This picture was just released from an anonymous source, video will be released as soon as it's ok'd by Project Bluebook. A peeking tom from an unreleased location has discovered an alien living in an old farm house where he was posing as a traveling salesman when he felt thought waves and was experiencing moments of profound reality. Then he was quickly teleported to the back streets of Sacramento, where Luckily he was still clutching his cell phone while returning to his normal state. He tried to show his picture to the street folks there, but naturally they were laughing their ass off and then became irritated as he told the part about being a traveling salesman. Here, have a little of this, and you'll feel better brother, said the old derelict as he handed him a bottle of mad Dog, so the now despondent peeping tom had a couple of sips. Well, it was only a few moments untill the NWO moved in on the area and spotted him, and if he hadn't had that MD 20 20 sugar rush he would have never got away. He is in an undisclosed location at present but promises to make the video available as soon as humanly possible, and it will be sold for a reasonable price condidering the ordeals he has been through so far. Fox News has the scoop on this and will soon be doing an interview.
Well, their website is no longer there, but the vermin are still rampant in every dark corner of the White House and are an integral part of The Bu$h Administration. Their influence can now be felt in every part of the world. They are in our banks, our medicine, our food, our telephone, our yada yadayadayada...I think you get my point. This list could reach from here to the ionosphere, and they aren't going to quietly go away. Here's a little bit of the history of these neer-do-wells.
The Prophet of Prevarication and His Disciple Special to The Dubya Report August 4, 2003 Updated February 10, 2007
Thirty years, two months and five days after North Carolina Senator Sam Ervin gaveled to order the Senate Watergate hearings, congress opened hearings into the use of "intelligence" to justify military action in Iraq. 1973 also marked the death of Leo Strauss, a little-known German émigré philosopher who fled Nazi Germany and found a home at the University of Chicago. While at Chicago, Strauss and mathematician Albert Wohlstetter trained a number of students who themselves became, or whose students became important figures in the neoconservative movement. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz studied with Strauss protégé Allan Bloom, and earned his Ph.D. from the U of C in 1972. William Kristol, chairman of the currently influential conservative advocacy group the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), studied with Strauss student Harvey Mansfield. NSC southwest Asia specialist Zalmay Khalilzad earned his Ph.D. under Wohlstetter in 1979, 10 years after Ahmed Chalabi, the "man who would be king" of Iraq.
Practical Straussianism?
The current skepticism in the mainstream media, the Congress, and increasingly the public over the justifications used by the Bush administration to initiate the ground war in Iraq occurs at the junction of a neoconservative approach to foreign policy and the practical implementation of Strauss's distinction between public and private truths. In May 2003 the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh examined the OSP -- a small group of policy advisers in the Defense Department. "These advisers and analysts, who began their work in the days after September 11, 2001, have produced a skein of intelligence reviews that have helped to shape public opinion and American policy toward Iraq," Hersh wrote. The workings of the Office of Special Plans read like a University of Chicago seminar, if not a Straussian "lab" project. The group was conceived by Paul Wolfowitz, now Deputy Secretary of Defense, a U of C product and student of Strauss protégé Allan Bloom. The office's director is Strauss devotee, Abram Shulsky. U of C alum Ahmed Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress were key resources for the group.
Also in the OSP is retired Navy Captain William Luti, who in April 2002 was Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, but is referred to by Hersh as Under-Secretary of Defense. Following the terrorist attacks of September 2001 Luti was among those who advocated that a policy paper justifying military response should make the case that Iraq was involved. Luti was also among a small number of US officials dispatched to London in December 2002 to monitor a conference of Iraqi exile groups.
On July 12, Knight-Ridder papers reported that despite their extensive efforts to justify military action in Iraq, OSP had no plan for the post-war period. An eight-month long effort by the State Department, labeled the "Future of Iraq" project, which had consulted dozens of Iraqi exiles and 17 government agencies in developing plans for everything from judicial code to environmental protection, was ignored. Instead, according to government officials interviewed for the Knight-Ridder report, "The Pentagon group insisted on doing things its way because it had a visionary strategy that it hoped would transform Iraq into an ally of Israel, remove a potential threat to the Persian Gulf oil trade and encircle Iran with U.S. allies." Consistent with Shulsky's theoretical writings, when State Department and CIA officials objected that the plan was impractical, they were simply ignored.
