenby Street in Jerusalem, that is designated for the embassy, is still sprouting thistle. Indeed, even though some Israelis fly a small "Stars and Stripes" on Independence Day (Israel's; not the 4th of July), we relate to promises (theirs and ours) with a reasonable degree of cynicism. If Kerry is elected, and there is an excellent chance that he will be, a high-level envoy (perhaps Clinton, himself) will come to the region and hamper implementation of what Sharon considers the "limited plan": evacuation of four settlements in Samaria and Gush Katif. President Kerry might not be satisfied with a finger. He might want the whole hand, not just Kadim but also Ma'ale Adumim. Therefore, Sharon is a Republican. It should be noted that despite the love affair between Bush and Sharon, a majority of American Jewry will continue to vote for the Democrats. The sky will not fall. There will not be a spilt between Israel's "Republican" government, even if it includes Shimon Peres, and American Jewry. However, part of the puzzle remains to unsolved (sic). If Bush is re-elected, will his romance with Sharon continue? No one knows. As of now, we know: we are walking down the republican path, that path of elephants, in the jungle. /-- The Israeli Holocaust Against the Palestinians by Michael Hoffman and Moshe Lieberman A Book Banned by Left and Right Alike. Get it here: http://www.revisionisthistory.org/cgi-bin/store/agora.cgi?cart_id=5468705.25910*qP57l2product=Books_and_Pamplets The HOFFMAN WIRE is a public service of Independent History and Research, Box 849, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 USA 24 Hour Revisionist News Bureau: http://www.revisionisthistory.org/news.html Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A
[CTRL] Voice of the White House July 15 16, 2004
-Caveat Lector- http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a994.htm Voice of the White House July 15 16, 2004 TBRNews.org - July 19, 2004 In previous issues, we carried comments from a reporter assigned to the White House press corps. Some of these remarks, most especially one about Bushs physical and mental problems, drew an enormous number of viewers and hundreds of inquiries, most especially from foreign press entities. The reporter advised us by email that there was rampant fury in the White House and security was becoming very tight. As a result of this, he decided to lay low for a few weeks and see how the wind was blowing. Yesterday, he sent us the following material which we are now posting. Some of it is outrageous in the extreme but to date, no one has proven him wrong. July 15, 2004: The Monkey Palace is taking on the aspects of a gay bar at frantic hour. The inclusion of Edwards on the Kerry ticket, the plummeting Bush poll numbers, the imminence of a raging civil war in Iraq, the growing defections of Willing Coalition members and on and on are turning this place into a muted mad house. Bush is, according to [redacted], gobbling tranquilizers and screaming at anything that moves. The latest bit of lunacy is this business about cancelling the election in November because of trumped up terrorist charges. They dragged out the dimbulb, Ridge, to propose that, because he knew there would be terrorist disruptions of the election, that it ought to be postponed for a safer time. If that ever happened, the mobs would be carrying Bushs head on a pike up and down Pennsylvania Avenue to the cheers of thousands and finally, someone with some sense realized that this just would not work like the last Florida rip-off so they quickly pretended that it was all a misunderstanding and want the rest of us to forget about it. This place is guarded like Fort Knox. There are more anti-antiaircraft rockets, machine guns, snipers and electronic snooping gear on the White House roof than at Aberdeen Proving Ground. In contrast to the Administrations strange lethargy prior to 9/11, the standing orders are that the President must be notified immediately of any potentially hostile aircraft entering into Washington Defense Zone airspace at which time, Bush will rush frantically down to the air raid bunker and close the bank vault- thick steel door behind him. Cheney will probably have a fatal heart attack down in his own bunker [a farting mouse could also cause this, so bad off is our de facto Presidents disintegrating pump these days] and the government will be run [into the ground] by the Likud boys. The RNC has teams out trying to find out if Edwards ever had sex with the mother of his own children or has overdue library books and Bush is looking at maps of North Korea in his Map Room! The general public would not believe how scary things are here, no matter how hard you try to alert them. I am planning to write a book about all of this, providing I dont get caught talking out of school and it will be very successful, believe me. Some of the help here are most cooperative because not all of them are rabid Jesus freaks and view the White House as a very weird and dangerous place to work. And oddly enough, a number are grossly offended [as am I] about enforced staff prayer meetings and the omnipresent pictures of Jesus, the Destroyer of all Muslims and Democrats, glaring at you from every office wall. July 16, 2004: The brass here is delighted that they were able to arm-twist a compliant Congress into postponing the release of a Congressional report on who knew what and when until after the election. Their aim is to throw just enough doubt into the very valid belief that George W. Bush was given false information about WMD to influence the undecided voter [both of them]. This is pure crap and everyone around here knows it. Bush demanded any information that would bolster his drive to war and refused to accept anything less. George W., by the way, is the source for the miserable tortures in Iraqi jails. It went from Bush, who wanted wholesale shootings of prisoners, through Rumsfeld, who toned it down, to the troops. Both of these jokers are guilty as hell of fostering a deliberate U.S. policy of violations of the Geneva Convention. Their rationale? We are all-powerful and no one will dare to contradict us. Also, they believe, the American people are divided into two distinct groups: the Good People who are all ultra right wingers, the Jesus freaks who are insane and the business world that expects complete support from Bush. [In exchange for huge bribes] And then there is the other side, the Bad People, composed, as they see it, of Muslims, queers, left wing idiots, niggers (oh yes, that word is occasionally heard in the Monkey Palace), sociopaths, secular humanists, Catholics, feminists and anyone and any group that does not realize that George W. Bush was called to the Monkey Palace by God Almighty and who
[CTRL] Signs Of The Times
-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om inline: Untitled01
[CTRL] 'Saving the World' With Your Money
-Caveat Lector- July 20, 2004 'Saving the World' With Your Money by Rep. Ron Paul The Millennium Challenge Act, a new foreign aid scheme I wrote about back in May, received its hoped-for $2.5 billion from Congress last week. Only 41 members of Congress supported an effort to strip the funding, demonstrating once again that the two parties are not serious about reducing federal spending. Considering all the rhetoric in Washington about runaway spending, one would think a new foreign welfare program would be among the easiest things to cut politically. Since American foreign aid programs began in earnest decades ago, tens of billions of U.S. tax dollars have been given to nations around the globe. The utter failure of this money to change things for the better in those nations is no longer in question; even the most earnest liberals are beginning to admit the obvious. Most of the recipient nations remain endlessly mired in poverty, political and legal corruption, and cultural malaise. A rational person would argue that failed aid programs should be eliminated. In Washington, however, failed programs get more money thrown at them. The Millennium Challenge Act is designed to appease fiscal conservatives and defense hawks by appearing to single out friendly, well-behaved nations for aid payments, ostensibly creating a carrot-and-stick approach. But the Act merely puts a shiny new label on the same old failed policy of trying to remake the world using welfare. Welfare has never worked at home and its never worked abroad, no matter what incentives Congress tries to attach. The proponents of the Millennium Challenge Act tell us this time it will be different. If only we condition foreign aid money on the adoption of certain policies, the recipient nations will clean up their acts. Market economies and democratic political reforms surely will follow, if only American taxpayers provide a little seed money. Does anyone actually believe this? It is beyond presumptuous to think Congress can change the politics, economies, and cultures of foreign nations. It is simply preposterous to imagine that foreign aid will be cut off once given, no matter what a nation does or fails to do. After all, weve been giving billions to some of our worst enemies for decades. Once a federal program begins, it becomes permanent. Mark my words, the Millennium Challenge Act budget will grow in future years. The question nobody in Washington wants to answer is this: What gives the Congress the right to send American tax dollars overseas in the first place? Certainly not the Constitution. Why should American taxpayers, many of whom are poor themselves, be expected to fund foreign welfare? Remember that the poorest Americans are hardest hit by the inflation tax, which is the direct result of deficit spending and the printing of new money to service federal debts. Congress hardly needs to concoct another way to spend money. Government debt already exceeds seven trillion dollars, and runaway spending will force yet another increase in the federal debt ceiling law before the end of the year. At its current pace, Congress soon will create single-year deficits of one trillion dollars. Combine this indebtedness with future liabilities in the form of exploding Social Security and Medicare obligations and its clear that Congress can find better things to do with $2.5 billion than send it overseas. My very modest proposal is this: eliminate the Millennium Challenge Act, apply half the money to the national debt, and spend the rest domestically if Congress simply cant bear to give it back to taxpayers. Even the worst domestic program is better than useless and meddlesome foreign aid. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] No nationalists on Jack's 'shining hill'
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39513
No nationalists on Jack's 'shining hill'
Patrick J. Buchanan
Posted: July 19, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
2004Creators Syndicate, Inc.
"A struggle is underway for the soul of the Republican Party, between a minority of protectionist xenophobes and those who are pro-trade and pro-immigration."
Thus does Jack Kemp begin a column in which he jettisons the black conservative running for Congress in North Carolina whom he earlier endorsed. Kemp accuses Vernon Robinson of "running a very negative and aggressive anti-immigration campaign ... contrary to the core values of the party of Lincoln."
Jack is right about that struggle for the soul of the party. But why is it necessary to demonize disagreement? Webster's defines xenophobia as "fear and hatred of strangers and foreigners." What evidence is there that Robinson is not a man of good heart?
Jack cites George Washington as having "famously quipped in 1788, 'I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong.'"
But, as James Fulford of VDare.com notes, Washington was talking about a persecuted Dutch minority that had supported the American Revolution. Few of the illegal aliens here were victims of persecution, and not all are necessarily virtuous. Their only common characteristic is that all have broken our laws.
Can Jack seriously believe the Father of Our Country would have approved of amnesty for 8 million to 14 million illegal aliens and an immigration policy that will leave us in 2050 with 100,000,000 Hispanics, concentrated in our Southwest, with scores of millions not speaking English and loyal to nations not our own?
Jack says illegals come for work, not welfare. Most do. But why, then, did Jack oppose California's Proposition 187, which would have denied welfare benefits only to aliens here illegally? Why, as HUD-meister, did he hand out housing subsidies to illegal aliens?
Jack believes being pro-illegal is good politics. But Gov. Pete Wilson overcame a 20-point deficit to win re-election in 1994 by backing Proposition 187. Wilson was the last Republican to win major statewide office before Arnold, whose best issue, pollsters say, was opposition to Gray Davis' handing out of driver's licenses to illegals. Even John Kerry now opposes driver's licenses for illegals.
The Dole-Kemp ticket, however, unfortunately lost first-time Hispanic voters to Clinton-Gore 91 percent to 7 percent. And California, which Nixon carried five times on national tickets and Reagan swept four times, is now routinely written off by the GOP in presidential elections, partly due to the surging Hispanic vote.
Since Bush took office, his free-trade policies have produced a net loss of 2.6 million manufacturing jobs, one in every six in the United States. The textile and apparel industries in the Carolinas have been especially hard hit. These jobs have historically been the access ramp to the American Dream for blacks, Hispanics, single moms and the working poor. Is Vernon Robinson wrong to want to stop shipping these jobs off to China?
Our open-borders policy is forcing millions of our workers into a Darwinian competition for jobs with desperate immigrant folks willing to work for less than the minimum wage. Unlike Jack, these Americans are not often invited onto the boards of Empower America, the Heritage Foundation, G2 Satellite Solutions, SmartCOP, Oracle, Hawk Corp., IDT Telecom, ING Americas, Thayer Capital or Thomas Weisel Partners.
After naming all the big men he met with in Mexico recently, Jack thunders, "[T]he best way to stop mass migration from Mexico is not to militarize the border." Did Jack ask his Mexican chums, then, why they have militarized their border with Guatemala?
Before using derogatory terms like "reactionary" and "protectionist xenophobes," Brother Kemp might read a little more deeply into American history than Carl Sandburg's "Lincoln."
The first act of Congress Washington proudly signed on July 4 was the Tariff Act of 1789. Abe ("Give us a protective tariff and we shall have the greatest country on earth") Lincoln was not only the father of 70 years of Republican protectionism, he raised the Morrill tariff 12 times. And, sorry to report, the old Rail Splitter spoke openly and often about sending slaves back to Africa.
Teddy ("I thank God I am not a free trader") Roosevelt called free trade a "pernicious doctrine."
Jack twice refers to America as a "city on a shining hill," Reagan's signature phrase. But Reagan slammed import quotas on steel, machine tools, computer chips, and Japanese cars and motorcycles to save the Big Three and the Harley "Hog." Which Reagan did, God bless him.
And as the Gipper said in 1983: "This country has lost control of its borders. And no country can sustain that kind of position."
By the way, Jack the phrase is "a shining city on
[CTRL] Israeli soldiers continue killing spree
-Caveat Lector- http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/56022801-DF7E-4DB4-B211-CC771B047FCC.htm Israeli soldiers continue killing spree Monday 19 July 2004, 20:06 Makka Time, 17:06 GMT Palestinians have been killed in their homes by Israeli soldiers Israeli occupation forces are continuing their Bait Hanun siege and have killed a number of civilians across the occupied Palestinian territories. Israeli occupation troops, backed by armour, invaded the northern West Bank region of Tulkarim early on Monday, killing at least two Palestinians and destroying a number of houses. Local sources told Aljazeera.net that as many as 40 Israeli military vehicles, backed by helicopter gunships, raided the villages of Allar and Saida as well as the Tulkarim refugee camp amid intensive firing and sounds of explosions. The invading forces reportedly raided and badly ravaged a local charity which the Israelis claim is associated with a resistance group. Locals told Aljazeera television that Israeli troops imposed a strict curfew on the village and were barring ambulances and paramedics from reaching the wounded. The latest incident, in which grenades were flung, took place in Saida, north of Tulkarim. Two Palestinians, Sahir Ajash and Basil Abu Shab, both in their late twenties, died in the attack. According to witnesses, a grenade was thrown on to a porch where Abu Shab was sleeping. The explosion ripped apart his body. Another unexploded grenade was found on the porch. Ajash apparently fled but was later found dead with bullet wounds to the head, witnesses said. Residents reported that the Israeli soldiers invaded the village in a number of military vehicles and a bulldozer and demolished part of house in the area where the men's bodies were found. Other incidents In another incident, two Palestinians, including a child, were killed by Israeli occupation troops in the southern Gaza Strip. Four-year-old Samar Fujo died early on Monday morning of wounds she sustained 10 days ago after being shot in the head by Israeli snipers in the Zurub quarter of the Rafah refugee camp, medical sources said. Another unidentified Palestinian was also killed when Israeli forces opened fire at a civilian in the same area of the refugee camp, Palestinian security sources said. Israeli soldiers will continue until they are "completely convinced that Qassam rockets are no longer being fired towards Israel and that such incidents will not recur in the future" Israeli military official Elsewhere in Gaza late on Sunday night, Israeli helicopter gunships fired several missiles at an agricultural college in Bait Hanun, leading to structural damage, but no injuries. Israeli bulldozers also razed several square kilometres of civilian farm land, including greenhouses and a chicken farm belonging to Muhammad Zaanin. The northern Gaza Strip village of 30,000 people has been under siege since 30 June, when Israeli forces launched an incursion with the stated aim of creating a security zone after Qassam rockets fired into the Negev town of Sderot by Palestinian resistance fighters claimed their first fatalities. Since that date, 14 Palestinians have been killed and more than 90 injured and about 2600 sq km of agricultural land cleared. An Israeli military spokesperson has said the siege has been imposed in self-defence and will continue until they are "completely convinced that Qassam rockets are no longer being fired towards Israel and that such incidents will not recur in the future". Civilian shot 10 times On Sunday, Palestinian mourners carried the body of Yasir Tantawi during his funeral at the Balata refugee camp in the West Bank city of Nablus. Tantawi, 21, was killed in cold blood on Saturday by Israeli soldiers, witnesses told Aljazeera.net. The International Solidarity Movement (ISM) said Israeli soldiers shot and killed Tantawi in the streets of Balata around 7pm on Saturday Witnesses report that Tantawi was shot once in the leg and then a further nine times as he lay in the street unable to move. A Swedish national and fifth-year medical student, named only as Henrik, volunteering with the Palestinian Medical Relief Societies, ran towards Tantawi after he had been shot once and shouted to the Israeli soldiers that he was an international medical volunteer, the ISM said. Palestinians are constantly targeted by Israeli snipers The Israeli soldiers ignored his pleas and shot Tantawi nine more times at point-blank range, with wounds ranging from his chest to his legs. By the time the medical volunteers could reach him he was dead, said an ISM spokesperson. The reasons behind why Israeli soldiers entered the Balata refugee camp remain unclear. Witnesses say the Israeli military left the same evening. In an earlier incident on Friday evening, Bashar Zuraik, a 16-year-old also from Balata, was shot in the eye by a rubber-coated steel bullet and is currently being treated in
[CTRL] The Rule of Law and the Rule of Exceptions
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7section=0article=48585d=19m=7y=2004 The Rule of Law and the Rule of Exceptions Hassan Tahsin In an attempt to put an end to the Arab and international demand to force Israel to reveal its nuclear program, Dr. Mohammad El-Baradei, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency went to Israel on a visit that was doomed to failure even before he set out: The Israeli government had announced before the visit that they would not allow anyone to visit their nuclear establishments. El-Baradei went any way. After a helicopter tour over Israel, which did not allow him to see anything, he issued statements that pleased Israel and enabled the American administration to continue its protection of Israel from international demands for an inquiry into its nuclear weapons stock. And as is customary now in international policies, the fundamental principle of which is double standard and taking care of ones own interests regardless of how they harm others, Western powers did not have anything to say about Israels refusal to defy international covenants. But this tolerance of nuclear programs was strictly in the case of Israel. The American administration had tough words for Iran. It threatened to refer Irans nuclear issue to the Security Council so that it could punish Tehran. In the Far East, the style of containing nuclear proliferation is a different one: After finding that arrogance will not get it anywhere, Washington is using every diplomatic nicety in its bag of tricks and absolute politeness in addressing North Korea in order to persuade it to relinquish its nuclear program. This politeness in tone is due to the fact North Korea is backed by China. In contrast, Iran has no ones backing. It is also guilty of being a Muslim country and, ipso facto, not entitled to have nuclear capability. The West feels that it has already done the Muslim world more favors than it deserves by tolerating Pakistan as a nuclear power. Why dont the United States of America and major European powers treat Israel in the same way they treat Iran, North Korea or any other country when the offenses are the same? There are two reasons. First, the strategic interests of big powers and second, the policy of confronting Islam, which they have labeled after the fall of communism as their No.1 enemy. Both these reasons dictate that Israel, a country the West implanted in the Arab region for a variety of reasons, must be protected in every way -- with military hardware, diplomatic backing, Security Council vetoes and contemptuous dismissal of judgments by international courts. One would expect a country that never stops bragging about its democracy to show respect for judicial verdicts. On July 9, the International Court of Justice gave its ruling on the wall Israel is building through the Palestinian land. The court ruled that the wall was illegal, must be demolished and the Palestinians compensated. And as usual, Israel rejected the courts decision and confirmed its contempt for the ruling by continuing the construction of the wall. As usual, Washington hurried to support the Israeli position and announced that the International Court of Justice was not the suitable forum to discuss such political issues. Refusing to admit the fact that seizing others lands is a crime to be judged on merits and not a political issue is not what one would expect from the policeman of the world. Now that the next stage in the battle is for the Arab countries to move the issue to the United Nations General Assembly, it is certain that the world body will witness a bitter war between Arab groups on one side and Israel and the US on the other side. But the unfortunate reality of double standard means that a decision in favor of the Arab position will not mean anything for the cause of justice and international law. Even if the UN rules that the wall is illegal, Israel will refuse to obey the ruling and defy international law. And to judge by Americas record, Washington will support Israel in violating international law whether it comes as a ruling by the General Assembly or the Security Council. The US, armed with its veto, will be there on Israels corner defending its right to kill and destroy. Such a clearly unjust position will ensure the continuity of turbulence in the Middle East. This, in turn will affect international peace and security. I would like to ask two questions: Is the violation and defiance of international ruling and law considered to be one of the bases of Western democracy? And whether lies and deceit are the essence of Western democracy that the US wants to impose on the region?
[CTRL] Israel's racist legislation
-Caveat Lector- http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/453006.html Racist legislation Last summer, the Knesset revised the Citizenship Law in a manner that imposes draconian limitations on the freedom of Arab citizens of Israel to marry. An Israeli Arab from Taibeh, for instance, is already unable to marry a woman of his choice from Ramallah and establish a family with her in Israel. If he is stubborn, he will be compelled to live in another country. The revision was initiated by the government, based on the recommendation of the head of the Shin Bet security service, who claimed that, "since 2001, 23 residents of the region who received standing in Israel due to family unification were involved in providing significant aid to hostile activity." In the wake of this recommendation - and not following a public debate befitting the intensity of damage to the rights of Arab citizens - the Knesset decided to completely prevent family unification, and permit non-citizens to stay in Israel only for a short period of time or for medical reasons, or if they have unique qualities - usually collaborators with Israel. In its response to a petition to the High Court of Justice on the issue, the state claims the law is temporary; but a temporary injunction by its nature becomes a permanent injunction, and meanwhile, the rights of thousands of Arab citizens have been steadily damaged. Yesterday's extension of the injunction for another six months provides more evidence to bolster the suspicion that the security explanation is only a cover for a racist political position. Particularly disappointing is the stance of liberal-minded Interior Minister Avraham Poraz, who participated in revising the law and sufficed with establishing a committee to try to ease the restrictions. If the reasoning for fundamentally damaging the basic rights of Israeli Arabs is, indeed, solely based on security considerations, the state could have been expected to avoid demonstrating an intolerable recklessness in changing one of the most important and equality-promoting laws on the books. The state could have been expected to institute a more fundamental security check for those who want to reside in Israel by force of their marriage. In addition, the 23 people whom the Shin Bet said were involved in hostile activity is a drop in the ocean, considering that nearly 100,000 Palestinians have settled in Israel in the last decade as a result of this law. The Citizenship Law is intended to balance as much as possible the discrimination that stems from the Law of Return, and every damage to it distances us from the basic principles on which Western democracies function. For as long as the Law of Return is intended to preserve the Jewish character of the state of the Jews, the Citizenship Law is intended to open a narrow gap for the entrance of non-Jews in specific personal circumstances. In the past, the interior minister had broad authority to decide who would enter, who would be a resident and who could become a citizen. This authority has now effectively been blocked regarding anyone defined by law as a "resident of the region." The law in its new formulation directly harms Arab citizens who marry "residents of the region." Israel has the right to limit the number of immigrants, as many countries do, but it cannot do so at the expense of the basic rights of its Arab citizens. Israel, in particular, in light of the historic circumstances surrounding its birth, must demonstrate restraint when it comes to legislating laws that result in fundamental discrimination against citizens of a large national minority. It is impossible to preserve the Jewish character of the state at the expense of equality, and it is worthwhile to remember that it is not the Citizenship Law that threatens the Jewish character of the State of Israel, but the continuation of the country's increasing control over the occupied Palestinian population. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to
[CTRL] Iowa's 35 Terror Arrests Dubious At Best
-Caveat Lector- http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040718/NEWS01/407180386/1001/NEWSlead=1 U.S. links 35 arrests in Iowa to terror But most defendants' ties to violence appear doubtful By BERT DALMER REGISTER STAFF WRITER Copyright 2004, Des Moines Register and Tribune Company July 18, 2004 About the statistics The terrorism arrest statistics in this article came from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, or TRAC, which is affiliated with Syracuse University. TRAC receives monthly information from a U.S. Justice Department database that includes entries for every law-enforcement case referred to various U.S. attorney offices for prosecution. The database includes no defendants' names or case numbers. But it does include lead charges, charge dates, attorneys' names, judges' names and sentencing information. The cases also include type-of-crime categories assigned by the Justice Department. Those pieces of information were used by the Des Moines Sunday Register to identify 27 defendants using court records. Eight other Iowa cases could not be identified by the newspaper based on information contained in the database. Court officials speculated that those cases were sealed from public inspection, most likely because the suspects had not yet been arrested. The Justice Department recently stopped providing TRAC with charge and type-of-crime information, believing that it could tip off would-be terrorists to an investigation. TRAC has sued the department to force release of the data, but that case is pending. Federal prosecutors say they built 35 terrorism-related cases in Iowa in the two years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. But a Des Moines Sunday Register analysis of the cases found that most defendants had questionable links to violent extremism. Those defendants who could be identified by the newspaper were, in most cases, charged with fraud or theft and served just a few months in jail. The number of terrorism-related cases even took one court official by surprise. "If there have been terrorism-related arrests in Iowa, I haven't heard about them," said U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt. Ironically, Pratt presided over courtroom proceedings in at least six of the criminal cases that federal prosecutors had cataloged as terrorist in nature. Included among the 35 cases were: Four American-born laborers who omitted mention of prior drug convictions or other crimes when they were assigned by a contractor to a runway construction project at the Des Moines airport or when they applied for manual-labor jobs there. Five Mexican citizens who stole cans of baby formula from store shelves throughout Iowa and sold them to a man of Arab descent for later resale. Two Pakistani men who entered into or solicited sham marriages so that they and their friends could continue to live in the Waterloo area and work at convenience stores there. The Iowa arrests were part of a national compilation of statistics cited by the U.S. Department of Justice in requests to Congress for $400 million this year for federal anti-terrorism efforts. The department's figures were again cited last week when Attorney General John Ashcroft lobbied lawmakers for continued support of the controversial U.S.A. Patriot Act, which gives law-enforcement officials greater authority to surveil and search foreigners and U.S. citizens. Skeptics of the Bush administration's response to the terrorist threat said that lumping minor crimes under the terrorism label could wrongly heighten public anxiety and provide a questionable rationale for more anti-terror resources. "When people read that they're doctoring the numbers, aren't they going to have less confidence in the Justice Department and the war on terror?" asked U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Ia. "You can't say that somebody's a terrorist when he isn't a terrorist." Prosecutors interviewed by the Sunday Register stressed that many of the Iowa cases were classic examples of illegal activities that are perpetrated by terrorist groups. And though any evidence of terrorist connections or motives was rarely mentioned in the courtroom, officials implied that some of the suspects might still be under suspicion, even since their release. " 'Bona fide' terrorism is a matter of semantics," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Murphy, who heads the criminal division of the U.S. attorney's office in Cedar Rapids. "I don't think you can draw conclusions based on what a person is convicted of." Prosecutors decline to explain most cases With few exceptions, Murphy and his fellow prosecutors declined to explain why any of the 35 cases were classified as terrorism, citing attorney rules and orders from Justice Department officials in Washington, D.C. Since 9/11, the Justice Department has largely equated secrecy with security, even in court. Top Justice Department officials have told Congress that some foreign suspects have been deported
[CTRL] The New Credibility Gap --- Look who's going after Joe Wilson
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 19, 2004 The New Credibility Gap Look who's going after Joe Wilson by Justin Raimondo The infinite chutzpah of the War Party is exemplified by its taking out after Joe Wilson for having a credibility problem. Look who's talking! These are the same people who stovepiped lies cooked up by a bunch of Iraqi exiles and passed it off as "intelligence": nuclear "centrifuges" that didn't exist, links to Al Qaeda that were utterly fictitious, a fleet of "drones" supposedly capable of bombing American cities that might just as well have been paper airplanes. It would be funny if we weren't talking about a decision to go to war. The much-cited (and little-read) Senate report supposedly exonerates the administration by sidestepping the issue of the Niger uranium forgeries: according to the revisionist view, the administration had other sources for their contention that Saddam was trying to procure uranium to make nukes. But as Joshua Marshall points out here, here, here, and especially here, these "other reports," as it turns out, were all based on the forgeries, or summaries of them. As Marshall concludes: "France, Italy and the United States each had reports about the alleged Iraq-Niger sales. And each stemmed from the same source the forged documents, the origins of which the SSCI chose not to investigate." The U.S. government may not be much good at procuring accurate intelligence, but one thing they are experts at is blowing smoke. And who really cares if Joe Wilson's wife did or did not recommend him for the job of going to Niger and investigating the claims about Saddam's uranium procurement activities? They deny it, while the neocons gleefully pronounce Wilson's credibility is history and undercut their own assertions of Wilson's anti-Bush "partisan bias" by claiming that his report somehow validated suspicions of Iraq's nuclear ambitions. We are told with a straight face that "analysts" were "alarmed" and not reassured by Wilson's report: they weren't convinced by his assessment that there was nothing to these stories. Keep in mind that these are the same "analysts" who received every bit of disinformation from Iranian agent Ahmed Chalabi as holy writ, who set up their own "shop" that cherry-picked raw intelligence and molded it to suit their preconceived purposes, who literally invented a narrative that Saddam, and not Osama Bin Laden, was the evil mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks. And now these people and their amen corner in the media are telling us that Wilson has forfeited his credibility! During the Vietnam war era, the phrase "credibility gap" was popular shorthand for the distance between the War Party's proclamations of impending victory and the reality of a futile, impossible war. Today that same gap is opening up between the Bush administration's mindlessly optimistic effusions and the rising reality of the Iraqi resistance: it is so wide that the Bushies are in danger of falling into it. In any case, the White House response to all this, reports the New York Times, has been strangely "muted." They aren't crowing, according to insiders, because: "The internal finger-pointing over who was to blame for the inclusion of the allegation in the speech left so much bad feeling, especially among the White House, the CIA and the State Department, that there was little appetite for reopening the subject." "Bad feelings" is one way to describe the emotional reaction of a high administration official facing a federal indictment although, depending on the severity of the charges, that may be a considerable understatement. The ultimate comeback to the Mark Steyns and Jonah Goldbergs of this world isn't anything I or Marshall can come up with: it's the indictments that Patrick J. "Bulldog" Fitzgerald and his fellow prosecutors will write up and put before a judge. The get-Wilson gang outed Valerie Plame, a CIA agent who happens to be Wilson's wife, in their rush to discredit him at all costs and they can smear their accusers, howl that they are being railroaded by anti-Semites, and do everything they can think of to wriggle their way out of it, to no avail. Because the time is coming when they are going to have to pay for their crimes, bigtime. Those infamous "16 words" just won't go away for the simple reason that they epitomized the campaign of deception that preceded the war. Bush's announcement that Iraq made an active effort to procure weapons-grade uranium from "an African country" was derived from documents that turned out to be crude forgeries. Less than five minutes of Googling would have been enough to disprove their veracity, and yet somehow this "intelligence" made its way into the White House and into the text of the President's speech. Who forged these documents and, more interesting, from a legal and political point of view, how did they go unvetted until months after the President's 2003
[CTRL] Zionism and anti-semitism
-Caveat Lector- http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/opposition/cannonfodder.htm Zionism and anti-semitism We implore and beseech our Jewish brethren to realize that the Zionists are not the saviors of the Jewish People and guarantors of their safety, but rather the instigators and original cause of Jewish suffering in the Holy Land and worldwide. The idea that Zionism and the State of Israel is the protector of Jews is probably the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the Jewish People. Indeed, where else since 1945 have Jews been in such physical danger as in the Zionist state?! Jews are enjoined by their religious laws to be loyal to the country of which they are citizens. ever since the destruction of the holy Temple in Jerusalem and the exile of the Jewish People some two thousand years ago, we have been enjoined to be scrupulously loyal to the countries we reside in, One of the great biblical prophets, Jeremiah, in chapter 29 of his book proclaimed G-d's message to all the exiled; verse seven reads, "Seek out the welfare of the city to which I have exiled you and pray for it to the Almighty, for through its welfare will you have welfare." This has been a cornerstone of Jewish morality throughout our history to this very day. Torah-true Jews wish to live in peace and harmony with their neighbors in every country among the community of nations, including in historic Palestine. They deplore acts and policies of violence carried out by those who, misusing the name of Israel our forefather, have substituted the ideal of chauvinist nationalism for the eternal values of the Torah, the eternal divinely bestowed inheritance of the Jewish people. It has been the age-old intention of Zionism to intentionally stir up anti-Semitism anywhere possible, and even more commonly, to take advantage of any Jewish suffering anywhere in order to enhance its cause Indeed, hatred of Jews and Jewish suffering is the oxygen of the Zionist movement, and from the very beginning has been to deliberately incite hatred of the Jew and then, in feigned horror, use it to justify the existence of the Zionist state this is, of course, Machiavellianism raised to the highest degree. Thus, the Zionists thrive on hatred and suffering of Jews, and seek to benefit thereby through keeping Jews in perpetual fear, causing them to ignore the true nature of Zionism, and instead to consider the Zionist state is their salvation. ANTI-SEMITISM BY POLITICAL ZIONISM Although Zionists and others dispute it, the undeniable fact is that revolutionary secular and apostate elements in the Jewish community in Europe contributed greatly to hostility towards Jews after World War I. This aroused hatred of Jews in general among many non-Jews. While a prisoner in 1924 in the fortress of Lansberg on the River Lech, Hitler wrote his Mein Kampf. We he became Chancellor of Germany in 1933, he was assisted by Goebbels, Roseberg and Streicher. From them came the declarations, The Jews of Germany caused the defeat of Germany in the 1914-1918 war; the Jews of Germany were responsible for the terrible conditions in Germany that followed the war; the Jews of Germany are foreigners and they wish to remain foreigners; they have no loyalty to the country of their birth; they are not human; they are filthy dogs; they have no right to intrude into Germanys affairs; there are too many Jews in Germany. As far as Zionism is concerned, the founder of Zionism and apostate, Theodor Herzl, sought to intensify hatred of the Jew in order to enhance the cause of political Zionism. Here are some of his pearls: It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . .I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends. (From his Diary, Part I, pp. 16) Additional words from the vivid imagination of this dreamer, from p. 68 of Part I of his Diary. So anti-Semitism, which is a deeply imbedded force in the subconscious mind of the masses, will not harm the Jews. I actually find it to be advantageous to building the Jewish character, education by the masses that will lead to assimilation. This education can only happen through suffering, and the Jews will adapt. Hateful views of Jews as being subhuman did not have to be invented by Nazi theorists such as Hitler, Goebbels, Rosenberg and Streicher. This ideology was simply adapted from statements of political Zionists such as those found in the writings of the Zionist Yehezkel Kaufman in 1933. In 1920 there were statements hostile to Jews expressed at Heidelberg University. These statements, arguing that Jews of Germany had caused the turmoil that followed the war; that the Jews of Germany had nothing in common with Germans, and that Germans had the right to prevent the Jews of
Re: [CTRL] Final Posting to CTRL
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/18/2004 4:06:58 PM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: General Bates, Noachide Liberation Army Is that General or Master Bates? Just couldn't help myself... Move along... Bill. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Final Posting to CTRL
-Caveat Lector- In a message dated 7/18/2004 4:06:58 PM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Has anyone ever wondered why it is that the Spotlight and LaRouche are able to "infiltrate" the Bilderberg while no one else can? Perhaps it is because they are really Commu-Nazi fronts who are ALLOWED to do just that! It's because they're the only ones who GIVE A DAMN. The court-killed Spotlight, now the American Free Press, is the ONLY newsweekly that truly can claim to tell the facts and name the names and is a populist, nationalist dream that ought to be required reading for all Americans. It is NOT owned by Zionists and therefore is free to report those truths that otherwise are suppressed by the powerful media elite. I understand why this threatens you so. No, your defense of Zionism and its legion crimes is persuasive to nobody with an open-mind. Your anti-Catholic bias and bigotry is distasteful but not an atypical reaction from the protectors of the cult of Zion. Why don't you add another wonderful publication to your little blacklist while you're at it. I'm sure you rather loathe their perspective also. That being the also quite essential American Conservative. And while you're at it, how about removing yourself to Israel where you can rejoin your heart and live as a whole human again. Leave America to those of us who truly love her. Bill Shannon. Bill. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] The Voice of the White House
http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a982.htm#001 The Voice of the White House In previous issues, we carried comments from a reporter assigned to the White House press corps. Some of these remarks, most especially one about Bushs physical and mental problems, drew an enormous number of viewers and hundreds of inquiries, most especially from foreign press entities. The reporter advised us by email that there was rampant fury in the White House and security was becoming very tight. As a result of this, he decided to lay low for a few weeks and see how the wind was blowing. Yesterday, he sent us the following material which we are now posting. Some of it is outrageous in the extreme but to date, no one has proven him wrong. July 10, 2004: Several bits of info your readers might find interesting. Firstly, I saw a purloined briefing in which it states that US Special Forces and other groups are not, repeat not, to nail Osama bin Laden! The Bush people want him alive and threatening us so they can use these threats to clamp down on this country! Because of faked threats of terrorist actions, elections will be cancelled until further notice, the military will go to a National Internal Crisis mode and we will, for certain, have martial law. Also, a number of lower level staffers are quitting the Monkey Palace because they are getting afraid of what our Prez and his bully boys are up to. Also some comments here about the CIA faking material. The CIA did not fake material. The Bush people, Rice and others, ordered them to produce certain supportive reports for Bush to use as an excuse for attacking Iraq. Bush was not mislead by a boneheaded CIA as he and his allies in Congress want you to believe. Cheney is dying of heart trouble and his dope popping doctor is off the case. I would bet five to ten that Dick gets off the ticket and they put Frist on. That one is a nasty piece of work. He once got nailed for torturing and killing stray cats and is a real dyed-in-the-wool sadistic Jesus freak. (Is there any other kind?)We are heading into big trouble, kids, believe me. Some people think Ashcroft is a nut but he does just what Bush wants him to. The Moore movie is keeping the rest rooms full here, believe me. This movie has the capability of destroying Bush come November, that is if the Fuhrer doesnt declare a national emergency and have himself appointed Dictator for Life. He wont get the black vote because he does not like them and Ashcroft positively hates the Sons of Ham as he calls them. The Mexicans dont vote and we hear daily that Bush is not vicious enough for the Christian right and they might decide to support an Ashcroft presidency. Ashcroft is a man who thinks calico cats are Satan himself and a friend at Justice says they view him there as a first class wacko who would be better for everyone if he were out in St. Elisabeths nut house in a rubber room.
[CTRL] Best Kept Secret In Washington: War Wounded
-Caveat Lector- www.americanfreepress.net/html/the_best_kept_.html Best Kept Secret in Washington: War Wounded Mike Blair American Free Press July 16, 2004 Throughout history, the recording of battle deaths has graphically illustrated the terrible cost of war. But those who want a more accurate portrayal of that awful price should instead look to the woundedthose brave men and women who return home from combat with debilitating injuries to find that the battle, for them, has not ended. In some wars, a deliberate effort was made to maximize the number of enemy soldiers maimed, not killedon the logical understanding that one or more others on the opposing side would be tied up caring for the wounded, while the dead need minimal care. >From World War II to present, there have been 612,875 Americans, mostly young, who have lost their lives in the service of the nation. An additional 928,900 returned to their homes suffering from wounds they received on the battlefield. In the war in Iraq, as of July 9, 882 U.S. servicemen and servicewomen have been killed, and, according to the Pentagon, in Iraq the ratio is estimated to be about six wounded for every battle death. But the Pentagon is not telling the whole truth. Calling upon various resources, in and out of the military, American Free Press estimates that as many as 30,000 American servicemen have been sent home from Iraq and Afghanistan as a result of battle wounds, accidents and illnesses. On May 1, President George W. Bush declared that the war was over in Iraq. Its been more than a year since that time, and, every week, large transport planes are still arriving at Andrews Air Force Base loaded with wounded soldiers, all unseen by most Americans. According to experts AFP consulted, among those 30,000 airlifted from Iraq and Afghanistan are an unknown number of seriously wounded, who, like thousands of others before them in previous wars, are hidden from the public. No one knowsor at least no one has been able to find outjust how many of these men still exist in underfunded Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities throughout America, and possibly abroad, as the U.S. government maintains no public accounting of the living dead. As this scenario of Americas living dead plays out during the Iraq war, the irony is that, according to recent reports, Kevlar helmets, body armor equipped with ceramic panels, field improvisations to personal and vehicle armor all have contributed to better protection against [often fatal] bullet and shrapnel wounds but have left the extremities vulnerable. Some have had their faces blown away or suffered irreparable brain damage. Some have no limbs, and some are totally paralyzed. Somewhere in the many facilities run by the VA, these men exist, hidden away in the departments 163 hospitals, 135 nursing homes, 43 domiciliaries and 73 comprehensive home-care programs. How many of these men are there? The American Legion doesnt know. The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) doesnt know. The Disabled American Veterans (DAV) doesnt know. Not even the Purple Heart Association admits knowledge, and they should be aware of every soldier wounded in combat. American Free Press contacted the VA, which didnt respond to our repeated inquiries. Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, also chose not to reply. For Iraq and Afghanistan, it has been almost impossible to get an accurate accounting of the number of wounded. In the February 16 issue, American Free Press first reported on the untold story of the thousands of injured U.S. military personnel being treated in a German military hospital. Reporting from the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, military officials told AFP that 12,000 U.S. servicemen and women had been brought to that one facility to receive treatment before being sent to military hospitals in the United States. According to Army Col. David Hackworth (retired), speaking more than six months ago, on Dec. 30: Even I . . . was staggered when a Pentagon source gave me a copy of a Nov. 30 dispatch showing that since George W. Bush unleashed the dogs of war, our armed forces have taken 14,000 casualties in Iraqabout the number of warriors in a line tank division. That means weve lost 10 percent of the total number of available personnel135,000. That 10 percent has been evacuated back to the United States, said Hackworth. In other words, our forces have effectively been decimated. It gets worse. Lt. Col. Scott D. Ross of the U.S. militarys Transportation Command revealed to Hackworth that as of last Christmas his outfit has evacuated 3,255 battle-injured casualties and 18,717 non-battle injuries, a total of 21,972 servicemen and women. Ross conceded that some of the personnel involved might have been counted more than once. A poignant reminder of the cost of war was well portrayed in the 1946 motion picture, The Best Years of Our Lives, which
[CTRL] Where Is This 'Safer' America?