U of C alum and convicted embezzler Ahmed Chalabi figures prominently in OSP efforts to justify the war, and in their postwar vision. According to the Knight-Ridder report, the OSP was convinced that Iraqis would welcome US forces (a view Chalabi voiced often to US media), and that Chalabi would assume power. Responding to the Knight-Ridder report, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith denied that OSP wanted to put Chalabi in charge, but the plan was confirmed by former Defense Policy Board chair Richard Perle, in an interview.
Jason Leopold's July 25 exposé of the OSP reported that the group leaked to the New York Times information that Iraq's attempt to purchase aluminum tubes last year was part of a nuclear weapons program. In public statements Bush and National Security adviser Rice both referenced the Times story as evidence of the Iraqi threat to the US. OSP also attempted to document links between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi government, but when the OSP presented their findings to the CIA, the CIA did not change their assessment that no significant links existed. According to the agents who spoke to Leopold, the OSP also "routinely rewrote the CIA’s intelligence estimates on Iraq’s weapons programs," removing qualifiers such as "probably" or "likely," in order to exaggerate the appearance of an imminent threat.
Ironically, as Hersh noted, Shulsky's book warned of relying on defectors to provide intelligence because "it is difficult to be certain that they are genuine...." While they can provide unique insight, Shulsky and Witt write, they "may be greedy; they may also be somewhat unbalanced people who wish to bring some excitement into their lives; they may desire to avenge what they see as ill treatment by their government; or they may be subject to blackmail." As an example Shulsky cited conflicting information provided to the US by Soviet defectors, which is still being sorted out. One of Strauss's philosophical forbears warned of the dangers of relying on information from exiles. Chapter 31 of Machiavelli's Discourses is titled "How Dangerous It Is to Believe Exiles."
Well folks, it looks like the MSM (main stream media) is about 6 months late with the story about what Scott McClellan revealed about George Duhbya Bu$h in his new book. Important news? Yeh, but why wasn't it reported by PBS, CNN, or MSNBC. Are we to believe that all of their reporters are asleep at the wheel?
Nov. 24, 2007 Scot McClellan: “The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore the credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,”
When the Bushes are involved in dirty deals or even criminal activity, standards of evidence change. Instead of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” that would lock up an average citizen, the evidence must be perfect.
If there’s any doubt at all, the Bushes must be presumed innocent. Even when their guilt is obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense, it’s their accusers and those who dare investigate who get the worst of it. Their motives are challenged and their own shortcomings are cast in the harshest possible light.
For decades – arguably going back generations – the Bushes have been protected by their unique position straddling two centers of national power, the family’s blueblood Eastern Establishment ties and the Texas oil crowd with strong links to the Republican Right. [For details on this family phenomenon, see Robert Parry’s Secrecy & Privilege.]
This reality was underscored again by how major news outlets and the right-wing press reacted to a new piece of evidence implicating George W. Bush in a criminal cover-up in the “Plame-gate” scandal.
Though the evidence is now overwhelming that President Bush was part of a White House cabal that leaked Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA officer and then covered up the facts, major newspapers, such as the New York Times and the Washington Post, continue to pooh-pooh this extraordinary scandal.
The latest piece of evidence was the statement from former White House press secretary Scott McClellan that Bush was one of five senior officials who had him clear Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby in the leak when, in fact, they were two of the leakers.
“The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore the credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,” McClellan said in a snippet released by the publisher of his upcoming memoir.
“So I stood at the White House briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby,” McClellan said. “There was one problem. It was not true.”
After McClellan’s statement touched off a brief furor on the Internet and cable TV shows, his publisher Peter Osnos tried to soften the blow. Osnos told Bloomberg News that McClellan didn’t mean that Bush deliberately ordered his press secretary to lie.
“He told him something that wasn’t true, but the President didn’t know it wasn’t true,” Osnos said.