-Caveat Lector- July 17, 2004 Where Is This 'Safer' America? by Charley Reese President George Bush says that America is safer because of our war against Iraq. I respectfully disagree. For one thing, our "shock and awe" campaign has turned into a show and tell of America's military limitations. We have not been able to defeat the Iraqi resistance, and trying to do so has put a great strain on our military forces. And now the whole world knows it. Nor have we been able to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure. Fifteen months of American occupation and the Iraqis still don't have full-time, reliable electric service. Evidence of our failure is the fact that Paul Bremer, our proconsul, had to almost surreptitiously turn over the reins to an interim government and practically sneak out of Iraq surrounded by heavy security. No farewell parties for him. It remains to be seen if the Iraqi people will accept the interim government as anything but an Iraqi face on an American occupation. We, after all, refused to vacate the presidential palace and are using that for our embassy with its ridiculous 1,000-person staff. The occupational authority put great limits on what the interim government could do. And its leader is a man well known to the Iraqis to have been on the CIA's payroll. Saddam Hussein, as bad a fellow as he is, was never a threat to the United States. He had no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. His army was dilapidated. He was a secular socialist and despised religious fanatics, and they despised him. There was, in fact, no connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda, and no connection at all with the attack on Sept. 11, 2001. The Bush administration has not been honest with the American people. If you wish to dump all the blame for bad intelligence on the CIA, you can certainly do that. Bush did, but has done nothing to improve the agency. Yet the Bush people certainly exaggerated the situation. They made absurd statements, such as that Iraq could have a nuclear bomb within a year and the laughable claim by Bush that Saddam's toylike drones might attack the United States. They ignored everyone in the intelligence community who had a different viewpoint. Whatever motive the Bush administration had for attacking Iraq, the safety of the American people was certainly not the reason. Attacking and occupying an Arab country has done exactly what experts about the area said it would do: It has inflamed anti-American feelings to the boiling point. Bush did exactly what Osama bin Laden wanted him to do, and now terrorists have no trouble at all finding new recruits. Furthermore, Bush's obsession with Iraq diverted resources from the hunt for bin Laden and the rest of the Taliban. Consequently, there are two unfinished jobs, Iraq and Afghanistan. The Bush administration's rosy claims about those two countries are as inaccurate as its claims about weapons of mass destruction. There have been more, not fewer, terrorist attacks since the war in Iraq. Warlords financed by opium run Afghanistan, and there is no security at all in Iraq. Americans should remember not only the 875 (and still counting) dead Americans, the more than 4,000 wounded and the $250 billion (and still counting) cost, but also the tremendous loss of American prestige and respect the country has suffered. In the eyes of the world, this was an unjust and illegal war, and our occupation has been incredibly inept and ineffective. It was a blunder from start to finish, and it has made the American people less secure, not more secure. More people hate us, and fewer nations are willing to cooperate with us on any international mission. We have sent a message to our enemies that while we might be able to crush their conventional forces handily, we are no better at fighting a guerrilla war than we were when the North Vietnamese drove us out of Southeast Asia. We have sent a message to the entire Arab world that under no circumstances will we treat the Palestinians with even a semblance of justice and that we will condone whatever Israel chooses to do. Bush has never grasped the fact that the Palestinian issue is paramount in every Arab country. If you think that makes America safer, then you should apply for a job as a Bush speechwriter. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
[CTRL] Bush on the Bus - The president's magical mystery tour through our American nigh
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 16, 2004 Bush on the Bus The president's magical mystery tour through our American nightmare by Justin Raimondo If Dick Cheney isn't F-you-ing Democrats on the floor of the U.S. Senate, George W. Bush is flipping off teenage boys in East Lampeter, PA, as the Bush-mobile swings through town and the residents come out to greet their sovereign Lord: "The action got started off right when we arrived on the scene, and seven or eight teenage guys decided to 're-enact' the prison abuse scandals in Iraq by stripping down to thongs and making a human pyramid, while donning black hoods. The police officers on the scene immediately tackled them and led them out in handcuffs. It will be interesting to see how that plays out in court." I wonder what they're charged with: sunbathing without a permit? Illegal simulation of a Madonna music video? Now here's an antiwar movement that even Andrew Sullivan can learn to appreciate. Oh, but these kids were just getting warmed up: "Now comes the good part. After waiting around for about 45 minutes, the motorcade passed by us again. A few police cars, followed by a van or two, drove by. Then, a Bush/Cheney bus passed, followed by a second one going slower. At the front of this second bus was The W himself, waving cheerily at his supporters on the other side of the highway. Adam, Brendan, and I rose our banner (the More Trees, Less Bush one) and he turned to wave to our side of the road. His smile faded, and he raised his left arm in our direction. And then, George W. Bush, the 43rd president of the United States of America, extended his middle finger. "Read that last sentence again: I got flipped off by George W. Bush." Yes, the Bush bus tour sure is mixing it up with the masses and showing what a regular guy the president is, roughing it in the wilds of Pennsylvania, and penetrating darkest West Virginia, where, in Charleston, he was met by more of his happy subjects: "A husband and wife who wore anti-Bush T-shirts to the president's Fourth of July appearance aren't going down without a fight: They will be represented by lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union as they contest the trespassing charges against them Thursday morning in Charleston Municipal Court. "Police took Nicole and Jeff Rank away in handcuffs from the event, which was billed as a presidential appearance, not a campaign rally. They were wearing T-shirts that read, 'Love America, Hate Bush.'" Mr. and Mrs. Rank had tickets, and entered the event legally, but apparently weren't in what we call nowadays a "free speech zone" outside of which the Constitution no longer has effect. Nicole Rank, who was working for FEMA, was told the next day that she is "no longer needed," but the couple, based in Corpus Christi, Texas, are staying in the area to fight the charges. The president is losing a lot of supporters: I mean, I doubt the Ranks are Republicans, but even Francis "The End of History" Fukuyama wants to see an end to George W. Bush's presidency: "Famous academic Francis Fukuyama, one of the founding fathers of the neo-conservative movement that underlies the policies of US President George W. Bush's administration, said on July 13 that he would not vote for the incumbent in the November 2 US Presidential election. "In addition to distancing himself from the current administration, Fukuyama told Time magazine that his old friend, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, should resign." Once a rising young star in the neocon firmament, Fukuyama signed a 1998 letter to then President Clinton, sponsored by the Project for a New American Century, urging him to take out after Iraq, and another one shortly after 9/11, urging George W. Bush not to be distracted by Osama bin Laden when he should really be going after Iraq, Hezbollah, Syria, and the Palestinians oh, and don't forget that "a serious and victorious war on terrorism will require a large increase in defense spending." But people can always change their minds yes, even at the End of History. It can be pretty frustrating, living in George W. Bush's America: people are going a little crazy, in an amusing sort of way. Like the guy who pissed off at the intrusive idiocy displayed by airport security, had some Epsilon-Minus Semi-Moron waving a wand at him and decided to just drop his trousers, then and there. He wasn't wearing any underwear. Undergarments are so 9/10-ish I mean, these days, you never know when you're going to be stopped and searched. So why not make it easier on Homeland Security? I was going to write about the Niger uranium brouhaha, a labyrinthine scandal which has lately acquired a few more layers of complexity. The issue has been revived by the release of the Senate's report not to mention the Butler report [pdf file], over on the other side of the Pond which supposedly debunks Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson's debunking of Iraq's alleged attempt to
[CTRL] Iraqi PM Shot Inmates IN COLD BLOOD
-Caveat Lector- Sidney Morning Herald Allawi shot inmates in cold blood, say witnesses By Paul McGeough, Chief Herald Correspondent, in Baghdad July 17, 2004 Iyad Allawi, the new Prime Minister of Iraq, pulled a pistol and executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station, just days before Washington handed control of the country to his interim government, according to two people who allege they witnessed the killings. They say the prisoners - handcuffed and blindfolded - were lined up against a wall in a courtyard adjacent to the maximum-security cell block in which they were held at the Al-Amariyah security centre, in the city's south-western suburbs. They say Dr Allawi told onlookers the victims had each killed as many as 50 Iraqis and they "deserved worse than death". The Prime Minister's office has denied the entirety of the witness accounts in a written statement to the Herald, saying Dr Allawi had never visited the centre and he did not carry a gun. But the informants told the Herald that Dr Allawi shot each young man in the head as about a dozen Iraqi policemen and four Americans from the Prime Minister's personal security team watched in stunned silence. Iraq's Interior Minister, Falah al-Naqib, is said to have looked on and congratulated him when the job was done. Mr al-Naqib's office has issued a verbal denial. The names of three of the alleged victims have been obtained by the Herald. One of the witnesses claimed that before killing the prisoners Dr Allawi had told those around him that he wanted to send a clear message to the police on how to deal with insurgents. "The prisoners were against the wall and we were standing in the courtyard when the Interior Minister said that he would like to kill them all on the spot. Allawi said that they deserved worse than death - but then he pulled the pistol from his belt and started shooting them." Re-enacting the killings, one witness stood three to four metres in front of a wall and swung his outstretched arm in an even arc, left to right, jerking his wrist to mimic the recoil as each bullet was fired. Then he raised a hand to his brow, saying: "He was very close. Each was shot in the head." The witnesses said seven prisoners had been brought out to the courtyard, but the last man in the line was only wounded - in the neck, said one witness; in the chest, said the other. Given Dr Allawi's role as the leader of the US experiment in planting a model democracy in the Middle East, allegations of a return to the cold-blooded tactics of his predecessor are likely to stir a simmering debate on how well Washington knows its man in Baghdad, and precisely what he envisages for the new Iraq. There is much debate and rumour in Baghdad about the Prime Minister's capacity for brutality, but this is the first time eyewitness accounts have been obtained. A former CIA officer, Vincent Cannisatraro, recently told The New Yorker: "If you're asking me if Allawi has blood on his hands from his days in London, the answer is yes, he does. He was a paid Mukhabarat [intelligence] agent for the Iraqis, and he was involved in dirty stuff." In Baghdad, varying accounts of the shootings are interpreted by observers as useful to a little-known politician who, after 33 years in exile, needs to prove his leadership credentials as a "strongman" in a war-ravaged country that has no experience of democracy. Dr Allawi's statement dismissed the allegations as rumours instigated by enemies of his interim government. But in a sharp reminder of the Iraqi hunger for security above all else, the witnesses did not perceive themselves as whistle-blowers. In interviews with the Herald they were enthusiastic about such killings, with one of them arguing: "These criminals were terrorists. They are the ones who plant the bombs." Before the shootings, the 58-year-old Prime Minister is said to have told the policemen they must have courage in their work and that he would shield them from any repercussions if they killed insurgents in the course of their duty. The witnesses said the Iraqi police observers were "shocked and surprised". But asked what message they might take from such an act, one said: "Any terrorists in Iraq should have the same destiny. This is the new Iraq. "Allawi wanted to send a message to his policemen and soldiers not to be scared if they kill anyone - especially, they are not to worry about tribal revenge. He said there would be an order from him and the Interior Ministry that all would be fully protected. "He told them: 'We must destroy anyone who wants to destroy Iraq and kill our people.' "At first they were surprised. I was scared - but now the police seem to be very happy about this. There was no anger at all, because so many policemen have been killed by these criminals." Dr Allawi had made a surprise visit to the complex, they said. Neither witness could give a specific date for the killings. But their accounts narrowed
[CTRL] Operation Summer Pulse '04 Could Spark War
Sailing Toward a Storm in China U.S. maneuvers could spark a war. By Chalmers Johnson July 15, 2004 "Los Angeles Times" -- Quietly and with minimal coverage in the U.S. press, the Navy announced that from mid-July through August it would hold exercises dubbed Operation Summer Pulse '04 in waters off the China coast near Taiwan. This will be the first time in U.S. naval history that seven of our 12 carrier strike groups deploy in one place at the same time. It will look like the peacetime equivalent of the Normandy landings and may well end in a disaster. At a minimum, a single carrier strike group includes the aircraft carrier itself (usually with nine or 10 squadrons and a total of about 85 aircraft), a guided missile cruiser, two guided missile destroyers, an attack submarine and a combination ammunition, oiler and supply ship. Normally, the United States uses only one or at the most two carrier strike groups to show the flag in a trouble spot. In a combat situation it might deploy three or four, as it did for both wars with Iraq. Seven in one place is unheard of. Operation Summer Pulse '04 was almost surely dreamed up at the Pearl Harbor headquarters of the U.S. Pacific Command and its commander, Adm. Thomas B. Fargo, and endorsed by neocons in the Pentagon. It is doubtful that Congress was consulted. This only goes to show that our foreign policy is increasingly made by the Pentagon. According to Chinese reports, Taiwanese ships will join the seven carriers being assembled in this modern rerun of 19th century gunboat diplomacy. The ostensible reason given by the Navy for this exercise is to demonstrate the ability to concentrate massive forces in an emergency, but the focus on China in a U.S. election year sounds like a last hurrah of the neocons. Needless to say, the Chinese are not amused. They say that their naval and air forces, plus their land-based rockets, are capable of taking on one or two carrier strike groups but that combat with seven would overwhelm them. So even before a carrier reaches the Taiwan Strait, Beijing has announced it will embark on a crash project that will enable it to meet and defeat seven U.S. carrier strike groups within a decade. There's every chance the Chinese will succeed if they are not overtaken by war first. China is easily the fastest-growing big economy in the world, with a growth rate of 9.1% last year. On June 28, the BBC reported that China had passed the U.S. as the world's biggest recipient of foreign direct investment. China attracted $53 billion worth of new factories in 2003, whereas the U.S. took in only $40 billion; India, $4 billion; and Russia, a measly $1 billion. If left alone by U.S. militarists, China will almost surely, over time, become a democracy on the same pattern as that of South Korea and Taiwan (both of which had U.S.-sponsored military dictatorships until the late 1980s). But a strong mainland makes the anti-China lobby in the United States very nervous. It won't give up its decades-old animosity toward Beijing and jumps at any opportunity to stir up trouble "defending Taiwan" is just a convenient cover story. These ideologues appear to be trying to precipitate a confrontation with China while they still have the chance. Today, they happen to have rabidly anti-Chinese governments in Taipei and Tokyo as allies, but these governments don't have the popular support of their own citizens. If American militarists are successful in sparking a war, the results are all too predictable: We will halt China's march away from communism and militarize its leadership, bankrupt ourselves, split Japan over whether to renew aggression against China and lose the war. We also will earn the lasting enmity of the most populous nation on Earth. Chalmers Johnson's latest book is "The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic" (Metropolitan, 2004). Copyright 2004 Los Angeles Times
[CTRL] Odigo says workers were warned of attack
-Caveat Lector- Thu., July 15, 2004 Tamuz 26, 5764 Odigo says workers were warned of attack By Yuval Dror Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack. Micha Macover, CEO of the company, said the two workers received the messages and immediately after the terror attack informed the company's management, which immediately contacted the Israeli security services, which brought in the FBI. "I have no idea why the message was sent to these two workers, who don't know the sender. It may just have been someone who was joking and turned out they accidentally got it right. And I don't know if our information was useful in any of the arrests the FBI has made," said Macover. Odigo is a U.S.-based company whose headquarters are in New York, with offices in Herzliya. As an instant messaging service, Odigo users are not limited to sending messages only to people on their "buddy" list, as is the case with ICQ, the other well-known Israeli instant messaging application. Odigo usually zealously protects the privacy of its registered users, said Macover, but in this case the company took the initiative to provide the law enforcement services with the originating Internet Presence address of the message, so the FBI could track down the Internet Service Provider, and the actual sender of the original message. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] President Khatami: Tel Aviv is actual US capital
-Caveat Lector- President Khatami: Tel Aviv is actual US capital IRNA | July 14 2004 President Mohammad Khatami said on Wednesday that for the American people Washington is the capital of the United States, but, unfortunately the actual capital is Tel Aviv. "I have already stated in my message to the American people that Americans are a great nation. The American Constitution is still a reference to freedom and democracy. The Americans are more religious than the Europeans and the founders of the United States advocated freedom and religion," President Khatami told a press conference. "It is inappropriate for the American people that their potentials are not being used for their own national interests." "Israel has been established with wrath and is pursuing its oppressive goal with wrath too. It is making every endeavor to influence the largest economic, political and military power of the world in addition to relying on it," President Khatami said in reference to the US. Asked to comment on ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague condemning Israel for its violation of international law and the rights of Palestinians for the wall it has erected around Palestinian territory, President Khatami said, "Israel has never respected resolutions of the UN Security Council and will not heed the ICJ ruling either." He said that the Zionist lobby is very strong in the United States which has exercised dominance over national interest of the American people for their own racist goals. "It is humiliating for the great American nation to be run by the Zionist lobby. They should stand up to such a situation," President Khatami said. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Accused Mass-Murderer Became President!
-Caveat Lector- http://www.rense.com/general54/mass.htm Middle-Finger News - Updated Bush Details Sticking It To The Poobahs News Hot Enough To Fry Radio Stations Accused Mass-Murderer Became President! By Sherman H. Skolnick and Lenny Bloom www.cloakanddagger.ca www.skolnicksreport.com www.rense.com/Datapages/skolnickdatapage.html 7-15-4 The following is an item from Sunnyvale Ca. from the 2000 election. "SUNNYVALE, CA - Telling reporters and critics to 'stick to the issues that matter', Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush declined to answer questions Monday concerning his alleged involvement in a 1984 Brownsville, TX, mass murder, in which 17 people were ritualistically murdered and skinned. 'I will not stoop to discussing that,' said Bush during a campaign stop at a Bay Area software-packaging plant. 'We've got people across this country without health care, a broken educational system, taxes that are way too high, and all you want to talk about is something THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED 16 years ago? I'm sorry, but I find that offensive.' " (Emphasis added). Bush, the son of a billioniare, was strangely living in the most impoverished place in America, Brownsville; living nearby to and also inside the headquarters of a Satanic Cult of which he was a member. Bush disappeared for three days during which ALL of the other of his fellow Cult Members were slaughtered. After he reappeared he could not explain where he had been. The local prosecutor continued to pursue Bush, sole Cult survivor, on mass murder charges for six months thereafter, heavily pressured by Daddy Bush to stop the investigation. For asking these questions the reporters were threatened with reprisals later by Bush and thereafter have feared for their life. Currently, as to 2004, Bush and Kerry have long been members of a Satanic Cult, Skull Bones (Yale). MORE DETAILS Following the attempted assassination of President Ronald W. Reagan, ahortly after his inauguration, 1981, George Herbert Walker Bush, as Vice President, on a day to day basis, until the end of Reagan's second term, 1988, actually ran the White House. In 1988, Daddy Bush was himself elected President, actually Bush's third term. In so doing, the elder Bush was violating the U.S. Constitution, 22nd Amendment, restricting the President to two terms. During that time, and even before, Daddy Bush and son George W. Bush, had financial and satantic cult links with the drug trafficking from Colombia through the Brownsville/Matamoros area. Brownsville is in the U.S. right smack on the Mexican border above Matamoros, Mexico. At one time Daddy Bush owned Texas Commerce Bank implicated in the drug traffic through their branch in Venezuela. That unit, starting about 1979, was run by Jeb Bush living in Venezuela with his latino wife. They laundered the drug proceeds from Colombia and from there, through Mexico to the U.S. The Bush Crime Family has for many years been business partners with the co-founder of the Medelin, Colombia drug cartel, Carlos Lehder. [See, the website series, www.skolnicksreport.com "The Chandra Levy Affair".] This was convenient to Daddy Bush having been with the CIA since 1959, through their adjunct, principally owned by the Bushies, Zapata Petroleum, later called Zapata Offshore, still later their interests joined with Pennzoil which by an induced bankruptcy took over Texaco. [See, "Oil Honor---The Texaco-Pennzoil Wars" by Thomas Petzinger, Jr., 1987, G.P. Putnam's Sons.] The satanic cult mass-murders revolved around in the Brownsville/Matamoros area. Among those involved were El Padrino Cult; and located outside Matamoros, Rancho Santa Elena, having human sacrifice chambers; and the satanic ritual sacrifices and mind control conducted by Aldolfo De Jesus Costanzo with others. The Bush Crime Family with their dope trafficking, Colombia through Matamoros, Mexico/Brownsville, Texas, were interlocked with these situations. The ranch was reportedly involved in snuffing out dozens and dozens of primarily latinos useful as "mules" in the drug trade and controlled through sexual satanic rituals and mind-control. In the 1980s, Daddy Bush, actually running the White House, and former head of the American secret political police, was in perfect position to be part of the drug trafficking. The elder Bush was the head of the South Florida Anti-Drug Project, supposedly clamping down on drug trafficking from Colombia to Mexico. During the 1980s, U.S. drug enforcement was near totally compromised and corrupted. A huge, heavy opus, mentioned in a moment, tells how the top people in the elite units of U.S. drug enforcement actually worked the other side. >From time to time, they went to parties at palacial estates in Mexico and elsewhere owned and operated by the major druglords. The drug police rubbed elbows there with movie stars and bigshots from Hollywood, users as well as traffickers with
[CTRL] How Israel Created The Myth of Al-Qaeda
-Caveat Lector- How Israel Created The Myth of Al-Qaeda by Seymour Hersh 3:27pm Thu Jun 24 '04 (Modified on 2:07pm Wed Jul 14 '04) article#42775 Seymour Hersh found out that hundreds of Mossad foreign fighters have been in Iraq for a long time. Their specialty: car bombs, sexual torture, beheadings. These Israeli citizens came into Iraq disguised as Arab or Kurdish civilians, businessmen. Maybe "contractors"? Under contract with the Pentagon's neocon office? Your tax dollars at work? How much of their work is blamed on Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? How much of Israel's terrorism is blamed on "Al-Qaeda"? I have investigated the development of the "mujahideen" and here is my conclusion: In the 80's, Israel supervised the recruitment of Arab Afghan "mujahideen" supposedly to fight against Russia. They became cannon fodder and refugees before they ended up in Guantanamo. THEIR REAL PURPOSE WAS TO HELP ISRAEL CREATE A USEFUL MYTH: AL-QAEDA. The Arab mujahideen were rather harmless as recent revelations from Guantanamo have shown. Israeli and Jewish-American intelligence specialists were trusted by the CIA--Israelis being "allies" and experts on the Middle East--to recruit the Arab "mujahideen" to be used by the US against Russia. Israelis disguised as Arab or Pakistani missionaries (tablighis) even ran the recruitment centers. Israelis playing Muslim missionaries (tablighis) were caught in India and Israel rushed to retrieve them. The Arab "mujahideen" themselves were inefficient and almost useless. I have heard from the relatives of many who died in vain in clumsy incidents in Afghanistan. All the Zionists wanted was a story, a myth that would enable them to create another myth: "Al-Qaeda." The Zionists needed this myth as an excuse for their long-term plans for the "war on terror," a war to destabilze the Middle East and pit the world against Muslims. Neither Bin Laden nor the Arab refugees he took care of were of any military significance. The Afghans themselves were the real efficient mujahideen because they knew the territory and the tribal structure. The Afghans actually saw the Arabs as nuisance. Arabs say "nothing comes out of a pot except what's in it." When the neocon liars speak about Arab/Islamic terrorism and Al-Qaeda, they are in fact talking about what they themselves are doing. They are talking about Israeli covert activities. No Arabs are involved. Israeli commandos move around using forged or stolen Arab ID's and--if necessary--they wear masks to hide their real identities, such as in beheading videos. Israelis continue to fake whatever it takes to prove that the "war on terror," i.e. the war on Arabs has to continue. Listen to them more carefully, folks. The Zionists in our midst have been telling us the truth all along. Just replace "Arab" with "Israeli," replace "Al-Qaeda" with "Mossad," etc. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Oak Ridge Boy and His War
-Caveat Lector- http://www.progressive.org/webex04/wx0713a04.html July 13, 2004 Oak Ridge Boy and His War Bush keeps defending the indefensible: His reckless, illegal war against Iraq. In his speech at Oak Ridge, he repeated one of his favorite lines: "I had a choice to make: Either take the word of a madman, or defend America." But that was not the choice he had to make. Though Saddam was still playing games with the U.N. weapons inspectors, they were allowed to go anywhere and everywhere in Iraq. This was the most intrusive inspection effort of all time, and Bush refused to let it proceed and refused to believe what the weapons inspectors were telling him. On top of that, the United States, Germany, and Russia were able to fly spy planes over every square inch of Iraqi territory. So, no, Bush didn't have to take the word of a madman. He could have taken the word of the U.N. weapons inspectors, but he chose not to. He could have taken the evidence from the spy planes, but he chose not to. Instead, he chose to plunge into war for ulterior motives. Some were petty (to get back at Saddam for allegedly trying to kill his daddy, or to clear up the blemish on daddy's record for not "finishing the job" and going to Baghdad). Some were about oil: controlling it, and letting U.S. companies get their hands on it. Some were about geopolitics: hedging a bet against an unstable Saudi Arabia, and eliminating a foe of Israel. But Bush never has spoken honestly about these motives, and his speech at Oak Ridge was no exception. He did, however, repeat the claim that "the American people are safer" because of the Iraq War. That's a hard argument to win. Former head of counterterrorism Richard Clarke says the Iraq War has made us much less safe. So, too, has Retired General Anthony Zinni, who used to be the Pentagon's commander for that region of the world. The International Institute for Strategic Studies, based in London, says that the Iraq War has made the world less safe and has served as a "potent global recruitment pretext" for Al Qaeda, whose ranks have grown to 18,000 as a consequence. U.S. alliances are tattered, and the U.S. reputation in the world is at historic lows. How does that make us any safer? Bush can boast all he wants, but his Iraq War is a disaster no matter how you slice it. -- Matthew Rothschild www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Fox News Exposed!
-Caveat Lector- http://mediamatters.org/items/200407140002 33 internal FOX editorial memos reviewed by MMFA reveal FOX News Channel's inner workings FOX news exec John Moody on 9-11 Commission: "Do not turn this into Watergate" Moody on George W. Bush: "His political courage and tactical cunning ar[e] [wo]rth noting in our reporting through the day" Moody on Sen. John Kerry: "starting to feel the heat for his flip-flop voting record" Documentary filmmaker Robert Greenwald's new film Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism, which interviews former FOX employees to provide "an in-depth look at Fox News [Channel] and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know," premiered at the New School University in New York on July 13. The FOX News Channel markets itself as "fair and balanced," promising that "We report. You decide." As The Washington Post reported on July 11, Greenwald's film features "a handful of memos from a top FOX executive that appear to suggest tilting the news." Media Matters for America has analyzed 33 such internal FOX memos, issued by FOX News Senior Vice President, News Editorial John Moody and Los Angeles Bureau Chief Ken LaCoste between May 9 and June 3, 2003 and March 12 and May 5, 2004. In the memos, some of which appear in Outfoxed, Moody instructs employees on the approach to take on particular stories. His instructions reflect a clear interest in furthering a conservative agenda and in supporting the Bush administration. The Post quoted Larry Johnson, identified by the paper as "a former part-time Fox commentator who appears in the film," describing the Moody memos as "talking points instructing us what the themes are supposed to be, and God help you if you stray." On July 13, Salon.com reviewed the film, and provided "some of the most notable excerpts" from the memos, referred to as "marching orders" by Jon DuPre, whom Salon identifies as "formerly of Fox News." In an interview with the Post, Moody rejected "the implication that I'm controlling the news coverage" and said, "People are free to call me or message me and say, 'I think you're off base.' Sometimes I take the advice, sometimes I don't." The following is a sample of reporting instructions issued by Moody to the FOX News staff. Moody on the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal: [T]he pictures from Abu Graeb [sic] prison are disturbing. They have rightly provoked outrage. Today we have a picture -- aired on Al Arabiya -- of an American hostage being held with a scarf over his eyes, clearly against his will. Who's outraged on his behalf? It is important that we keep the Abu Graeb [sic] situation in perspective (5/5/04). Moody on the war in Iraq: As is often the case, the real news is [sic] Iraq is being obscured by temporary tragedy. The creation of a defense ministry, which will be run by Iraqis, is a major step forward in the country's redevelopment. Let's look at that, as well as the deaths of a US soldier in a roadside bombing (3/25/04). Into Fallujah: It's called Operation Vigilant Resolve and it began Monday morning (NY time) with the US and Iraqi military surrounding Fallujah. We will cover this hour by hour today, explaining repeatedly why it is happening. It won't be long before some people start to decry the use of "excessive force". We won't be among that group (4/4/04). The events in Iraq Tuesday are going to be the top story, unless and until something else (or worse) happens. Err on the side of doing too much Iraq rather than not enough. .Do not fall into the easy trap of mourning the loss of US lives and asking out loud why are we there? The US is in Iraq to help a country brutalized for 30 years protect the gains made by Operation Iraqi Freedom and set it on the path to democracy. Some people in Iraq don't want that to happen. That is why American GIs are dying. And what we should remind our viewers (4/6/04) If, as promised, the coalition decides to take Fallujah back by force, it will not be for lack of opportunities for the terrorists holed up there to negotiate. Let's not get lost in breast-beating about the sadness of the loss of life. They had a chance (4/22/04). The continuing carnage in Iraq -- mostly the deaths of seven US troops in Sadr City -- is leaving the American military little choice but to punish perpetrators. When this happens, we should be ready to put in context the events that led to it. More than 600 US military dead, attacks on the UN headquarters last year, assassination of Iraqi officials who work with the coalition, the deaths of Spanish troops last fall, the outrage in Fallujah: whatever happens, it is richly deserved (4/4/04). [L]et's refer to the US marines we see in the foreground [of pictures coming out of Fallujah] as "sharpshooters" not snipers, which carries a negative connotation (4/28/04). Moody on abortion: [Le]t's spend a good deal of time on the battle over judicial nominations, which [th]e
[CTRL] The Story About Israel TV News Won't Tell
-Caveat Lector- http://www.coastalpost.com/04/07/09.htm July, 2004 The Story About Israel TV News Won't Tell By Tim Llewellyn For 10 years Tim Llewellyn was the BBC's Middle East correspondent. In this passionately argued polemic he accuses British broadcasters, including his former employer, of systematic bias in covering the Arab-Israeli conflict, giving undue prominence to the views of Jerusalem while disregarding the roots of the crisis. Llewellyn is a periodic contributor to the Coastal Post. Since the Palestinians began their armed uprising against Israel's military occupation three years and eight months ago, British television and radio's reporting of it has been, in the main, dishonest-in concept, approach and execution. In my judgment as a journalist and Middle East specialist, the broadcasters' language favours the occupying soldiers over the occupied Arabs, depicting the latter, essentially, as alien tribes threatening the survival of Israel, rather than vice versa. The struggle between Israel and the Palestinians is shown, most especially on mainstream bulletins, as a battle between two 'forces', possessed equally of right and wrong and responsibility. It is the tyranny of spurious equivalence. That 37 years of military occupation, the violation of the Palestinians' human, political and civil rights and the continuing theft of their land might have triggered this crisis is a concept either lost or underplayed. Nor are we told much about how Israel was created, the epochal dilemma of the refugees, the roots of the disaster. Legions of critics have formed similar views and put them to the BBC and ITN, to no avail. In my case, the BBC, who employed me for many years in the Middle East, was no doubt able to categorise me as a veteran journalist who had spent too long in the region, though executives are always polite and prompt in their replies. Even making such criticisms carried the risk of my being labelled parti pris. (BBC producers are instructed not to mention that I was a BBC Middle East correspondent on air, in case my views might be associated with the BBC.) Now comes hard evidence to support these views, gathered by Greg Philo and his Glasgow University Media Group, who have monitored and analysed four separate periods of BBC and ITN coverage between late 2000 and the spring of 2002. Bad News From Israel makes the scientifically based case that the main news and current affairs programmes-with the rare exception, usually on Channel 4-are failing to tell us the real story and the reasons behind it. They use a distorted lens. The result is that the Israelis have identity, existence, a story the viewer understands. The Palestinians are anonymous, alien, their personalities and their views buried under their burden of plight and the vernacular of 'terror." The Israeli view, the study finds, dominates the coverage. There is far more coverage of Israeli deaths than Palestinian, even though far more Palestinians have died, and they have the evidence that unerringly shows it. Israeli violence is tempered not only by the weight of coverage but by the very language used to describe incidents. One example is a template for hundreds: when Israeli police killed 13 Israeli citizens of Palestinian origin in October 2000, inside Israel, soon after the armed uprising in the occupied territories began, BBC and ITN coverage was a fifth of that given to the Palestinians who stormed a police station in Ramallah a day later and murdered two captured Israeli soldiers. These Palestinians were 'a frenzied [lynch] mob... baying for blood'. No such lurid prose was used to describe the Israeli killing of their own citizen Arabs. In the Israeli reprisals that followed the Ramallah killings, ITV said the Israelis were 'abandoning their restraint.' This was after two weeks in which Israeli forces had killed 100 Palestinians, most of them civilians. Cause and effect, the Philo team finds, are misreported. Why does the 'cycle of violence' start, for example? In October 2002, the BBC repeatedly referred to the killing of the Israeli tourist minister as the reason for Israeli army reprisals against Palestinian towns and villages. It did not mention the fact that the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine had killed the minister in reprisal for the Israeli assassination of its leader. As Philo shows, the cycle is always shown as Palestinian attack and Israeli reprisal. Broadcasters consistently fail to suggest that it might be the military occupation that engenders armed resistance, or that Israeli actions may be such as to provoke Palestinian violence. The study finds that the daily despairing and degrading consequences of living under military occupation are rarely reported. And while there is constant reference to Israeli security and Israel's right to exist, there is little mention of Palestinians' security or their right to exist. A former news agency bureau chief, based in
[CTRL] Advocates of war now profit from Iraq
-Caveat Lector- http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/iraq/bal-advocates0714,0,3957771.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines Advocates of war now profit from Iraq Lobbyists, aides to senior officials and others encouraged invasion and now help firms pursue reconstruction contracts; They see no conflict By Walter F. Roche Jr. and Ken Silverstein Los Angeles Times Staff Writers Originally published July 14, 2004 WASHINGTON In the months and years leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, they marched together in the vanguard of those who advocated war. As lobbyists, public relations counselors and confidential advisors to senior federal officials, they warned against Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, praised exiled leader Ahmad Chalabi, and argued that toppling Saddam Hussein was a matter of national security and moral duty. Now, as fighting continues in Iraq, they are collecting tens of thousands of dollars in fees for helping business clients pursue federal contracts and other financial opportunities in Iraq. For instance, a former Senate aide who helped get U.S. funds for anti-Hussein exiles who are now active in Iraqi affairs has a $175,000 deal to advise Romania on winning business in Iraq and other matters. And the ease with which they have moved from advocating policies and advising high government officials to making money in activities linked to their policies and advice reflects the blurred lines that often exist between public and private interests in Washington. In most cases, federal conflict-of-interest laws do not apply to former officials or to people serving only as advisors. Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, said the actions of former officials and others who serve on government advisory boards, although not illegal, can raise the appearance of conflicts of interest. "It calls into question whether the advice they give is in their own interests rather than the public interest," Noble said. Michael Shires, a professor of public policy at Pepperdine University, disagreed. "I don't see an ethical issue there," he said. "I see individuals looking out for their own interests." Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey is a prominent example of the phenomenon, mixing his business interests with what he contends are the country's strategic interests. He left the CIA in 1995, but he remains a senior government advisor on intelligence and national security issues, including Iraq. Meanwhile, he works for two private companies that do business in Iraq and is a partner in a company that invests in firms that provide security and anti-terrorism services. Woolsey said in an interview that he was not directly involved with the companies' Iraq-related ventures. But as a vice president of Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting firm, he was a featured speaker in May 2003 at a conference co-sponsored by the company at which about 80 corporate executives and others paid up to $1,100 to hear about the economic outlook and business opportunities in Iraq. Before the war, Woolsey was a founding member of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, an organization set up in 2002 at the request of the White House to help build public backing for war in Iraq. He also wrote about a need for regime change and sat on the CIA advisory board and the Defense Policy Board, whose unpaid members have provided advice on Iraq and other matters to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Woolsey is part of a small group that shows with unusual clarity the interlocking nature of the way the insider system can work. Moving in the same social circles, often sitting together on government panels and working with like-minded think tanks and advocacy groups, they wrote letters to the White House urging military action in Iraq, formed organizations that pressed for invasion and pushed legislation that authorized aid to exile groups. Since the start of the war, despite the violence and instability in Iraq, they have turned to private enterprise. The group, in addition to Woolsey, includes: Neil Livingstone, a former Senate aide who has served as a Pentagon and State Department advisor and issued repeated public calls for Hussein's overthrow. He heads a Washington-based firm, GlobalOptions, that provides contacts and consulting services to companies doing business in Iraq. Randy Scheunemann, a former Rumsfeld advisor who helped draft the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 authorizing $98 million in U.S. aid to Iraqi exile groups. He was the founding president of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Now he's helping former Soviet Bloc states win business there. Margaret Bartel, who managed federal money channeled to Chalabi's exile group, the Iraqi National Congress, including funds for its prewar intelligence program on Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction. She now heads a Washington-area consulting firm helping would-be investors find Iraqi partners. K. Riva Levinson, a
[CTRL] Trotsky's ghost wandering the White House