The truth is quiet, eternal and unchanging. Scott McClellan has spoken the truth, and documented it in writing, so it doesn't really matter how much noise and disharmony we hear from these desparate cronies who are worried only about their own a$$. We will hear whining, moaning, and the gnashing of teeth, accompanied by the cacophony of the main stream media while the truth lives, silently, in the hearts of "We The People".
The porkrinds are on the fire folks, and are liberally sprinkled with scandle sauce...G:
LEESBURG, Virginia (AP) -- The United States and other nations will not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, Vice President Dick Cheney said Sunday.
Vice President Dick Cheney gave a speech Sunday saying that the U.S. will not tolerate a nuclear Iran.
"Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions," Cheney said in a speech to the Washington Institute for Near East Studies.
He said Iran's efforts to pursue technology that would allow them to build a nuclear weapon are obvious and that "the regime continues to practice delay and deceit in an obvious effort to buy time."
If Iran continues on its current course, Cheney said the U.S. and other nations are "prepared to impose serious consequences." The vice president made no specific reference to military action.
"We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon," he said.
Cheney's words seemed to only escalate the U.S. rhetoric against Iran over the past several days, including President Bush's warning that a nuclear Iran could lead to World War III.
Cheney said the ultimate goal of the Iranian leadership is to establish itself as the hegemonic force in the Middle East and undermine a free Shiite-majority Iraq as a rival for influence in the Muslim world. Video Watch Cheney talk about Iran »
Iran's government seeks "to keep Iraq in a state of weakness to ensure Baghdad does not pose a threat to Tehran," Cheney said.
While he was critical of that government and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad , he offered praise and words of solidarity to the Iranian people. Iran "is a place of unlimited potential ... and it has the right to be free of tyranny," Cheney said.
Cheney accused Iran of having a direct role in the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and said the government has "solidified its grip on the country" since coming to power in 1979.
On Hannity and Colmes the throwing of Scott McClellan under the bus starts immediately with Karl Rove trying to say he was out of the loop and that the quotes he read don't sound like the Scott he knows, and instead sound like a left wing blogger. Let the smear campaign begin!!...lol.
Here's some related stuff about Scott McClellan from Nov. 2007: John Dean on Keith Olbermann's show
Massive earthquakes—such as the magnitude 9 quake that sparked the deadly Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004—can set off smaller tremors around the globe, a new study shows.
Traditional aftershocks occur close to the time of the original earthquake—often within days or a few weeks—as the earth adjusts to changes caused by the slippage along the original fault.
But smaller, more distant earthquakes can be triggered as low-frequency vibrations—somewhat like ocean swells—pass over faults. Such waves can't be felt by people standing on the ground.
It's too early to know if the recent deadly earthquake in China also triggered its own swarm of distant tremors, but "it wouldn't surprise me in the least," said study lead author Tom Parsons of the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, California.
September 09, 2007 In this segment from CNN's Firehouse 54-4 special, Jim Dwyer from the New York Times tells a story about an engineer at World Trade Center 7 having an impromptu meeting with other unidentified people in the lobby of Building 7. The engineer states that he believes a "total collapse of the towers is possible," and sends a messenger to Fire Chief Pete Ganci to relay the message. Upon hearing the engineer's suspicion, Ganci then asks, "Who would tell you a thing like that?"
July 14, 2007 Giuliani stated in an ABC News interview that he was given warning of a collapse well in advance of the actual event. I was "told that the World Trade Center was gonna' collapse," referring to the 9:59 destruction of the South Tower. "I went down to the scene and we set up a headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the Police Commissioner, the Fire Commissioner, the Head of Emergency Management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna' to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit, got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us."
His account is corroborated by 2 different eye witness accounts from the passages of the Oral Histories of emergency responders. The account of EMT Richard Zarillo goes as follows: As I was walking towards the Fire command post, I found Steve Mosiello. I said, Steve, where's the boss? I have to give him a message. He said, well, what's the message? I said the buildings are going to collapse; we need to evac everybody out. With a very confused look he said who told you that? I said I was just with John at OEM. OEM says the buildings are going to collapse; we need to get out. He escorted me over to Chief Ganci. He said, hey, Pete, we got a message that the buildings are going to collapse. His reply was who the f___ told you that? Then Steve brought me in and with Chief Ganci, Commissioner Feehan, Steve, I believe Chief Turi was initially there, I said, listen, I was just at OEM. The message I was given was that the buildings are going to collapse; we need to get our people out. At that moment, this thunderous, rolling roar came down and that's when the building came down, the first tower came down."