-Caveat Lector- http://www.majority.com/news/jeet1.html Trotsky's ghost wandering the White House Influence on Bush aides: Bolshevik's writings supported the idea of pre-emptive war Jeet Heer National Post Saturday, June 07, 2003 Joseph Stalin, the Soviet dictator, was paranoid. Perhaps his deepest fears centred around his great rival for the leadership of the Bolshevik movement, Leon Trotsky. Stalin went to extraordinary lengths to obliterate not only Trotsky but also the ragtag international fellowship known as the Left Opposition, which supported Trotsky's political program. In the late 1920s, Stalin expelled Trotsky from the Communist Party and deported him from the Soviet Union. Almost instantly, other Communist parties moved to excommunicate Trotsky's followers, notably the Americans James P. Cannon and Max Shachtman. In 1933, while in exile in Turkey, Trotsky regrouped his supporters as the Fourth International. Never amounting to more than a few thousand individuals scattered across the globe, the Fourth International was constantly harassed by Stalin's secret police, as well as by capitalist governments. The terrible purge trials that Stalin ordered in the late 1930s were designed in part to eliminate any remaining Trotskyists in the Soviet Union. Fleeing from country to country, Trotsky ended up in Mexico, where he was murdered by an ice-pick-wielding Stalinist assassin in 1940. Like Macbeth after the murder of Banquo, Stalin became even more obsessed with his great foe after killing him. Fearing a revival of Trotskyism, Stalin's secret police continued to monitor the activities of Trotsky's widow in Mexico, as well as the far-flung activities of the Fourth International. - - - More than a decade after the demise of the Soviet Union, Stalin's war against Trotsky may seem like quaint ancient history. Yet Stalin was right to fear Trotsky's influence. Unlike Stalin, Trotsky was a man of genuine intellectual achievement, a brilliant literary critic and historian as well as a military strategist of genius. Trotsky's movement, although never numerous, attracted many sharp minds. At one time or another, the Fourth International included among its followers the painter Frida Kahlo (who had an affair with Trotsky), the novelist Saul Bellow, the poet André Breton and the Trinidadian polymath C.L.R. James. As evidence of the continuing intellectual influence of Trotsky, consider the curious fact that some of the books about the Middle East crisis that are causing the greatest stir were written by thinkers deeply shaped by the tradition of the Fourth International. In seeking advice about Iraqi society, members of the Bush administration (notably Paul D. Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defence, and Dick Cheney, the Vice-President) frequently consulted Kanan Makiya, an Iraqi-American intellectual whose book The Republic of Fear is considered to be the definitive analysis of Saddam Hussein's tyrannical rule. As the journalist Christopher Hitchens notes, Makiya is "known to veterans of the Trotskyist movement as a one-time leading Arab member of the Fourth International." When speaking about Trotskyism, Hitchens has a voice of authority. Like Makiya, Hitchens is a former Trotskyist who is influential in Washington circles as an advocate for a militantly interventionist policy in the Middle East. Despite his leftism, Hitchens has been invited into the White House as an ad hoc consultant. Other supporters of the Iraq war also have a Trotsky-tinged past. On the left, the historian Paul Berman, author of a new book called Terror and Liberalism, has been a resonant voice among those who want a more muscular struggle against Islamic fundamentalism. Berman counts the Trotskyist C.L.R. James as a major influence. Among neo-conservatives, Berman's counterpart is Stephen Schwartz, a historian whose new book, The Two Faces of Islam, is a key text among those who want the United States to sever its ties with Saudi Arabia. Schwartz spent his formative years in a Spanish Trotskyist group. To this day, Schwartz speaks of Trotsky affectionately as "the old man" and "L.D." (initials from Trotsky's birth name, Lev Davidovich Bronstein). "To a great extent, I still consider myself to be [one of the] disciples of L.D," he admits, and he observes that in certain Washington circles, the ghost of Trotsky still hovers around. At a party in February celebrating a new book about Iraq, Schwartz exchanged banter with Wolfowitz about Trotsky, the Moscow Trials and Max Shachtman. "I've talked to Wolfowitz about all of this," Schwartz notes. "We had this discussion about Shachtman. He knows all that stuff, but was never part of it. He's definitely aware." The yoking together of Paul Wolfowitz and Leon Trotsky sounds odd, but a long and tortuous history explains the link between the Bolshevik left and the Republican right. To understand how some Trotskyists ended up as advocates of U.S. expansionism, it is
[CTRL] The Cult of Power --- From Leon Trotsky to Paul Wolfowitz
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 14, 2004 The Cult of Power by Justin Raimondo With almost 900 Americans dead, thousands horribly wounded, and talk of canceling a national election that is taking place in the shadow of terrorism, one has to ask: how did we get here? Seymour Hersh, speaking at the American Civil Liberties Union conference on July 7, gave a pretty good answer: "Rather than deal with the obvious stuff about Bush and this election and what it means, I think the real question we have to answer and this is the question that I'm inchoate about: my friend Dan Ellsberg would say this is heuristic, 'I have some heuristic thoughts about it' he's a great expert on heurism. The question we have to say to ourselves is, okay, so here's what happens: a bunch of guys, eight or nine neoconservatives, cultists not Charles Manson cultists, but cultists get in. "And it's not, with all due respect to Michael Moore, (his movie's fine) but it's not about oil, it's even not about Israel, it's about a utopia they have. It's about an idea they have. Not only about that democracy can be spread. In a sense I would say Paul Wolfowitz is the greatest Trotskyite of our times. He believes in permanent revolution. And in the Middle East, to begin with, needless to say. "And so you have a bunch of people who have been, for ten or twelve years, fantasizing, since the 1991 Gulf war, on the way to resolve problems. And of course there'll be beneficiaries, Israel would be a beneficiary, etc., etc., but the world in their eyes, this is a utopia. "And so they got together this small group of cultists. And how did they do it? They did do it. They've taken the government over. "And what's amazing to me and what really is troubling is how fragile our democracy is. Look what happened to us They took the edge off the press, they also muzzled the bureaucracy, they muzzled the military, they muzzled the Congress. And it's an amazing feat. We're supposed to be a democratic society. And all those areas of our democracy bowed and scraped to this group of neocons." It was a riveting talk, delivered in a tone of understated modesty, each interruption of applause visibly anticipated and borne by the speaker as if the audience were shooting arrows at him: as if to say there's no time for self-congratulation, because we have to get at the truth and time is running out. I've lost track of how many major stories Hersh has broken in the past few months: Abu Ghraib, the financial shenanigans of neocon guru Richard Perle, the lie factory called the "Office of Special Plans," and the list goes on. In this age of journalistic servility to the State, he has no peers as an investigative reporter. The boys in the Pentagon shudder each time The New Yorker rolls off the presses. Here is a topnotch journalist an empiricist by profession, and necessity trying to discern some pattern in the facts he's assembled. With access to all sorts of Washington insiders including Pentagon generals, whose disaffection, he said in his talk, "has never been so acute" Hersh comes up with a story remarkably similar to that recounted by others, including General Anthony Zinni, intelligence expert James Bamford, retired Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, and a number of authors and journalists including the present writer, who has been continually underscoring the threat posed by the neocons since the very first installment of this column. "It's not the Manson clan," said Hersh to the assembled civil libertarians, "but we really have been taken over." By whom or what? Like other such sects, religious as well as political, the history and beliefs of the neoconservative cult come in two versions. As Murray N. Rothbard pointed out in a trenchant 1972 study of the Ayn Rand cult: "Every religious cult has two sets of differing and distinctive creeds: the exoteric and the esoteric. The exoteric creed is the official, public doctrine, the creed which attracts the acolyte in the first place and brings him into the movement as a rank-and-file member. The esoteric creed is the unknown, hidden agenda, a creed which is only known to its full extent by the top leadership, the 'high priests' of the cult. The latter are the keepers of the mysteries of the cult." An ideological cult, Rothbard observed, has many of the salient features of a religious cult, and essentially the same belief structure: leader-worship, dogmatism, and a hatred of heresy, characteristics the neocons exhibit in abundance. Leader-worship fairly describes the neoconservative theory of the Presidency: the President, as Warrior-King, can order torture, and even suspend the Constitution. As for dogmatism: instead of acknowledging and analyzing the utter wrongness of their expectation that we would be greeted with cries of "Hail our liberators!" by the Iraqis, the neocons are now blaming the disaster on the allegedly flawed "execution" of their policies. Hatred of
[CTRL] These Dogs Don't Hunt
-Caveat Lector- These Dogs Don't Hunt A Pentagon inspectors defense of Halliburton is a textbook example of the cronyism of Bush's so-called watchdogs. By David J. Sirota and Judd Legum Web Exclusive: 07.09.04 Fact: Halliburton has overcharged taxpayers for food, accepted kickbacks for oil subcontracts, and spent taxpayer money renting rooms at five-star resorts in Kuwait. But instead of expressing outrage the government's top watchdog, Pentagon Inspector General Joseph Schmitz, last week parroted the company line, saying he believes Halliburton's problems "are not out of line with the size and scope of their contracts." He then accused the press of overemphasizing the connections between the company and its former CEO Dick Cheney, even though Vice President Cheney still collects hundreds of thousands of dollars in deferred compensation, owns company stock options, and had his office "coordinate" Halliburton contracts in Iraq. Why is the government's top independent watchdog deliberately sugarcoating taxpayer ripoffs? Because he, like other Bush administration officials charged with overseeing expenditures in Iraq, is anything but independent. Instead of filling the various inspector general, comptroller, and budget officer positions in Iraq with skilled, non-partisan public servants, President Bush has packed them with partisans and cronies like Schmitz. Many of these individuals have longstanding political ties with the administration and ties to the very industries and companies that they are supposed to oversee. Here are the dirty details: Joseph Schmitz: Defense Department Inspector General Defense Department Inspector General Joseph Schmitz was appointed to his post by President Bush in 2001 after the Associated Press reported the office "was caught cheating" and destroying internal documents. His office has broad jurisdiction to investigate all Pentagon contracts, both in Iraq and elsewhere. But judging by Schmitz's qualifications, the White House had one thing in mind when it appointed him: political loyalty. According to National Journal, Schmitz is the son of former California Rep. John G. Schmitz, who was a John Birch Society director. As a member of the archconservative Washington Legal Foundation, Joseph Schmitz made a name for himself as "a conservative activist" and as a lawyer for House Speaker Newt Gingrich in a court case attempting to outlaw forms of taxation. In 1992, he authored a letter to The Washington Times insinuating that the Democratic presidential nominee had connections to Russian intelligence, writing, "The KGB apparently knows more about the shady side of Bill Clinton than the American people ever will." His short tenure at the Pentagon has been marked not only by defending Halliburton, but also by defending the administration he is supposed to be overseeing. For instance, in 2002, Schmitz refused congressional entreaties to declassify a report detailing how the administration was providing inadequate training and protective gear to troops in the event of a bio-chemical attack. And Schmitz's corporate background has also raised questions about his objectivity. According to the January 5, 1996, Aviation Daily newsletter, Schmitz "had a number of airline clients in his private practice" -- and as IG has subsequently refused bipartisan efforts to intervene and terminate a controversial, multi-billiondollar Pentagon contract with Boeing. The contract would send more than $23 billion in taxpayer funds to the company, yet in return would only be allowed to lease jets, not own them. In fact, even though Schmitz himself admitted the administration "used inappropriate procurement strategies and did not use best business practices ... to provide sufficient accountability" for the contract, he claimed there was "no compelling reason" to halt the deal. Stuart Bowen: Coalition Provisional Authority Inspector General The inspector general of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) is described by the CPA's website as an "independent and objective oversight office" to monitor taxpayer money being spent on contracts. But instead of appointing someone with budget or contracting experience, the White House appointed Stuart Bowen, Jr., a Texas lawyer with longtime ties to President Bush. Before being appointed Inspector General, Bowen worked directly for the President for eight years -- most recently as a White House legal counselor, and before that in the Texas governor's office. According to The Chicago Tribune, between his time at the White House and the CPA, Bowen lobbied for Iraq contracts for the consulting firm URS Group; his connections to the Bush team landed contracts worth up to $30 million. As inspector general, Bowen oversees many of the investigations into Halliburton's misuse of taxpayer money. Yet despite evidence that the company could be bilking taxpayers, he has been only mildly critical. In fact, one of his most public statements was a call for
[CTRL] The case for sanctions against Israel
-Caveat Lector- http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1259087,00.html The case for sanctions against Israel What worked with apartheid can bring peace to the Middle East Gerald Kaufman Monday July 12, 2004 The Guardian The bomb attack in Tel Aviv yesterday highlights the desperate need to achieve a peace settlement. It highlights, too, the futility of the wall Israel is building in Palestinian land, a wall condemned by the international court of justice last Friday and whose route was condemned by Israel's supreme court last month. What action is needed to put an end to this dance of death? When the international court demanded the removal of the wall, the Israeli government replied that it had a "moral duty" to protect its citizens. Quite apart from the fact that this government - the most rightwing and bellicose in Israel's 56-year history - could not recognise a moral duty if hit in the face by one, the protection of citizens is, above all, the duty in which it is failing. Since the second intifada was sparked in September 2000 by the provocative visit by Ariel Sharon (then an opposition leader) to the Temple Mount, sacred to Muslims, in Jerusalem, more than 1,000 Israelis have been killed by terrorist action - far more than in any comparable period since Israel was created. In the same period, of course, more than three times as many Palestinians have been killed by Israelis. In justifying the wall, the Israeli government points to what it claims to be its success in reducing terrorism by physically cordoning off the profoundly deprived Palestinians of the Gaza strip. Well, that success was demonstrated two weeks ago when a rocket from the Gaza strip killed an Israeli toddler, not in one of the illegal Israeli settlements in the strip, but in the nearby Israeli town of Sderot. Shortly afterwards, another rocket fell within a couple of hundred yards of Sharon himself, paying a condolence and "we will not be moved" visit to Sderot. The wall has no chance of halting terrorism, even though $1bn is being squandered on it at a time when unemployment is at record heights, destitution is hitting large numbers of the Israeli underclass, tourist revenue is spiralling downwards and the economy is almost in freefall. When I toured the wall a few months ago, I visited the Palestinian town of Qalqilya, which is strangled in a near-total noose by the wall but which I was able to enter in a UN vehicle. The next day Israeli soldiers at a checkpoint I had passed, in view of that part of the wall, were killed in a bomb attack. Although the Israeli supreme court argued that the wall was not illegal, it did insist that this barrier is causing "unjustified hardship" to some 35,000 Palestinians penned into isolated enclaves and cut off from agricultural land, medical care, schools and universities. If the wall is completed, hundreds of thousands more Palestinians will suffer, with a city such as Bethlehem facing destruction of its tourism and agriculture. What, then, should be done? It is pointless to take the issue to the UN security council, since the Bush administration, seeking to win Jewish votes from the Democrats while impelled to support Sharon by Texas Christian wacky fundamentalism, would veto any resolution condemning the Israeli government. Economic sanctions and an arms ban against Israel are the only way of breaking the impasse. Such a policy brought down apartheid in South Africa, which was similarly condemned by the world court in 1971 for its illegal occupation of South West Africa (now free and democratic Namibia). It was sanctions imposed by a President Bush (the incumbent's markedly more sensible and principled father) that forced a rightwing Israeli prime minister, Yitzhak Shamir, to peace talks in Madrid after Bush suspended $10bn of loan guarantees for resettling Russian immigrants in Israel. Obtaining sanctions and a weapons ban today will not be easy. That is all the more reason why a strong campaign needs to be mounted as soon as possible. A recent report by the House of Commons international development committee pointed to the leverage available through making European trade agreements conditional on Israel's compliance with international law and security council resolutions (all flouted by Israel). War on Want has stated: "A trade policy could provide a key mechanism for exerting pressure on Israel. A full economic embargo would be in line with article two of the EU-Israeli association agreement, which states that trade restrictions can be enforced in deference to a country's poor human rights record." As emerges incontrovertibly from the Israeli supreme court's ruling, let alone that of the international court, this government's human rights record is appalling. Moreover, while the US is Israel's principal arms supplier, European countries such as Germany are also involved. Pressure must be exerted here, too. That there is increasingly explicit acceptance of
[CTRL] Proposal floated for North American ID card
-Caveat Lector- http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentID=72685catname=Local+News Proposal floated for North American ID card By Sarah Staples Local News - Thursday, July 08, 2004 @ 01:00 CanWest News Service An influential organization representing U.S. and Canadian drivers licence bureaus is developing a proposal for a de facto North American identity card: a biometric licence for 300 million people that could be fed through law enforcement databases to nab holders of multiple forged licences. Such a card would require the creation of the largest database of biometric data in the world potentially to include digital images of a persons face or eye, or electronic fingerprints. The move comes as Ontario becomes the latest Canadian province to signal it will tighten security on major pieces of identification: It has quietly just revealed plans to adopt biometric technology on health cards and drivers licences. A spokesman would not rule out the possibility of merging the two cards into a single smart ID even though a similar proposal by the previous Conservative regime was abandoned in 2002 after it was panned by privacy critics. The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, a quasi-governmental body whose members are mainly state and provincial ministries of transportation, has finished the first stage of a multi-year evaluation to gauge whether a common biometric licence could be applied across association jurisdictions, including Canadian provinces. A report by International Biometric Group, produced last January and released to association members in September 2003, reviewed available research on biometrics before concluding more study is needed to decide whether a North American identity card supported by a massive database of fingerprints, iris or facial scans is technically feasible. Marked confidential and with an advisory it is intended for dissemination within the association member jurisdiction community only, the report, titled Phase I: Technical Capability of Biometric Systems to Perform 1:300 million Identification, was later posted on the associations website as an addendum to a status report on drivers licence security. Although a decision would ultimately rest with lawmakers in the U.S. and Canada, the initiative is being fast-tracked at the highest levels of the association, according to a second report produced by Fischer Consulting Inc., which offers a detailed blueprint for further action. The associations board of directors has voted to continue canvassing biometrics vendors for detailed technical advice on scaling a database so it could dwarf existing warehouses of personal information without sacrificing accuracy, according to the Fischer report. Raj Nanavati, a partner with International Biometric Group, confirmed his company was contracted by the association to explore the feasibility of a North American licence designed to provide a real background check that would identify criminals who apply for more than one licence under an alias. But Jason King, a spokesman for the Arlington, Va.-based organization, denied the association is reviewing options for a centralized North American licensing system. I dont know what reports youre reading and Im not certain what alls in them, but you can take my word as gospel, said King. In Ontario, meanwhile, Joe Uzan, of the strategic procurement branch of the provinces Ministry of Transportation, said everything is open and on the table, when asked if the province intends to design a combined ID card merging health and drivers information. A notice posted last week on the government tendering website, Merx, announces the ministries of transportation and health wish to develop a strategy for new security measures for driver licence and health card issuance and identification security. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:]
[CTRL] Facing the Enemy on the Ground
-Caveat Lector- http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/19190/ Facing the Enemy on the Ground By Scott Ritter, AlterNet. Posted July 9, 2004. The Iraqi resistance has been years in the making. And with the help of American involvement, the insurgency will continue to flourish and grow until no force can defeat it. The battle for Iraq's sovereign future is a battle for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. As things currently stand, it appears that victory will go to the side most in tune with the reality of the Iraqi society of today: the leaders of the anti-U.S. resistance. Iyad Allawi's government was recently installed by the United States-led Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) to counter a Ba'athist nationalism that ceased to exist nearly a decade ago. In the aftermath of the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein's regime shifted toward an amalgam of Islamic fundamentalism, tribalism and nationalism that more accurately reflected the political reality of Iraq. Thanks to his meticulous planning and foresight, Saddam's lieutenants are now running the Iraqi resistance, including the Islamist groups. Not only has the United States failed to put into place a viable government to replace the CPA in the aftermath of the so-called "transfer of sovereignty," but more importantly, it continues to misidentify the true nature of the Iraqi insurgency. As a consequence, the resistance will inevitably continue to flourish and grow until no force can defeat it, Iraqi or American. Ba'athism is Dead, Long Live Saddam In August 1995, Saddam Hussein's son-in-law, Hussein Kamal, defected to Jordan. In the lead up to the war, much of the attention paid to this event has centered on Kamal's various debriefings with the CIA, British Intelligence, and UN weapons inspectors concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Fourteen months into the U.S. occupation of Iraq, Hussein Kamal's testimony that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction had been destroyed in the summer of 1991 has taken on new relevance, given the fact that to date no WMD have been found. But more important than the WMD information (which has become abundantly clear through other sources) is Kamal's self-described reason for defecting: Saddam Hussein's order that all senior Ba'ath Party officials undergo mandatory Koranic studies. A staunch Ba'athist like Hussein Kamal, schooled in the doctrine of secular Arab nationalism, viewed the command as tantamount to heresy. But for Saddam Hussein, this radical shift in strategy was necessary to his survival given the new realities of post-Gulf War Iraq. Confronted with the postwar turmoil created by military defeat and economic devastation (prolonged by UN-imposed sanctions), Saddam had to re-engineer his domestic constituency to maintain his power. The traditional Ba'athist ideology, based on Iraq-centric Arab nationalism, was no longer the driving force it had been a decade prior. Creating a new power base required bringing into the fold not only the Shi'ite majority which had revolted against him in the spring of 1991 but also accommodating the growing religious fundamentalism of traditional allies such as key Sunni tribes in western Iraq. The most visible symbol of Saddam's decision to embrace Islam was his order to add the words "God is Great" to the Iraqi flag. He also simultaneously embraced traditional Iraqi tribal culture, de-emphasizing the importance of the Ba'ath Party in 1996 by noting that it was but "one of the tribes of Iraq" a move that erased decades of Ba'athist anti-tribal policies. Getting It Wrong, Again The transformation of the political dynamics inside Iraq, however, has gone largely unnoticed in the West. It certainly seems to have escaped the attention of the Bush Administration. And the recent "transfer of sovereignty" from the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) to the new Iraqi government of Prime Minister Iyad Allawi reflects this lack of understanding. For many in the Bush Administration, the greatest and indisputable success of the invasion of Iraq was ridding the world of a dangerous ideology, Ba'athism. Indeed, one of the first directives issued by Paul Bremer, the former head of the CPA, was to pass a "de-Ba'athification" law, effectively blacklisting all former members of that party from meaningful involvement in the day-to-day affairs of post-Saddam Iraq. The law underscored the mindset of those in charge of Iraq: Ba'athist holdouts loyal to Saddam were the primary threat to the U.S.-led occupation. Senior Bush Administration officials recognized their mistake though a little too late. In April 2004, Bremer rescinded his "de-Ba'thification" order. The architect of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, recently told members of Congress that the Pentagon had underestimated its enemy in Iraq. The Pentagon today speaks of a "marriage of convenience" between Islamic fundamentalists and former members of Saddam's Ba'athist regime,
[CTRL] A Scheme to Cancel the Elections?