Zarillo's recollection is verified by Fire Marshall Steven Mosiello's account: "At that point I don't know exactly when the Commissioner and Mayor had left. It was pretty soon after they had left that Richie Zarillo, who works with EMS -- I believe he's an OEM liaison -- came running up to me. I was not on the ramp at this time. I was like almost at the sidewalk location. He said Steve, where's the Chief? I have to tell him, you know -- I said tell him what, Richie? These buildings are in imminent danger of collapse. I said how do you know that, you know? So he ran with me. I ran over and grabbed Chief Ganci and said Chief, these buildings are in imminent danger of collapse."
Iif Giuliani knew the towers were 'to collapse' as he said he did, why not order emergency and rescue workers out of the buildings and save some of the 403 first responders that were killed on that day? The real question is: who in the OEM told Guiliani and Zarillo that the towers were pending collapse? If someone had prior knowledge of the towers destruction, perhaps that person can explain how they knew those towers were coming down.
Ronald Weick@6:15 into the broadcast "BBC is hostile to George Bush" blahblah
Actually the BBC became compliant to Bu$hco after they got their tit in the wringer over the death of David Kelly.Two reporters were fired and the head of BBC resigned.
Ronald Weick@8:25 into the broadcast "The fire department was not told anything about a controlled demolition. 343 firefighters lost their lives on that day. they were not complicent in this terrible terrible catastrophy.To argue that they were is simply insane."
Read what Ronald has to say in the comments on my Article, where he is trying to goad me into advocating that the firefighters were involved in a conspiracy. This poor excuse for a man and his buddies on the JREF forum are working really hard to fit the story to the evidence.
ZZZZzzzz....* Hmm, I can remember my first post here on Blogger, it's like just an instant of time looking back from the "here & now". That's when I was commenting on the Patrick Fitzgerald Blog, and met SQ and GEF. Suzie-Q later started up a blog and ask me if I would like to be one of the authors and i've been posting there ever since. It's been a real gas and I've met some cool folks along the way...G:
Another clear cut case of the media on 9/11/01 being fed a cover story on WTC-7's collapse before the actual event. In this clip, the anchors for FOX-5 in Washington DC on 9/11/01 report that WTC-7 had already collapsed and then they watch WTC-7 collapse seconds in their own video footage just after they already reported that the collapse already happened. This is more evidence that WTC-7 was brought down in a controlled demolition. How could anyone know a building with light fire damage is too collapse at free fall speed, unless they know it is going to be brought down with explosives?
I have not been able to find out how to reach you directly, so I drafted this letter in the hope it will be brought to your attention.
First, thank you for honoring the oath we commissioned officers take to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic. At the same time, you have let it be known that you do not intend to speak, on or off the record, about Iran.
But our oath has no expiration date. While you are acutely aware of the dangers of attacking Iran, you seem to be allowing an inbred reluctance to challenge the commander in chief to trump that oath, and to prevent you from letting the American people know of the catastrophe about to befall us if, as seems likely, our country attacks Iran.
Two years ago I lectured at the Naval Academy in Annapolis. I found it highly disturbing that, when asked about the oath they took upon entering the academy, several of the "Mids" thought it was to the commander in chief.
This brought to my mind the photos of German generals and admirals (as well as top church leaders and jurists) swearing personal oaths to Hitler. Not our tradition, and yet…
I was aghast that only the third Mid I called on got it right – that the oath is to protect and defend the Constitution, not the president.
Attack Iran and Trash the Constitution
No doubt you are very clear that an attack on Iran would be a flagrant violation of our Constitution, which stipulates that treaties ratified by the Senate become the supreme law of the land; that the United Nations Charter – which the Senate ratified on July 28, 1945, by a vote of 89 to 2 – expressly forbids attacks on other countries unless they pose an imminent danger; that there is no provision allowing some other kind of "preemptive" or "preventive" attack against a nation that poses no imminent danger; and that Iran poses no such danger to the United States or its allies.
You may be forgiven for thinking: Isn't 41 years of service enough; isn't resigning in order to remove myself from a chain of command that threatened to make me a war criminal for attacking Iran; isn't making my active opposition known by talking to journalists – isn't all that enough?
With respect, sir, no, that's not enough.
The stakes here are extremely high, and with the integrity you have shown goes still further responsibility. Sadly, the vast majority of your general officer colleagues have, for whatever reason, ducked that responsibility. You are pretty much it.
In their lust for attacking Iran, administration officials will do their best to marginalize you. And, as prominent a person as you are, the corporate media will do the same.
Indeed, there are clear signs the media have been given their marching orders to support attacking Iran.
At CIA I used to analyze the Soviet press, so you will understand when I refer to the Washington Post and the New York Times as the White House's Pravda and Izvestiya.
Sadly, it is as easy as during the days of the controlled Soviet press to follow the U.S. government's evolving line with a daily reading. In a word, our newspapers are revving up for war on Iran, and have been for some time.
In some respects the manipulation and suppression of information in the present lead-up to an attack on Iran is even more flagrant and all encompassing than in early 2003 before the invasion of Iraq.
It seems entirely possible that you are unaware of this, precisely because the media has put the wraps on it, so let me adduce a striking example of what is afoot here.
The example has to do with the studied, if disingenuous, effort over recent months to blame all the troubles in southern Iraq on the "malignant" influence of Iran.
Just saying, because i can, and because this is a critical time in history, that before we elect a new president we should all communicate with each other in our individual communities. A grass root viewpoint of the candidates might give us a better viewpoint of who we should elect to represent us on a National level. There are still Ron Paul signs in some folks yards and farms here in Oregon. I would like to see some for Dennis Kucinich also, but the MSM and political pressure from the Corporate Government has convinced the sheeple that he is irrelevant. Peace has become a concept that cannot be used as a platform for the leader of our once great country, but the estranged wife of an ex-president who proclaims that she is a qualified "Commander in Chief" has been accepted by many as a viable candidate.
I guess that what I would really like to see is the main stream media talking about our alternatives and making special mention of the Write-In Vote.
PORTLAND, Oregon - Some 75,000 people have turned out to see Barack Obama speak along the Portland waterfront, a record for the campaign.
The crowd covers the lawn here at Tom McCall Waterfront Park, from the streetside entry gates down to the Willamette River. Portland fire officials estimate 60,000 people are packed inside the park proper and another 10-15,000 are watching outside the gates. Spectators are lining the bridge behind Obama and watching, bikini-clad, from boats on the river.
The stump speech is Obama's standard riff - 30 minutes long and counting now, despite the sun beating down on the candidate. He's added a few Oregonian flourishes, drawing big cheers when he said the country can learn from Portland's commitment to mass transit and bicycle lanes. The biggest applause came when he denounced the Iraq war; Oregon is a hotbed of anti-war activism.
Olmert: "President George Bush is a great leader, he's a great friend, he's a source of inspiration, and we are very proud that we can celebrate the sixtieth anniversery of the state of Israel with you and your wife here in our eternal capital in Jerusalem."
Well, Duhhbya doesn't let us down as he leaves us no doubt that He is the master of dumbness as he proclaims...
"We believe that the surest way to defeat the enemies of hatred is to advance the cause of hope to the cause of freedom. Liberty as the great alternative to tyranny and terror."
Charlie Rose discusses Bush 43 with ex British General Michael Rose, who compares US policy in the Middle East with that of King George the Third.
Well folks as I begin to think seriously about who I would vote for I find that the remaining candidates are pretty much on the same trip as the existing Corporate Government that was installed by the Neocons at the turn of this New American Century. Obama, when he made his speech in 2004 impressed me with his rhetoric, but since then has became a politician that is in the middle of the well established game of of World control through US hegemony in the middle East.
The two viable candidates who I would vote for have been decimated and are supposedly irrelevant according to the Corporate Media, so here I am in Oregon casting my vote for Obama in the primaries, but I believe that on election day I will be doing a write in vote (write in is right-on) for Ron Paul. And that's only because our best hope for peace, Dennis Kucinich, has became almost invisible on the political spectrum...G:
The 2004 Democratic National Convention may be remembered most for a young and energetic senator that immediately drew comparison to the Kennedys. Obama's speech launched his name and image into the public spotlight, and his fresh style of rhetoric filled a growing anti-war political void – He voted against the Iraq war and wasn't afraid to criticize it's handling. Excitement and support for the senator eventually snowballed into his current presidential campaign. He enjoys a popular image as a liberal democrat, and his harsh criticism of the Iraq war has earned him support from a population united in it's discontent with the current government. To a select crowd of Americans, Obama preaches against the handling of the Iraq war. To other more private groups, Obama advocates military strikes on new middle eastern countries. Obama has aligned himself with several lobbying firms and nongovernmental organizations who seek further US militarization of the world. In several speeches and essays, Obama makes his foreign policy goals clear – and he is not anti-war. Is Obama intentionally sending a deceptive message to his constituency?
In a recent speech given to the American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC), Obama outlines a plan for U.S. hegemony. He suggests polarizing political alignments that are already breeding anti-U.S. sentiment. Specifically, Obama pledges unfaltering military support to Israel. The U.S. has long supported Israel – this year they were given $30 billion for defense of the young state. To put this in perspective, less than $7 billion has been federally granted to rebuild homes destroyed after hurricane Katrina. Although the U.S. has always given billions in aid to Israel, his alliance backs preemptive strikes against countries deemed a threat. Israel is unpopular in the region, and is threatened by Iran's desire for modern nuclear energy in the future. Regarding Iran's nuclear program, Obama states “We should take no option, including military action, off the table”. The US has already constructed massive permanent military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan to serve as hubs for such an operation. The fleet of aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf continues to grow, while politicians and media simultaneously hype a nonexistent enemy. This reckless policy leaves the U.S. on the brink of full scale war at all times.
Frankly, I'm tired of listening to Senator Clinton portray herself as being in the solutions business -- as boasting a nice, fat resume of accomplishments -- while mocking Barack Obama for being a rhetorical empty suit.
Is she truly a beacon of experience? Because I couldn't think of a single piece of legislation that has her name stuck proudly on the front of it, no equivalent of McCain-Feingold, for example, I headed straight for her campaign website to see what glorious aspects of her vaunted experience I was missing.
Actually, I was missing nothing. There is not one single example of any legislation with her name appended to it. In fact, the page devoted to her Senate biography is a mush-mash, a laundry list of good intentions. When she talks about "sponsoring" and "introducing" and "fighting for" legislation that obviously hasn't passed, that's a smokescreen for failure. By introducing all that legislation that never makes it out of committee, she's guilty of what she accuses Senator Obama of: confusing "hoping" with doing.
"CBS News RAW": While campaigning in Fayetteville, W.Va., Bill Clinton argued with an audience member over claims made by Hillary Clinton that she improved health care during his administration.
There is no issue more serious then the continued militarization of our country and our culture. We have seen this and exposed this from Uncovered to Iraq for Sale to Fox Attacks Iran.
But right now, we want to call attention to someone who not only embraces the song of war, he literally sings it!
The mainstream press is absorbed in the presidential race—the latest poll numbers, the in-fighting between Obama and Clinton—while we seek to expose the true story humming just beneath the surface (yes, this calls for some major puns in a matter very serious... sometimes satire can be the most effective way to reach people).
Stop the Iraq Sellout Thursday: Call Congress Today
On Thursday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi will force the House to approve $163 billion more of our tax dollars for the occupation of Iraq - nearly $100 billion for 2008 plus nearly $70 billion more for 2009.
We are outraged. This Democratic Congress was elected to end the occupation, not fund it forever.
On Monday, a new Democrats.com poll found an overwhelming 68% of Americans want to bring our troops safely home within 6 months - a significant increase from 54% last September. Support among Democrats increased 14% to 85%, while support among Independents increased 20% to 78%. Why is the Democratic Congress defying the will of the overwhelming majority of Democrats and Independents?
Each day's news underscores how disastrous the occupation is. April was the deadliest month for U.S. soldiers since last September. One in five Iraq and Afghanistan veterans - roughly 300,000 - report symptoms of PTSD or major depression. The V.A. covered up the fact that 12,000 veterans attempt suicide each year while under V.A. treatment. As Cindy Sheehan asked, "for what noble cause" are our sons and daughters suffering and dying?
To make matters worse, Bush continues to use our occupation of Iraq as a reason to wage a covert war against Iran that could quickly turn to a wider and even more disastrous war. We know the Iraq War "marketing" was timed for the 2002 election - if John McCain is behind in the polls, will Bush "bomb bomb Iran" as an "October Surprise" to keep Republicans in power?
On top of it all, as our economy tanks, we simply cannot afford to waste $163 billion more of our tax dollars for Iraq on top of the $562 billion we've already wasted and the $3 trillion overall cost, included tripling the price of gasoline.
It's urgent for everyone to call your Representative today with a simple message: Not One More Penny for Iraq.
This battle is not impossible. On January 16, 42 progressive Democrats voted against the last $70 billion blank check. Most Republicans oppose Pelosi's bill because it includes some domestic spending, so a large bloc of progressive Democrats can defeat it.
According to official Pentagon sources, military vehicles equipped with this laser device have been used in Afghanistan to explode mines. According to two reliable military information sites -- Defense Tech and Defence Industry Daily - at least three such vehicles are being used in Iraq as well and some people report having seen them.
Hmm, I think that I'll keep this in my organic hard drive for future reference. Who knows how these NWO dudes are using Star Wars weapons and how this will affect us folks who are virtually living in the past while dreaming of a better life through advanced technology?
And just in case, here is an article that refers to the testimony in text
From Brett Wagner, president of the California Center for Strategic Studies:
A couple of weeks ago I sent you an urgent email titled "The Most Shocking Thing I Have Ever Seen."
The documentary news video in question, which was released online recently (16 May 2006) by a major Italian news service, examines evidence that the U.S. military has deployed – dating back to the 2003 battle for Baghdad Airport – a new generation of weaponry likely based on firing microwaves. Viewer discretion is advised: even as a former professor for the U.S. Naval War College, this goes way beyond my comfort zone
Judging from the reported effects of the weaponry, it likely includes "speed of light" technology defying the generic term "laser" and it is my professional opinion that it also likely includes the use of microwaves, judging from the descriptions of bodies that seem to have inexplicably exploded.
However, I cannot imagine the scientific explanation for the cadavers that reportedly shrunk to the size of approximately one-meter in length after being exposed to some sort of ray (the cause of death) and then inadvertently struck by bullets. Neither do I have an explanation for what one eyewitness describes as a bus transformed "like a cloth, like a wet cloth" and shrunk to the size of a Volkswagen. To me, it sounds like a very intense form of microwaves.
The statements by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and General Myers excerpted from a 2003 archived press conference are especially revealing:
JOURNALIST: Mr. Secretary, can I ask you a question about some of the technology that you're developing to fight the war on terrorists, specifically directed energy and high-powered microwave technology? When do you envision that you can weaponize that type of technology?
DONALD RUMSFELD (appearing noticeably uncomfortable with the question): In the normal order of things, when you invest in research and development and begin a developmental project, you don't have any intention or expectations that one would use it. On the other hand, the real world intervenes from time to time, and you reach in there and take something out that is still in a developmental stage, and you might use it.
JOURNALIST: But you sound like you're willing to experiment with it.
GENERAL MYERS: Yeah, I think that's the point. And I think we have from the beginning of this conflict… I think General Franks [commander of U.S. forces in Iraq] has been very open to looking at new things, if there are new things available, and has been willing to put them into the fight, even before they've been fully wrung out… And we will continue to do that.
Also noteworthy was the inclusion of footage, albeit very brief, near the end of the documentary of the "pain ray" being tested on a person identified as an American soldier. The person exposed to the ray obviously experienced excruciating pain before ducking quickly out of the line of fire.
The closing remarks in the documentary by highly-respected military analyst William Arkin echo my widely-publicized concerns regarding the implications of the pain ray for use in crowd control in the U.S. – and the potential threat to our basic civil liberties, such as our First Amendment rights of peaceable assembly and to petition the government for a redress of our grievances (not to mention undermining the norms expressed by Sixth Amendment prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment).