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 12, 2004 A Scheme to Cancel the Elections? Why bother? No matter who wins this November, the War Party will remain in the saddle by Justin Raimondo We're fighting a war to export "democracy" to Iraq as U.S. government officials openly discuss the possibility of canceling the November elections. While it's no surprise that a government official of any nationality would talk out of both sides of his mouth, in the Bizarro America of the post-9/11 era a distinctly double-jointed rhetorical style seems to have become an all-pervasive aspect of political discourse. In late June, DeForest B. Soaries, Jr., head of the freshly-minted U.S. Election Assistance Commission (USEAC), started talking about "reviewing" possible scenarios in which the November elections would be canceled, or delayed, in response to a terrorist attack in the U.S. "Guidelines" for dealing with such a situation "do not currently exist," bemoaned Soaries, provocatively pointing to the example of the terrorist attacks on the eve of Spain's elections. According to the neoconservative party line, the Madrid bombings handed the victory to the antiwar Socialists, and this proved the Spanish to be a nation of "appeasers," in spite of polls that showed the Socialists pulling ahead before the bombs went off. Never mind that such an attack on American soil would almost certainly ensure Bush's reelection. If the Spanish reference didn't set off alarm bells at the time, then surely the breathtaking assumptions contained in Soaries' comments might lead us to wonder what they're smoking over at the USEAC: "Look at the possibilities. If the federal government were to cancel an election or suspend an election, it has tremendous political implications. If the federal government chose not to suspend an election it has political implications. Who makes the call, under what circumstances is the call made, what are the constitutional implications? I think we have to err on the side of transparency to protect the voting rights of the country." Yes, George W. Bush and his minions putting the kibosh on their upcoming landslide defeat certainly would have "tremendous political implications." It would usher in an era of political instability such as accompanied the rise of Caesarism in ancient Rome, marking the transition from Republic to Empire in a formal sense. As for the constitutional implications, Soaries' concern is vastly understated. Since there are no provisions in the U.S. Constitution providing for the cancellation of elections by the federal government, Soaries is asking us to consider "under what circumstances" the Constitution ought to be overthrown. His proposal amounts to a usurpation of power: in effect, a coup. The Bush administration, in any case, was quick to pick up on the Soaries proposal in tandem with the latest terrorist scare, as Michael Isikoff reported: "American counterterrorism officials, citing what they call "alarming" intelligence about a possible Qaeda strike inside the United States this fall, are reviewing a proposal that could allow for the postponement of the November presidential election in the event of such an attack, Newsweek has learned." It's the same old color-coded cacophony of scaremongering that has had the Bush administration manipulating the American people from one end of the manic-depressive scale to the other. Go shopping: buy duct tape: "They hate us for our freedom" oh, and, by the way, we're canceling the elections. It's funny how all this mysterious "chatter" we're always hearing about invariably feeds the paranoiac convenience of the Bush administration, and once again this is proving to be the case, as Newsweek reports: "The prospect that Al Qaeda might seek to disrupt the U.S. election was a major factor behind last week's terror warning by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge. Ridge and other counterterrorism officials concede they have no intel about any specific plots. But the success of March's Madrid railway bombings in influencing the Spanish elections as well as intercepted "chatter" among Qaeda operatives has led analysts to conclude 'they want to interfere with the elections,' says one official." Short of nuclearizing every major American city, Al Qaeda, in and of itself, is powerless to "disrupt" our electoral process: the only ones who seem to want to directly interfere with the elections are Mr. Soaries, the USEAC, and, now, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which, according Newsweek, will "analyze what legal steps would be needed to permit the postponement of the election were an attack to take place." In a letter to Ridge, Soaries asks the Department of Homeland Security to submit "emergency" legislation to Congress empowering the USEAC to "make such a call." Soaries, an unsuccessful 2002 Republican candidate for Congress, is also pastor of the First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens in
[CTRL] Déjà Vu, ElBaradei?
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/prather.php?articleid=3012 July 12, 2004 Dj Vu, ElBaradei? by Gordon Prather Mohamed ElBaradei director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency was in Israel last week pursuing a nuke-free Middle East. Now, ElBaradei has already certified Iraq to be nuke-free. And Iran. So, isn't the Middle East already nuke-free? Well, not according to Mordechai Vanunu. Vanunu was a technician at the Israeli nuclear facilities at Dimona for eight years. He fled to England, taking with him documents and photographs, including a photo of a plutonium "pit" for a thermo-nuke "primary" and a photo of a facility producing lithium-6 a critical material in a thermo-nuke's "secondary." The London Sunday Times had Vanunu's photos and documents "vetted" by British nuke scientists and published Vanunu's story on Oct. 5, 1986. But even before publication, Vanunu had been kidnapped and taken back to Israel. He was held captive and incommunicado until this April, when he was semi-released. He is not allowed to leave Israel, and his movements and communications are severely restricted. Nevertheless, Vanunu heard about ElBaradei's visit and managed to make public a suggestion that ElBaradei "should demand that the Israeli government let him go inside Dimona, to be part of the IAEA inspection of Dimona as the IAEA demanded from Iran, Iraq to report to all the world what every state is doing in secret." It is extremely unlikely that Prime Minister Sharon will allow that, or that ElBaradei would even make such a "demand." You see, Israel is a charter member of the IAEA, which was established by United Nations statute in 1957 to facilitate the spread of nuclear energy. But Israel is not a "party" to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which entered into force in 1970. The IAEA is not a "party" to the treaty, either, but has been made the international "safeguards" inspectorate under Article III of the NPT. Each non-nuclear-weapon state party to the treaty undertakes to accept safeguards as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agency's safeguards system for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed under the treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. But, if Israel is not an NPT signatory, why is ElBaradei in Israel? Well, as El-Baradei put it, "I'd like to see Israel supporting the Non-Proliferation Treaty through maybe concluding an Additional Protocol with the agency." ElBaradei would "like" Israel to agree to do what we at the urging of the Israelis have just forced Iran to do? Elbaradei would "like" Israel to sign an Additional Protocol to an IAEA Safeguards Agreement, authorizing IAEA inspectors unrestricted and unannounced access to all "suspicious" sites and facilities in Israel? Get outta here! Now, the IAEA can negotiate Safeguard Agreements and Additional Protocols with any nation-state NPT signatory or not when asked. And, if the IAEA concludes that any nation-state NPT signatory or not is "cheating" on its Safeguards Agreement, it may report that to the UN Security Council for appropriate action. In fact, we demanded that the Iranians sign an Additional Protocol because we were fairly certain the Iranians would refuse and that refusal might cause the IAEA to refer the matter to the Security Council. Either way, the Israelis would have an "excuse" to launch pre-emptive attacks on Iranian "nuclear" facilities, destroying the not-yet-operational Russian-supplied Bushehr reactor, just as they destroyed, back in 1981, the not-yet-operational French-supplied Osiraq reactor in Iraq. But the Iranians didn't refuse. They made a deal. Iran would sign an Additional Protocol if and only if UK-France-Germany would guarantee their "inalienable" rights under Article IV of the NPT. All the parties to the treaty undertake to facilitate and have the right to participate in the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. However, as ElBaradei was urging an Additional Protocol on Israel, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom emerged from a meeting in Washington to claim that "European foreign ministers" had concluded that Iran had reneged on their Additional Protocol deal with UK-France-Germany. It seems Israeli spies and Iranian expatriates have "intelligence" not to be made available to the IAEA that Iran is pursuing a "nuclear weapons program" at sites that ElBaradei can never find. Dj vu, ElBaradei?
[CTRL] Fox News Follies
-Caveat Lector- http://www.alternet.org/story/13046 Fox News Follies By Phil Boyer, TomPaine.com. Posted May 3, 2002. An open letter to Fox News CEO says the network's reporter and crew misrepresented themseelves and the facts to obtain a sensationalistic story. Story Editor's Note: The following is the complete text of an April 22, 2002 letter from Phil Boyer, president of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, to Roger Ailes, CEO of Fox News Channel. Dear Mr. Ailes: Little did I realize our paths would cross, even though I went off into a totally different field than television, where you and I met and worked for so long. Actually, I do recall you had substantial experience working with candidates as a political advisor, so we have almost swapped places. Sadly, however, this letter is to complain about a story that I and many of our 380,000 AOPA members think crossed the line beyond the fair and accurate reporting that I know you personally promote. The report surrounded the so-called "threat" of small general aviation aircraft to nuclear power plants. Reporter Douglas Kennedy misrepresented the facts and misled the audience. He claimed he rented a small airplane and made multiple passes over the Indian Point nuclear power plant, lingering in the area for twenty minutes. "No one warned the pilot of anything," Kennedy said. "No one at the plant, in fact, did or said a single thing in regards to the plane." That was false and Kennedy knew it. Your staff misrepresented the nature of the story to the flight school. They said they wanted to rent an airplane to photograph escape routes near the plant. Based on that representation, the pilot of the aircraft telephoned the manager on duty at the New York Terminal Area Radar Control facility and obtained permission for the flight. The aircraft departed Teterboro with an assigned, discrete transponder code, and under direction of air traffic control. It flew northbound past the plant at above 2,000 feet, continued north for about three miles, then flew west for several miles, then south until about four miles south of the plant, then turned back upriver and flew past the plant again. Once well past the plant, the pilot turned around and flew southbound past the plant for a third time. The video crew requested another pass, but the pilot declined because he had already told air traffic control that he had completed the photo run. The federal government knew who was onboard the aircraft and knew what the purpose of the flight was. The federal government maintained constant radar vigilance on the aircraft and remained in communication with the pilot. The flight school verified the identities of your crewmembers before the flight, including making copies of their photo IDs. Should anyone have been concerned about this aircraft passing the Indian Point power plant? Of course not. The flight had been cleared and was being tracked, the crew and passengers were known, the purpose of the flight approved. Kennedy's story also did not fairly represent the threat of a general aviation aircraft crashing into a nuclear facility. He cited a nuclear activist, with no identified engineering expertise, claiming that a small aircraft could damage a nuclear facility, and "damage to the spent fuel pool could lead to a massive release of radioactivity, which would then threaten the entire New York metropolitan area..." Yet independent nuclear engineers have confirmed for us that even an airliner could not penetrate the containment vessel house the nuclear reactor. Spent fuel rods are kept in steel-lined concrete "swimming pool" designed to withstand an earthquake measuring 6.6 on the Richter scale. Some thirty feet of water covers the fuel rods. Even if an aircraft were able to penetrate the building covering the storage pool, it couldn't get to the fuel rods. When impacted at aircraft speeds, water is harder than concrete. Pieces of the aircraft might sink down to the fuel rods, but it's extraordinarily unlikely that the fuel would be disturbed. And Kennedy claimed that most nuclear plants "are near a major airport." He neglected to mention that all nuclear plants have been designed taking into account the plant's proximity to an airport; it's proximity to federal airways, and proximity to military aircraft training routes. In sum, your staff misrepresented themselves and the facts to obtain a sensationalistic story that unfairly alarmed a trusting public. Our members had expected better from Fox News, and, frankly, you and I know well these facts spell poor journalism. Sincerely, Phil Boyer Phil Boyer is president of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright
[CTRL] Another Fake Hate Crime
-Caveat Lector- http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/07/12/france.attack.ap/ Doubts amid swastika attack hunt Monday, July 12, 2004 Posted: 1857 GMT (0257 HKT) PARIS, France (AP) -- Police patrolled suburban trains on Monday and studied video from surveillance cameras, trying to track down six men who allegedly attacked a young mother and scrawled swastikas on her stomach. But doubts began to surface about the truth of the attack report that stunned France. A 23-year-old mother told police that she was robbed by a knife-wielding gang of six young men while riding a train with her infant on Friday morning, then mistreated after being mistaken for a Jew. None of some 20 witnesses came to her rescue, she told police. Investigators trying to track down the culprits had almost no clues to guide them. Surveillance cameras at the station where the culprits reportedly left the train showed no young men running from the scene, and no witnesses have come forward despite repeated calls from officials and promises of anonymity. Both France-Info radio and the television station LCI reported that the young woman had filed several complaints for violence and aggression in the past. Neither provided sources, but LCI said she had filed six such complaints in the past. That information could not be immediately confirmed. "It is absolutely necessary to have a certitude before speaking," said Paris Police Chief Jean-Paul Proust, when asked about the case on France-2 television. "I have no certitude." Despite the doubts being cast on the woman's report, officials continued to issue statements of shock and calls to fight anti-Semitism and passiveness by bystanders. Deputy Minister for Victims' Rights Nicole Guedj met with the young mother, then asked witnesses to step forward, particularly a young man said to have been seated near the mother. "The gesture that he was not able to make Friday, he must make today," Guedj said. Guedj also suggested that witnesses who failed to act at the time would not risk being pursued for non-assistance to a person in danger, a crime in France. "It is difficult to go after people who feel themselves to be in danger," she said. France was stunned by news of the attack, which emerged over the weekend. The brutality of the aggression, its anti-Semitic character and the fact that no one came to the mother's rescue raised worrisome questions. "Anti-Semitism is shameful ... but there is also a sickness in our society," said Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin. "It's indifference to violence." He called for courage among citizens, saying that "courage must be quicker than violence." Police, their information based on the woman's account, said that the gang, described by the victim as between 15 and 20, allegedly grabbed the woman's backpack, taking her money and credit cards. When they saw that her identification card said she lived in the wealthy 16th district of Paris, they reportedly told the woman: "There are only Jews in the 16th." The woman told police that the men, described as North Africans and blacks, then cut off locks of her hair, opened her shirt with their knives and used markers to draw three swastikas on her stomach. Guedj said the woman told her that about 20 people in the train were "capable of seeing" what was happening. One of the attackers held the woman by her neck, forcing her to keep her head to the ground so that she couldn't see them, several French newspapers quoted police as saying. Meanwhile, the office of President Jacques Chirac said that crimes involving racism would not be among those benefiting from the traditional Bastille Day pardons on Wednesday. www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Israel planted Tel Aviv bomb
-Caveat Lector- . LA VOZ DE AZTLAN NEWS BULLETIN .. Los Angeles, Alta California .. July 11, 2004 Israel planted Tel Aviv bomb The bomb that went off today near a bus stop in Tel Aviv was actually planted by Israeli agents and not by the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades as reported earlier. The blast that killed one Israeli army soldier and wounded 20 others is the work of nefarious Zionist agents attempting to justify the mammoth "Apartheid Wall" that was condemn by the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Friday. Killing and terrorizing its own citizens to justify government policies in the eyes of its own people and in the eyes of international public opinion is a very common practice by Likud Party operatives, the MOSSAD and the Israeli security service called the Shin Bet. This is not the first time that these government agents have carried out terrorist attacks against their own people which they than blame on the Palestinians. These vile and evil acts perpetuate the notion of "Jews as victims" and justifies the continued slaughter and massacre of Palestinians by the Israeli army. On Saturday, an Israeli tank shell killed four Palestinians in Gaza and one occupation soldier shot dead a teenage girl in Rafah. In another incident, on the same day, a pregnant Palestinian woman was shot by Israeli occupation troops in Bait Hanun. These sinister terrorist acts are now becoming manifest in the USA as well. The recent "Anthrax" killings is just one example. "Terrorism" is being utilized by our own government to keep the populace in constant fear and more compliant towards unpopular government policies. The film "Fahrenheit 911" brilliantly exposed the lies by our own government that were utilized to justify the pro-Israel war on Iraq. Fear-mongering has now become a very effective US government tool. This is a trend we have called "The Israelization of the USA". * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * La Voz de Aztlan http://www.aztlan.net/israel_planted_bomb.htm www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Bagged And Tagged!
-Caveat Lector- http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski82.html Bagged and Tagged! by Karen Kwiatkowski The Senate has gingerly examined, apparently for the first time, what the CIA told them two years ago. Before this, they didnt have time to question, to peruse, to use common sense, perhaps even to read what the CIA reports said and not just follow blindly the commands of the majority whip and our wild-eyed President. Its preliminary report indicates that much of the information was bad, and blames the CIA. The CIA was a victim of groupthink; it "interpret[ed] ambiguous elements . . . as conclusive evidence"; its corporate culture is broken. Ouch! The CIA wasnt pressured by anyone, either. It just produced boatloads of bulls%*t all on its own. Wrong, unreasonable, made no sense, by the boatload. Normal people (this apparently excludes most members of Congress) would wonder why you would believe anything from the CIA or DIA on Iraq anyway, given we had had no real in-country assets or visibility for years. Not even a military attach, or a tiny hovel of a CIA station in Baghdad or Basra. Last CIA agent we had in Ba-ath country was an illegal member of the Hans Blix team. The CIA is the predominant intelligence agency, and the Director has authority over the whole shooting match. The community contains 15 different intelligence collecting organizations, over half of which belong to the Department of Defense. 80% of all intelligence funding is spent and apparently wasted by the Pentagon. Thanks to a convenient reorganization by the all-knowing and also wild-eyed Secretary Rumsfeld, this consolidation of budget and product has been further stovepiped into an even more politically manageable entity, the Defense Under Secretary for Intelligence. The office is currently staffed by neoconservative loyalist and Claremont Institute alumni Stephen Cambone and his deputy, Bible-thumping warmonger General "Jerry" Boykin. One wonders how long the rush to lay the blame in a neat package on the CIA corporate culture doorstep will distract the media from the obvious. With 80% of the cash, 80% of the blame may well flow to the Pentagon. But maybe, just maybe, the Pentagon will be OK. Work with me here. Lets think back to the Pentagon behavior during the rush to war in 2002 and 2003. As I recall, Rumsfeld was calm, slow to act, and full of wisdom. He is the man who insists on facts and hard evidence, or was it absence of evidence? Never mind. Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz claimed that Iraqis want democracy and we should support them in their goal of overthrowing Saddam Hussein from afar, given the lack of intelligence that would push us into any premature involvement in Baghdad. As a student of history, with a bloody painting of the Battle of Antietam dominating his office wall, Wolfowitz also understood the danger of war, the unintended consequences, the cost. Under Secretary for Policy Doug Feith was telling anyone who would listen that while it is unfortunate that ugly dictatorships and human rights abusers exist in the world, sometimes it is pragmatic to deal with them, instead of bomb and occupy them. Feith would also remind us of all the oil we bought from Iraq under the oil for food program. Who can forget the former Chair of the Defense Policy Board Richard Perle who said any invasion of Iraq on such grounds would be illegal! Oops, he said that after we occupied the country. But Im sure he said it many times before! And of course, the Office of Special Plans was using its friendly backchannel to the Office of the Vice President to advise him that in the absence of reliable human intelligence regarding Iraq, the best policy would be a truly conservative one. The OSP surely told the Vice President that Iraq was in no position to threaten either her neighbors or the United States, and that containment of Saddam Hussein was working. Isnt that how you all remember it? Many politicos in Washington hope against hope that this report will bag and tag the CIA with the Bush-Cheney festival of lies that have killed so many, for so little. And like a flock of geese at the sound of a shotgun, they are nervously considering flight and looking for leadership. July 10, 2004 www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
[CTRL] Neocon Coup at CIA?
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 9, 2004 Neocon Coup at CIA? It will be if John Lehman takes over by Justin Raimondo All this folderol about how the neoconservative moment is over, and the War Party totally discredited, is just so much wishful thinking, as the prospect of John F. Lehman's nomination as CIA chief makes all too clear. Rumor has it that Porter Goss is out too partisan and Lehman is leading the pack. If so, this is a testament to the neocons' bureaucratic staying power. Formerly an investment banker with Paine Webber, Inc., Lehman was President of the Abington Corporation, (1977-81), a lobbying and consulting firm, a staff member of the National Security Council under Henry Kissinger, and deputy director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. He has been associated with the neoconservative network in Washington since the good old days of Iran-Contra. In 1981, President Ronald Reagan appointed Lehman Secretary of the Navy: he served until 1987. In 1983, a mysterious package of documents arrived at the New York Times, a fortuitous delivery that led to a piece by reporter Jeff Gerth in which Lehman, along with Richard Perle, was accused of accepting payments from Israeli arms dealers Shlomo Zabludowicz and his son, Chaim Zabludowicz, who were Perle's clients in 1980. They paid $90,000 to Abington Corporation: Perle kept $50,000, while Abington got the rest. Lehman blamed his wife: Perle said he did the work for the Zabludowicz clan before he was employed by the government. Whatever. In any case, as per the custom in Washington, Lehman and Perle survived the scandal, as neocons always do, and lived to fight another day. Lehman's most recent position has been as a member of the 9/11 Commission, where he excoriated Richard Clarke for writing a book, and went on Meet the Press declaring that a prominent member of Saddam's militia had been identified as a member of Al Qaeda, confusing two different Arab names in the process and getting it thoroughly wrong. The Washington Post pointed out the discrepancy to Lehman, who brushed it aside, claiming it really made no difference: he stood by his claim. Oh well, whatever. In the early 90's, Lehman joined up with the Committee on U.S. Interests in the Middle East, a neocon front group organized by Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams and Douglas J. Feith, and headed up by Frank Gaffney. The Committee lobbied for more U.S. tax dollars for Israel, and, among other activities, in 1992 bought a full-page ad in the New York Times viciously denouncing President George H. W. Bush as an appeaser for pressuring then-Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir to open negotiations that eventually led to the Oslo process: "As friendly as the United States is with many Arab states, when it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict, the United States must be squarely on the side of the Israelis." The principal founders and sponsors of the Committee, which broke with Dubya's dad over this issue, are now in charge of U.S. foreign policy, and of the last two holdouts the Department of State and the CIA it looks like they're about to take Langley. Although long associated with the War Party through his connections to Ball Aerospace Technologies a major manufacturer of NASA and Pentagon satellites and the board of the Center for Security Policy, a neoconservative redoubt, Lehman seems to be trying to distance himself from the neocons and their foreign policy views now that he's up for the CIA post. However, his record speaks for itself. He has long exhibited a Laurie Mylroie-like obsession with Iraq, claiming, for instance, that Saddam was behind the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000. The bombing, as it turned out, was the work of al-Qaeda, and had nothing whatsoever to do with Iraq. A few days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks Lehman signed an open letter calling on the President to attack Iraq. Keeping in mind his demonstrated inability to keep Arabic names straight, do we really want to appoint to the CIA's top post a man so often proved wrong? The bureaucratic brawl that took place between the CIA and the Pentagon in the prelude to war is now being resumed with new ferocity: the latter's policies may be discredited, and Iraq may be in ruins, along with the alleged "liberation," but just because they're losing the war on the overseas front doesn't mean the neocons can't ultimately carry the day in Washington. Former counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke, and the anonymous author of Imperial Hubris, along with a whole raft of former U.S. diplomats and government officials, have been on the offensive lately, targeting the neocons as duplicitous seducers who had their way with us and then left American soldiers and taxpayers with the burden of a costly occupation. The Lehman boomlet shows, however, that, far from being on the run, the neocons are counterattacking. The question now is: will the White House wait until after November
[CTRL] A Time for Reckoning
http://www.amconmag.com/2004_07_19/article.html July 19, 2004 issue Copyright 2004 The American Conservative A Time for Reckoning Ten lessons to take away from Iraq By Andrew J. Bacevich Reality has not dealt kindly with the hopes and expectations conjured up to justify Operation Iraqi Freedom. Although the war may not be lost, it cannot be won, at least not as the Bush administration once defined winning. What then are we to make of this experience? The question may strike some as premature. Whether President Bush (or President Kerry) stays the course or cuts American losses, difficult days lie ahead. The bill yet to be levied for this misadventure promises to be steep. More Americans and even larger numbers of Iraqis will lose their lives. Combat operations and the black hole of nation-building will consume additional billions of dollars, adding to the ocean of red ink that is the federal budget. Yet even as events wind their way toward what promises to be a deeply unsatisfactory denouement, the argument over what it all means must necessarily be joined. Common sense dictates that we apply to future U.S. policy what we have learned in Iraq, and the future will not wait. With an eye toward that futureand with no claim that any of what follows qualifies as definitiveherewith a first cut at identifying the wars operative lessons. First, ideology makes a poor substitute for strategy. With the invasion of Iraq, it became impossible to deny that in the heady aftermath of the Cold War American grand strategy became uncoupled from reality. Certain that history had spoken and that Americans were uniquely able to interpret its meaning, policymakers both Democratic and Republican uncorked old vials of Wilsonian illusion and breathed deeply. As a consequence, zealotry supplanted calculations of power and interest as a determinant of U.S. policy. Bill Clinton entertained visions of globalization, creating a world without borders in which all nations would be sure to enjoy the blessings of peace, prosperity, and democracy. George W. Bush topped Clinton, vowing after 9/11 not only to eliminate terror (an impossibility) but also to put an end to evil. But mixing utopianism and politics is a recipe for miscalculation and an invitation to strategic bankruptcyas the Iraq War has painfully reminded us. It is the tradition of George Washington rather than the tradition of Woodrow Wilson that best serves American interests. The nations first presidentand successors like Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, and Eisenhowerunderstood not only the uses but also the limits of power. That balanced sensibility, anchored to considerations of prudence, has vanished from the current foreign-policy elite. There is an urgent need to restore it. Second, wars leave loose ends. In a political sense, decisive victorymeaning military success that makes a clean sweep of the complaints giving rise to war in the first placeis a pipe dream. Operation Iraqi Freedom was supposed to finish the job that Bushs father had left undone in 1991. Oust Saddam Hussein, the wars supporters promised, and all sorts of good things were sure to follow. War would transform Iraq into the first Arab democracy, usher the Middle East into an era of lasting peace, and nudge Islam toward moderation and modernity. Today, the Baathist regime is gone, but none of the predicted benefits seems likely to materialize. Instead the United States has exchanged the limited burdens of containment for the far more onerous burdens of occupation. We have overthrown a tin-pot dictator posing no immediate threat to the United States and thereby energized and encouraged far more dangerous enemies. Rather than persuading Muslims to see America as liberator and friend, we have cemented our image as Great Satan. War is like a highly toxic drug: with the cure come side effects. And Iraq reminds us that the side effects can prove worse than the disease. Third, allies have choicesand will exercise them. Across a decade of hyping the United States as sole superpower and indispensable nation, too many policymakers persuaded themselves that Americas traditional allies had no alternative but to accede to U.S. global leadership. Both the Persian Gulf War of 1990-1991 and the Kosovo conflict of 1999 seemed to show that when Washington called, others clamored to board the bandwagon. To opt out was to be left out and left behind: from Washingtons perspective, this was a risk that few friends were likely to take. Iraq demolished such fantasies. Allies are not vassals. When interests diverge sufficiently, friendship counts for little. The Iraq experience has, time and again, affirmed this fundamental principle: when old Europe chose to sit out the war altogether; when Turkey rejected Washingtons request to allow U.S. troops to cross its territory; when Spanish voters concluded that occupying Iraq was exacerbating rather than reducing the threat of terror. At every step of the way,
[CTRL] Kabbalah
-Caveat Lector- http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2015 Peter Goodgame on the Kabbalah Letter from Peter Goodgame to Henry Makow Ph.D. Maddona is said to be a big fan of the Kabbalah but then, ambitious as she is, that may be because she aspires to be more than a mere pop star. Because, as the following letter to Henry Makow Ph.D. reveals, there is much more to the Kabbalah than mere fashion. Ed. Thanks so much for linking to my report. The hits have been streaming in. I know you receive a great deal of email, but hopefully you have the time to read this brief update on the direction I am headed. Perhaps you know that the Kabbalah is at the very heart of the Sabbatean movement that Barry Chamish has been exposing lately (see www.redmoonrising.com/chamish/Feb04.htm). You see, just prior to the year 1666 (perhaps in anticipation of the "666" of Revelation?) Kabbalistic scholar Nathan of Gaza was about 18 years old when the "angels" spoke to him and told him to preach that Sabatai Sevi was the Messiah of the Jews. The whole Sabbatean movement is pretty well documented, including the testimony that Nathan gave of his mystical experiences, and how his role was simply as a mouthpiece for the "angels" to direct Sevi's actions. It was all so believable that many of his followers were faithful and unfazed even when Sevi converted to Islam during his incarceration under the Turks. After yet another failed Messianic movement instigated by the "angels" of the Kabbalah, the Kabbalah was again discredited within Judaism. However, it remained a powerful force in occultism within the "Gentile" world, basically acting as a false "Judeo-Christian" link to the angels that were actually the spiritual forces of paganism that survived within the Hermetic documents that were translated during the Renaissance. And then as the Hermetic-Kabbalistic tradition evolved it eventually turned, first, into a viciously anti-Christian political force (Weishaupt's Illuminati was one of the first to actively plot against Christianity as a whole), and then also into an anti-Semitic political force (most notably with Helena Blavatsky's Theosophical movement that helped to inspire Hitler). Lately I have been doing a lot of research into the Templars and its offshoot the Freemasons, and I have been studying how this vast body of research connects with EIR's historical material that exposes the insidious role of Venice from the Crusades to the Thirty Years War (approx.1200-1650). See http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/venicept.htm I have come to realize how Venice was actually a bastion of paganism throughout its existence. It was continually a thorn in the side of the Catholic Church, and it was the architect of the Protestant Reformation, as well as the architect of the over-reactive Counter-Reformation that created the Inquisition. Early on, Venice was instrumental in getting Henry VIII to break with Rome and Spain (1529), and by this time England was already infected with anti-Catholic sentiments through the ancestors of the Templar elite and through the Masonic lodges that had crept down from Scotland, which is where many of the Templars had fled in the early 1300s. England became a Satanic power base through the combined effect of the Scottish Templar/Freemasons; the spread of the spirit-conjuring Hermetic-Kabbalist teachings of Cornelius Agrippa, the Venetian Franciscan monk Francisco Giorgi, Giordano Bruno, and John Dee; as well as through the Aristotelian materialistic teachings of atheistic Venetian scholar Paolo Sarpi that inspired (and were plagiarized by) Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes, and later John Locke and Isaac Newton. These three occult streams merged together in London, which became the new Venice, and once again evil was entrenched in an island fortress. From there the "spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms" (Ephesians 6:10-12) were able to continue their battle against humanity. After the Church was deliberately torn apart by the successful schemes of these unholy beings, and after Europe was ravaged by seemingly never-ending religious warfare, the Rosicrucian movement came on the scene in the early 1600s. It began with documents that spoke of a secret movement that was working to establish a peaceful New World Order of love and religious tolerance. The Rosicrucian movement pretended to acknowledge Christianity as the true faith (or a true faith), but underneath it was infused with pagan hermetic and kabbalistic symbolism and imagery. Its roots were undoubtedly with the spirit-conjurers at the head of the Satanic heirarchy, with whom Francis Bacon was intimately involved (for instance his New Atlantis). Rosicrucianism was but one of many examples of a bogus solution being offered for a manufactured crisis. As Venice faded from being the world's most powerful economic force London took its place. Under Cromwell (1600s) the Jewish financier element was invited
[CTRL] Israel's Chemical Weapons
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/orig/brooks.php?articleid=2957 July 8, 2004 Israel's Chemical Weapons by James Brooks "On June 10th, 2004, the two clinics in Al-Zawiya treated 130 patients for gas inhalation. The patients were children, women, old people and young men. Dr. Abu Madi related that there was a high number of cases of [tetany], spasm in legs and hands, connected to the nervous system. Pupils were dilated. Other symptoms included shock, semi-consciousness, hyperventilation, irritation and sweating." Thus reads a report by medical units serving the West Bank village of Al-Zawiya, where nonviolent resistance to Israel's impending wall has been extraordinarily resolute. According to the medical report (procured by the International Middle East Media Center [IMEMC]), "the gas used against the protestors is not tear gas but possibly a nerve gas." The following day, Israel's "Peace Bloc," Gush Shalom, began a press release with the following quote from Al-Zawiya: "What the army used here yesterday was not tear gas. We know what tear gas is, what it feels like. That was something totally different. When we were still a long way off from where the bulldozers were working, they started shooting things like this one (holding up a dark green metal tube with the inscription "Hand and rifle grenade no.400" - in English). Black smoke came out. Anyone who breathed it lost consciousness immediately, more than a hundred people. They remained unconscious for nearly 24 hours. One is still unconscious, at Rapidiya Hospital in Nablus. They had high fever and their muscles became rigid. Some needed urgent blood transfusion. Now, is this a way of dispersing a demonstration, or is it chemical warfare?" The incident in Al-Zawiya appears to be the tenth attack by Israeli soldiers using an "unknown gas" against Palestinian civilians since early 2001. We have photographs of the canisters. We have film of victims suffering in the hospital. We have interviews with Palestinian and European doctors who have treated the victims. And we presumably have hundreds, perhaps thousands, of survivors. But we know nothing of their fate. Despite the evidence, we have not inquired. Though it is a state secret, Israel's development of chemical and biological weapons has been known and analyzed for decades. From the typhoid poisoning of Palestinian wells and water supplies in 1948 to the conversion of F-16s into nerve gas "crop dusters" in 1998, Israel has always demonstrated a strong interest in developing CBW agents and methods for their dispersal. In 1992 an El Al 747 flying nerve gas ingredients from the U.S. to Israel crashed into an Amsterdam apartment building. According to Salman Abu-Sitta, president of the Palestine Land Society, the respected Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad followed up the crash with an in-depth investigation of the Israel Institute for Biological Research (IIBR), Israel's CBW complex in Nes Ziona. The paper reportedly found "strong links" with several U.S. CBW and medical research centers, "close cooperation between IIBR and the British-American biological warfare program," and "extensive collaboration on BW research with Germany and Holland." At IIBR, doctors publish world-class research in acetylcholine, the mother lode of nerve gas design. The Nes Ziona complex is reputed to have invented an "undetectable" poison-needle gun for "clean" assassinations. In September 1997, two days after Jordan's King Hussein told Israeli PM Netanyahu that Hamas was seeking negotiations, Mossad agents in Jordan attempted to kill Hamas leader Khaled Misha'al with a lethal dose of fentanyl. For years, rumors persisted that Israel was using or testing unknown chemical agents on Palestinian civilians. The rumors began to reveal their substance February 12, 2001, when Israel began a six-week campaign of "novel gas" attacks in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. By chance, American filmmaker James Longley arrived in Khan Younis, Gaza in the middle of the first attack. That afternoon he began filming the victims. His award-winning film, Gaza Strip, documents the naked reality of Israel's chemical weaponry the canisters, the doctors, the eyewitnesses, and the hideous suffering of the victims, many of whom remained hospitalized for days or weeks. The February 12 gassing of neighborhoods in Khan Younis presaged the attacks that followed. When the gas canisters landed, they began to billow clouds of either white or black, sooty smoke. The gas was non-irritating and initially odorless, changing to a sweet, minty fragrance after a few minutes. One victim recalled, "the smell was good. You want to breathe more. You feel good when you inhale it." The smoke often shifted to a "rainbow" of changing colors. >From five to thirty minutes after breathing the gas, victims began to feel sick and have difficulty breathing. A searing pain began to wrench their gut, followed by vomiting, sometimes of blood, then complete
[CTRL] Controlling The News June 1-5
-Caveat Lector- http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2013 Controlling the News June 1 5, 2004 TBRNews.org June 5, 2004 (July 1, 2004) This is going to be the most vicious Presidential election campaign on record and potentially the most dangerous. Bushs actions have politically polarized the American electorate and Moores Fahrenheit 9/11 documentary has made a bad situation for Bush far worse. We can see why the Mickey Mouse boys were terrified to touch this. They are very vulnerable and an infuriated Bush gang would take out their revenge on them for such a film. The danger lies in what probable actions Bush might take to swing the election that now is moving strongly against him. He is appealing to far right Christian groups, something that is sure to outrage more centrists and moderate religious groups. When these groups get the bit in their teeth, they become very vocal and often very vicious. More important, however, is the distinct possibility that Bush will start another military adventure, just before the election. Rumor at high levels has it that he will declare a state of emergency, based on faked reports, that North Korea and/or Iran are about to launch nuclear strikes against the American homeland and that he has ordered counterstrikes to defend this country. There are a significant number of Americans who would go for this. Hell, there are many Americans that believe Hussein controlled Al Quaeda, that the WTC was blown up by CIA missiles or plasmoid clouds or that Bush has helped the American economy instead of absolutely destroying its future growth. Unfortunately, both of these countries do have the Bomb and both are capable of retaliation or, worse, preemptive strikes against our troops in South Korea, Iraq or even Japan. Between Israel beating the drums for a US attack on Iran and Syria and Bushs toppling pole numbers, most of us are now seriously afraid of some Godawful adventure on the part of the Mission Accomplished lad. For previous reports see our Controlling the News archive: www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/category.asp?id=42 SOME BACKGROUND Walter Storch - TBRNews.org During the middle of March, 2003, tbrnews received an email from a man who claimed to be a mid-level executive with a major American television network. He stated in this, and subsequent, emails that he was in possession of thousands of pages of in-house memos sent from his corporate headquarters in New York City to the head of the networks television news department. He went on to say that these memos set forth directives about what material was, and was not, to be aired on the various outlets of the network. This individual claimed he was developing serious doubts about the strict control of media events and decided that he would pass this material along to someone who might make use of it. There was the question of his job security. If someone published his name, it would be certain he was not only fired but blackballed throughout his profession. If tbrnews.org would agree to protect his identity, he would send us these alleged thousands of pages of notes, going back to 2001. The proof of the pudding is in the eating so we accepted his caveats and he then sent to us by disk the pages he spoke of. All are on corporate stationary, signed or initialed by the senders and again, signed or initialed by the recipients in the news division. It was always possible that this material consisted of a very involved hoax or was something designed for the news site to use and then have it revealed that it was not original. It would not be the first time that spurious disinformation had been sent to us in the hopes that it would be used. There were not thousands of pages of memos but a total of 1,497 separate pages involved. Many of them consisted of short memos while others ran to a larger format. Naturally, someone could easily have obtained correct in-house network letterheads, made copies of them and prepared false memoranda but the sheer size and depth of the collection was impressive. If these memos were true, they showed with a terrible clarity that at least one part of the American mass media was strictly controlled and that the news was so doctored and spun that it might as well be official news releases from the White House and Pentagon. The best way in which to ascertain whether or not these documents contained original information was to check the dates of issuance and compare the information with subsequent news stories. This was a terrible, time-consuming chore but by selecting random memos and looking through the archives of various national newspapers, checking AP releases and so on, the results indicated that indeed, news was being managed. However, it was also possible that someone else did this and was preparing these after the fact and making the memos conform to published material. That having been said, we insisted on absolutely current memos so that we could
[CTRL] House vote about Israel ignores attempts for peace
-Caveat Lector- http://news.statesmanjournal.com/article.cfm?i=83100 House vote about Israel ignores attempts for peace July 7, 2004 Again the United States has shown that it is not really interested in addressing the causes of terrorism, nor the rule of law, by the overwhelming vote in the U.S. House recently to endorse the most egregious of Israels positions regarding settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. Our elected representatives have agreed that taking over another countrys lands is good policy, similar to our behavior in Iraq. This time it is the United States agreeing with Israel that separating people from their land, their livelihoods, even their life is acceptable if they are militarily superior and state that they are afraid. The U.N. Security Council stated that Israel should withdraw from those lands in return for certain guarantees from Palestinian groups that they would not attack Israeli citizens. Palestinians and Israelis worked together to create the Geneva Initiative that both could support and that addressed peace between them. Our representatives, including Darlene Hooley, voted to ignore these attempts at peace, even our own road map for peace. May we not reap the results of our beating plowshares into swords. We must withdraw our funding of Israel. Jan Soyster, Salem www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ A HREF=""ctrl/A To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
[CTRL] Elie Wiesel: Madman Or Commissar?