These types of weapons pose a dire threat to the world as we know it and their deployment must be prevented at all cost. At the very least, they could ignite a new global arms race, which in turn would lead to increasing global instability or worse.
In a followup to this earlier story, the Institute for Creation Research's proposal to offer Masters of Science Education degrees was flatly rejected by members of the advisory committee of the Texas Board of Higher Education, paving the way for official rejection by the full board. The ICR had contended that its masters degrees in science-related subjects
are currently being developed for web-based, distance education platforms to accommodate a growing number of students who desire quality advanced science instruction from a thoroughly biblical perspective.
According to the Dallas Morning News
A lawyer for the Bible-based group also warned that the coordinating board could eventually face legal action for suppressing the free-speech rights of the institute.
That seems about par for the course for creationist strategems to dress up religion as science-- dress religion up as "science," offer it as an "alternative," and then threaten lawsuits when the public rightly recognizes that what's being offered isn't in any way scientific. As previously noted, the ICR's "thoroughly biblical perspective" is comprised of a variety of beliefs, including
* God created the universe in six 24-hour days, 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. * The universe was created “perfect” by the “creator.” * The global flood of Noah's age formed all the evident features of the earth's surface, including the existing continents * Humans and dinosaurs co-existed * God specially created every "kind of animal" (i.e. produced "proto-species" from which various breeds we recognize as "species" "arose"). * The Bible is literally true and “free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological.”
Now, it's hard to see how anyone could have thought these beliefs constitute any kind of science content, except for our Commander in Chief, who has some pretty strange opinions on almost all worldly subjects.
Please George, just leave, The Parties Over. Take your finger off the trigger, lay the shotgun down and we'll drive you home. You don't have to worry about who's guarding the Chicken House, Hillary said she'll ride shotgun while you're sleeping it off...G:
Call To Mind Monday, April 28, 2008 By Don M. Fisher
Racist McCain
As Uncle Hugh used to say, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t shove his head under and expect him to show up in church next week wearin’ a necktie."
On one hand, if John McCain can’t control the lunatics in his own party, how can he run the country?
On his left foot, does anybody out there really think that the North Klanolina Republiklan party wouldn’t do what the party’s nominee asks if he really if he threw a hissy fit?
North Klanolinians been known to spit their tobacco plugs plumb out when Big Daddy throwd a hissy fit.
Of course he didn’t mean for them to pull their coon joke ads.
North Carolina is the most racist place since Cain slew Abel.
Hope there are enough Biblical bigots out there to know what I’m talking about.
Suffice it to say, North Carolina is the only place where a waitress will offer you a cigarette after recommending the scrambled egg and fried bologna breakfast special.
McCain wanted to make sure, what with the literacy rate in North Carolina low enough to categorize it as a third world country had we won the war, that everybody on both sides of the Rowan River knowd that Obama is a colored boy.
And yet more newsy articles from The Lone Star Iconclast, some genuine Texas news fresh from Crawford Texas, which is Duhbya's own home town. If you can't believe the rest of the world, then read what real Texan's have to say about our current state of World affairs...G:
Deborah Jeane Palfrey, known as the "D.C. Madam," once implied that suicide was cowardice but, in the end, she seems to have chosen that same path herself. "She wasn't going to jail, she told me that very clearly. She told me she would commit suicide," author Dan Moldea told TIME soon after news broke of her body being found in Tarpon Springs, Florida, an apparent suicide. Palfrey's body, along with a handwritten suicide note, was discovered by police in a storage area attached to her mother's mobile home. Palfrey contacted Moldea last year to provide her help writing a book. "She had done time once before [for prostitution]," Moldea recalls. "And it damn near killed her. She said there was enormous stress — it made her sick, she couldn't take it, and she wasn't going to let that happen to her again."
Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet Thursday, May 1, 2008
DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey predicted she would be "suicided" on several occasions both recently and as far back as 17 years ago - comments that now appear ominous in light of the announcement that the former head of a Washington escort service allegedly killed herself today.
(Ares).jpg)