-Caveat Lector- http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/mickeyz07062004/ Tuesday, July 06, 2004 Elie Wiesel: Madman or Commissar? By Mickey Z. Parade Magazine took full advantage of Independence (sic) Day falling on a Sunday by hiring none other than Elie Wiesel to pen a little something called The America I Love for their patriotic cover story. Over a two-page spread, the Nobel Laureate explained how America for two centuries, has stood as a living symbol of all that is charitable and decent to victims of injustice everywhere...where those who have are taught to give back. The perpetually disheveled Wiesel explained that in the U.S., compassion for the refugee and respect for the other still have biblical connotations. Those same thoughts coming from a housewife in Peoria or truck driver in Boise are typically chalked up to ignorance so, perhaps Elie Wiesel is just an idiot...too simple-minded to discern reality from fantasy. But we cant let him off the hook so easily when, after reminding usyet againof his Holocaust experiences, the winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom admits, U.S. history has gone through severe trials (apparently this is how Nobel Peace Prize winners think: its history that undergoes trials). Ever careful to point out his bearing witness to the civil rights movement (and equally careful to avoid explaining what that means), Wiesel calls anti-black racism scandalous and depressing. But, take heart, black America, because dear Elie adds racism as such has vanished from, the American scene. Roll over, Mumia...and tell Leonard Peltier the news. Wiesel deigns to mention a few more of Americas indiscretions but is at the ready to explain: No nation is composed of saints alone. None is sheltered from mistakes and misdeeds (more scholarly talk: mistakes, not policy"). America is always ready to learn from its mishaps, he writes. Self-criticism remains its second nature. This is the territory of madmen and commissars. Who else speaks such words...and is convinced they speak the truth? Precisely what kind of man is this professional sufferer, Elie Wiesel? Here are two peeks behind the myth: While Wiesels documentation of the Nazi Holocaust has earned him international acclamation and a Nobel Peace Prize, he is not always predisposed to yield the genocide victims spotlight. In 1982, for example, a conference on genocide was held in Israel with Wiesel scheduled to be honorary chairman, but the situation became complicated when the Armenians wanted in. Heres how Noam Chomsky described the incident: The Israeli government put pressure upon [Wiesel] to drop the Armenian genocide. They allowed the others, but not the Armenian one. He was pressured by the government to withdraw, and being a loyal commissar as he is, he withdrew...because the Israeli government had said they didnt want Armenian genocide brought up. Wiesel went even further, calling up noted Israeli Holocaust historian, Yehuda Bauer, and pleading with him to also boycott the conference. That gives an indication of the extent to which people like Elie Wiesel were carrying out their usual function of serving Israeli state interests, Chomsky explains, even to the extent of denying a holocaust, which he regularly does. Why not welcome the Armenians, you wonder? Chalk it up to two conspicuous factors: the need to monopolize the Holocaust image and the geopolitical reality that Turkey (the nation responsible for the Armenian genocide) is a rare and much-needed Muslim ally for Israel. In Parade, Wiesel also speaks of brave American soldiers bringing rays of hope to the people of Iraq. However, such rays were not welcome in Central and South America when Israel served as a U.S. proxy for proving arms to murderous regimes like that of Guatemala. In 1981, shortly after Israel agreed to provide military aid to this oppressive regime, a Guatemalan officer had a feature article published in the armys Staff College review. In that article, the officer praised Adolf Hitler, National Socialism, and the Final Solution --quoting extensively from Mein Kampf and chalking up Hitlers anti-Semitism to the discovery that communism was part of a Jewish conspiracy. Despite such seemingly incompatible ideology, Israels estimated military assistance to Guatemala in 1982 was $90 million. What type of policies did the Guatemalan government pursue with the help they received from a nation populated with thousands of Holocaust survivors? Consider the words of Gabriel, one of the Guatemalan freedom fighters interviewed in 1994 by Jennifer Harbury: In my country, child malnutrition is close to 85 percent. Ten percent of all children will be dead before the age of five, and this is only the number actually reported to government agencies. Close to 70 percent of our people are functionally illiterate. There is almost no industry in our countryyou need land to survive. Less than 3 percent of our landowners own over 65 percent
[CTRL] ANOTHER Bush Lie About Iraq...
-Caveat Lector- http://www.opednews.com/kall_070604_gas_lies.htm Another Bush Lie About Iraq: Saddam Didn't Mass Murder His People with Gas. But is it Worse than that? How Deep Does the Republican-Iran Connection Go? Did republicans use their Iran connection to manipulate the 2002 election and are they using it now, to influence the 2004 presidential contest? by Rob Kall OpEdNews.Com Now we're discovering that one of the last excuses G.W. Bush has remaining for going to war, that Saddam gassed thousands of his people, is also a lie-- a lie that Bush should of and probably did know was a lie. Back in 1988 thousands of Kurds were reported killed in the gassing of Halabja. The CIA even prepared a report on it. Too bad the Bush people don't like to bother with reports. They have direct info from God Oh. I guess this proves that it's not God talking to George. Maybe he's having flashbacks. Maybe it's a case of the DTs. Maybe he's having strange symptoms from choking on another pretzel. Bottom line Sadam did not kill those people. Bottom line--- Bush knew it and still uses it to argue his case for going to war with Saddam. The IRANIANS gassed Halabja. The US knew it. Bush senior knew it and that's why, in 1988, the US gave Iraq poison gas to defend itself with. Yet George W. Bush, in building his case for war, said, "The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured." Now, it appears that Saddam didn't use the poison gas on his people at all. It gets even worse. When you tie in Achmed Chalabi, the accused Iranian Mole, who fed Bush's military neocons lies about Iraqi WMDs, you get a picture that adds up to the Iranians first mass murdering thousands of Kurds, then tricking Bush to go to war to do their dirty work-- defeating Saddam and neutralizing Iraq as a military threat. Bush has been working for the Iranians! Now, one might be inclined to attribute this to the stupidity of George W. Bush and his advisors. But wait. His advisors are supposed to be really smart. And there's that little matter of the October Surprise that Ronnie Reagan and his VP George Bush senior pulled off upon taking office in the White House. It was the mess in Iran, more than anything else, that blew it for Jimmy Carter. Iran saved the Republicans' butts and handed them an eight year reign in Washington DC. Is it too much of a stretch to speculate that the Republicans used their experience exploiting chaos in the Middle east to win the 2002 elections? Is it too much of a stretch to speculate that the Iranians worked with some of the neocons? Maybe. Is it too much of a stretch to speculate that the Iranians used their experience manipulating politics in America, used Chalabi to trick Bush and his failed advisors into a war that eliminated their sworn enemy and neutralized the army that had killed hundreds of thousands of their troops? Is that such a stretch? I don't think so. Bottom line-- when an independent or right winger tells you he or she is glad we took out Evil Saddam the mass murderer, point out that Bush has lied about the mass murder too, that the worse mass murder that happened in Iraq was perpetrated by Iran, and that Bush was tricked by Chalabi into doing Iran's dirty work. Bush's father even gave Saddam poison gas to use in defense against the Iranians. Weapons of mass destruction? No! Saddam as evil mass murderer? No! Huh? Saddam was not a mass murderer as Bush and Blair said? But he cut off people's heads and hands. That's nasty, right? If you think so, then take a look at Saudi Arabia. Decapitation is a regular form of execution in Saudi Arabia, and other parts of the Arab world. Cutting off hands is also a punishment for unacceptable actions, like thievery, that has been around for centuries in the Arab world. Years ago, while sharing a family dinner in a home in Morocco, I started to take a handful of food from a family-style bowl (cous-cous, I think) but they raised a ruckus and stopped me before my left hand touched the bowl. My host explained that the left hand was used for clean-up, in a country where toilet paper was a luxury most people couldn't afford. It was dirty and offensive to use the left hand to eat. When a thief is punished, his right hand is cut off and he can no longer share food with others. Was Saddam the worst offender in the Middle East? I don't think so. The Iranians were guilty of gassing thousands of people. But the Iranians had a real army. Bush went after an Iraqi army that was far weaker than the one his father took on in 1991. The real villains are still out there. But now, after being duped by the Iranians, Bush has created a playground for terrorists that they would never have dreamed possible. Bush created a recruiting scenario for terrorists that they wouldn't have even fantasized could be that good. What's left for Bush to
[CTRL] Israel Unleashed - The real reason for the biggest foreign policy blunder in Ame
-Caveat Lector- http://www.antiwar.com/justin/ July 5, 2004 Israel Unleashed The real reason for the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history . by Justin Raimondo The Israelis just had to get in on the fun. But then the stories of torture of hooded, humiliated inmates at Abu Ghraib and other facilities did have a familiar air, as if the Israelis were tutoring their American sock-puppets in the finer points of squeezing those ragheads until they squealed. Torture of the "mild" variety has the official imprimatur of Israel's high court, and it makes perfect sense that the Israelis would be called in as "experts" in the art (science?) of corralling and controlling crowds of irksome Arabs, but this testimony from General Janis Karpinski, former commander at Abu Ghraib, explicitly fingers the Israelis: "I was visiting an interrogation facility one time not under my control, but I was escorting a four-star. And he wanted to go back and observe an interrogation that was taking place. They asked me if I wanted to go and I said no. So I was standing there and, you know, the usual conversation, just kind of chit-chat, there (were) three individuals there and two of them had DCU pants on, one had a pair of blue jeans on, but they all had T-shirts on. They did not appear to be military people. And I said to one of the one of them asked me, 'So what's new?' Or, 'What's challenging about being a female general officer over here?' And I said, 'Oh! Too long a story, but it's all fun.' And I said to this guy who was sitting up on the counter, I said to him, 'Are you local?' Because he looked like he was Kuwaiti. I said, 'Are you an interpreter?' He said, 'No, I'm an interrogator.' And I said, 'Oh, are you from here?' And he said, 'No, actually, I'm from Israel.' And I was kind of shocked. And I think I laughed. And I said, 'No, really?' And he said, 'No, really, I am.' And but it was I didn't pursue it, I just said, 'Oh, I visited your country a couple of years ago and I was amazed that there's so little difference between the appearance of Israelis and Americans,' and I really was just kind of making chit-chat at that point. "But it didn't strike me as unusual, I guess, until after the fact. And I remember making a comment to him, I said, 'Wow, that's kind of unusual.' And he said, 'No, not really.' Like that. So I do know for a fact that at least in that one case now, I didn't ask him for identity papers or anything. It was none of my business. But that's what he said." Busy, busy, busy that certainly describes the Israelis in the bloody aftermath of our Pyrrhic victory in Iraq. Oh, they deny it, of course, but that's boilerplate. After all, Karpinski saw and spoke to one of their interrogators, who was sitting there right in front of her. The truth is they're swarming all over Kurdistan, fomenting trouble, siccing the Bush administration on Iran and most importantly Syria. Good lord they're even in New Zealand, of all places, stealing passports from bedridden paraplegics. Talk about bad public relations! But do they even care? Not too much. Now that they've maneuvered the clueless Bush into Iraq, and forever changed the face of the Middle East, Ariel Sharon and his amen corner in this country are getting bolder, openly flying their own flag over what were previously touted as exclusively American initiatives. So their Kurdish allies are bellicose about the Israeli connection in speaking to Ha'aretz: "'The Kurdish public is not ready to take any more humiliation. As long as we thought we could persuade the Americans to support our positions, our leaders were supported by the public,' he said. 'The Kurdish public is disappointed and angry, it wants results. You in Israel talk of the greater Eretz Yisrael and here we talk of greater Kurdistan. Today our political war begins.'" Our war against whom? In the guise of Israeli entrepreneurs, Mossad agents, according to Seymour Hersh, have infiltrated the Kurdish territories for the purpose of creating a buffer Kurdistan between Israel and the emerging Shi'ite-dominated Iraqi state, which is heavily influenced by the Iranians. The entire "handover" process, while not signaling American withdrawal, nevertheless indicates nervousness in Washington over being too closely identified with the unfolding disaster, and the Israelis see this as a bad sign. Is Uncle Sam going wobbly? That question has worried the neoconservative faction of the Right which effectively functions as Israel's fifth column in the U.S. and rightly so, from their perspective. That's what motivates all this activity in Kurdistan, and elsewhere. The idea is to spread the chaos, escalate the war, and make it impossible for George W. Bush to somehow pull us out the Iraqi quagmire. In an effort at damage control, the Israel lobby is making a concerted effort to smear whomever states the obvious: a great deal of the "intelligence" used to lie us into war came
[CTRL] Laurie Mylorie's Strange Fascination
-Caveat Lector- http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1254072,00.html Did one woman's obsession take America to war? She is a conspiracy theorist whose political conceits have consistently been proved wrong. So why were Bush and his aides so keen to swallow Laurie Mylroie's theories on Saddam and terrorism? By Peter Bergen Monday July 5, 2004 The Guardian Americans supported the war in Iraq not because Saddam Hussein was an evil dictator - they knew that - but because President Bush made the case that Saddam might hand weapons of mass destruction to his terrorist allies to wreak havoc on the United States. In the absence of any evidence for that theory, it's fair to ask: where did the administration's conviction come from? It was at the American Enterprise Institute - a conservative Washington DC thinktank - that the idea took shape that overthrowing Saddam should be a goal. Among those associated with AEI is Richard Perle, a key architect of the president's get-tough-on-Iraq policy, and Paul Wolfowitz, now the number-two official at the Pentagon. But none of the thinkers at AEI was in any real way an expert on Iraq. For that they relied on someone you probably have never heard of: a woman named Laurie Mylroie. Mylroie has credentials as an expert on the Middle East, national security and, above all, Iraq, having held faculty positions at Harvard and the US Naval War College. During the 1980s she was an apologist for Saddam's regime, but became anti-Saddam around the time of his invasion of Kuwait in 1990. In the run-up to that Gulf war, with New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Mylroie wrote Saddam Hussein and the Crisis in the Gulf, a well-reviewed bestseller. It was the first bombing of the World Trade Centre in 1993 that launched Mylroie's quixotic quest to prove that Saddam's regime was the chief source of anti-US terrorism. She laid out her case in a 2000 book called Study of Revenge: Saddam Hussein's Unfinished War Against America. Perle glowingly blurbed the book as "splendid and wholly convincing". Wolfowitz and his then wife, according to Mylroie, "provided crucial support". Mylroie believes that Saddam was behind every anti-American terrorist incident of note in the past decade, from the levelling of the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995 to September 11 itself. She is, in short, a cranky conspiracist - but her neoconservative friends believed her theories, bringing her on as a terrorism consultant at the Pentagon. The extent of Mylroie's influence is shown in the new book Against All Enemies, by the veteran counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, in which he recounts a senior-level meeting on terrorism months before September 11. During that meeting Clarke quotes Wolfowitz as saying: "You give Bin Laden too much credit. He could not do all these things like the 1993 attack on New York, not without a state sponsor. Just because FBI and CIA have failed to find the linkages does not mean they don't exist." Clarke writes: "I could hardly believe it, but Wolfowitz was spouting the Laurie Mylroie theory that Iraq was behind the 1993 truck bomb at the World Trade Centre, a theory that had been investigated for years and found to be totally untrue." Mylroie's influence can also be seen in the Bush cabinet's reaction to the September 11 attacks. According to Bob Woodward's recent book, Plan of Attack, Wolfowitz told the cabinet immediately after the attacks that there was a 10 to 50% chance that Saddam was implicated. Around the same time, Bush told his aides: "I believe that Iraq was involved, but I'm not going to strike them now." The most comprehensive criminal investigation in history - pursuing 500,000 leads and interviewing 175,000 people - has turned up no evidence of Iraqi involvement. How is it that key members of the Bush administration believed otherwise? Mylroie, in Study of Revenge, claims to have discovered what everyone missed: that the plot's mastermind, a man generally known by one of his many aliases, "Ramzi Yousef", was actually an Iraqi intelligence agent. Some time after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990, Mylroie argues, Yousef was given access to the passport of a Pakistani named Abdul Basit whose family lived in Kuwait, and assumed his identity. She reached this deduction following an examination of Basit's passport records that indicated Yousef and Basit were four inches different in height. But US investigators say that "Yousef" and Basit are the same person, and that he is a Pakistani with ties to al-Qaida, not to Iraq. Yousef's uncle, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was al-Qaida's military commander until his capture in Pakistan in 2003. The reality is that by the mid-90s, the FBI, the CIA and the State Department had found no evidence implicating the Iraqi government in the first Trade Centre attack. Vincent Cannistraro, who headed the CIA's counterterrorist centre in the early 90s, told me, "My view is that Laurie has an obsession with
[CTRL] Bush Should Follow Saddam Into The Dock
-Caveat Lector- http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/397/13257_Saddam.html Bush should follow Saddam into the dock 07/04/2004 13:14 If Saddam Hussein is in court, why isn't Bush? Saddam Hussein is accused of a number of crimes committed during his Presidency of Iraq. An analysis of four years of government under the Bush regime reveals some shocking parallels. Saddam Hussein is supposed to have sent people to their deaths as President of Iraq. George Bush sent people to their deaths as Governor of Texas. Saddam Hussein is accused of being responsible for acts of torture committed during his presidency. However, George Bush was President when the prison at Abu Ghraib in Baghdad was turned into a medieval torture chamber by US military personnel and George Bush is today President and the tortures continue at Guantanamo Bay. Who would ever have thought that a President of the United States of America would have to defend himself against accusations of torture? And more than accusations, they are fact. Saddam Hussein is accused of committing acts of mass murder. Would these mass murders be including the need to put down armed insurrection inside his own country after the United States had interfered, financed and armed the insurgents/terrorists? And is George W. Bush not responsible, as Commander in Chief of his country's Armed Forces, for the ten thousand civilian deaths during this illegal war, including one thousand children? Is George W. Bush not responsible for the mutilation of thirty-five thousand people, their legs and arms and faces and futures blown away by his Armed Forces? Is George W. Bush not responsible for the cluster bombs deployed in civilian areas or the Depleted Uranium munitions which left swathes of Iraqi territory radio-active? Does George W. Bush think he can target civilian infra-structures with precision weaponry, destroy sewage and water and electricity supply systems, hand the contracts without tender to his friend Richard Cheney and walk free? Are the United States and the international community not ultimately responsible for millions of deaths inside the Iraq that Saddam Hussein was trying to govern, his task made impossible just because he refused to allow the Americans access to control his economy? Saddam Hussein is accused of attacking three neighbouring countries. However, how convenient it is to forget that Saudi Arabia was attacked in a very small incursion during the First Gulf War and Iran was attacked with the full blessing and support of Washington. Rumsfeld even went to Baghdad to pat Saddam on the back and shake his hand, although later he had difficulty in remembering what he had done. And was the invasion of Kuwait not due to the Kuwaiti authorities performing acts of cross-drilling, stealing Iraq's oil? And was this invasion also not due to a need to defend Iraq's economy because Kuwait had been told by Washington (as a provocation) to reduce its oil prices? And was Kuwait not warned several times by Iraq that it was ruining Iraq's economy and that the only way out was war? Did the international community listen to Baghdad? No. It did not. Washington had created the monster by arming Iraq to the teeth and decided to launch phase two, which was substituting Saudi Arabia by Iraq as its strategic base in its attempt to take a stranglehold of the resources in the Middle East and in Central Asia and sit on Iraq's vast oil wealth. On the subject of illegal invasions, did George Bush not commit the same crime he accuses Saddam Hussein of, in attacking Iraq outside the UN Charter? This invasion was based on lies, bullying, blackmail, cajoling, forgery. Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction? Did the Bush regime not show maquettes of models with satellite photos, complete with arrows and affirmations like "We know where they are"? So, where are they? Saddam Hussein is accused of using chemical weapons against the Curds. Who sold them to him and what type were they? Did Washington say anything when gas was used to stop the Iranian army breaking through? Is Depleted Uranium not a form of chemical weapon? Is the act of dropping cluster bombs into housing estates any better? Or is George W. Bush, President of the United States of America, nothing more than a barefaced liar, as well as a mass murderer and a war criminal? In which case, why isn't he in the dock alongside his country's former buddy and comrade in arms, Saddam Hussein? Or is George Bush above the law just because he was born in the US of A? Welcome to freedom and democracy, winning hearts and minds by blasting the legs off six-year-old kids playing in their back yard, in their city, in their country. And the crime goes unpunished? Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey www.ctrl.org DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid
