/

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11

Bush Now Says What He Wouldn’t Say Before War: Iraq Had ‘Nothing’ To Do With 9/11

Thinkprogress August 23, 2006

President Bush was in the midst of explaining how the attacks of 9/11 inspired his “freedom agenda” and the attacks on Iraq until a reporter, Ken Herman of Fox News, interrupted to ask what Iraq had to do with 9/11. “Nothing,” Bush defiantly answered.
To justify the war, Bush informed Congress on March 19, 2003 that acting against Iraq was consistent with “continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.”
As ThinkProgress has repeatedly documented, Vice President Cheney cited “evidence” cooked up by Douglas Feith and others to claim it was “pretty well confirmed” that Iraq had contacts with 9/11 hijackers.
More generally, in the lead-up to the war in Iraq, the administration encouraged the false impression that Saddam had a role in 9/11. Bush never stated then, as he does now, that Iraq had “nothing” to do with 9/11. Only after the Iraq war began did Bush candidly acknowledge that Iraq was not operationally linked to 9/11.

Digg It!

Full transcript:

BUSH: The terrorists attacked us and killed 3,000 of our citizens before we started the freedom agenda in the Middle East.

QUESTION: What did Iraq have to do with it?

BUSH: What did Iraq have to do with what?
QUESTION: The attack on the World Trade Center.

BUSH: Nothing. Except it’s part of — and nobody has suggested in this administration that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack. Iraq was a — Iraq — the lesson of September 11th is take threats before they fully materialize, Ken. Nobody’s ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq.

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

THE BEAST PART 3

Who’s Watching?
By ERIC PETERS

Big Brother will be watching you for sure by 2008 -- the year a proposed requirement that Event Data Recorders (EDRs) become mandatory standard equipment in all new cars and trucks will become law unless public outrage puts the kibosh on it somehow.EDRs are "black boxes" -- just like airplanes have. They can record a wide variety of things -- including how fast you drive and whether you "buckle-up for safety." The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) wants EDRs to be installed in every new vehicle beginning with model year 2008 -- on the theory that the information will help crash investigators more accurately determine the hows and whys of accidents.But EDRs could -- and likely will be -- used for other purposes as well.Tied into GPS navigation computers, EDRs could give interested parties the ability to take automated ticketing to the next level. Since the data recorders can continuously monitor most of the operating parameters of a vehicle as it travels -- and the GPS unit can precisely locate the vehicle in "real time," wherever it happens to be at any given moment -- any and all incidents of "speeding" could be immediately detected and a piece of paying paper issued to the offender faster than he could tap the brake. That's even if he knew he was in the crosshairs, which of course he wouldn't. Probably they'll just erect an electronic debiting system of some sort that ties directly into your checking account -- since the paperwork could not keep up with the massive uptick in fines that would be generated.

What Do You Think?
If you think this is just a dark-minded paranoiac vision, think again. Rental car companies have already deployed a very similar system of onboard electronic monitoring to identify customers who dare to drive faster than the posted limit -- and automatically tap them with a "surcharge" for their scofflaw ways. While this inventive form of "revenue enhancement" was challenged and subsequently batted down by the courts, the technology continues to be honed -- and quietly put into service.Already, 15-20 percent of all the cars and trucks in service have EDRs; most of these are General Motors vehicles. GM has been installing "black boxes" in its new cars and trucks since about 1996 as part of the Supplemental Restraint (air bag) system. Within a few years, as many as 90 percent of all new motor vehicles will be equipped with EDRs, according to government estimates -- whether the requirement NHTSA is pushing actually becomes law or not.The automakers are just as eager to keep tabs on us as the government -- in part to keep the shyster lawyers who have been so successfully digging into their deep pockets at bay. EDRs would provide irrefutable evidence of high-speed driving, for example -- or make it impossible for a person injured in a crash to deny he wasn't wearing a seat belt.Insurance companies will launch "safety" campaigns urging that "we use available technology" to identify "unsafe" drivers -- and who will be able to argue against that? Everyone knows that speeding is against the law -- and if you aren't breaking the law, what have you got to worry about?It's all for our own good.But if you get edgy thinking about the government -- and our friends in corporate America -- being able to monitor where we go and how we go whenever they feel like checking in on us, take the time to write a "Thanks, but no thanks" letter to NHTSA.

FREE VIDEO: 9-11 REVISITED

911 TRUTH VIDEO, PLEASE WATCH AND DISTRIBUTE, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT




WHATS REALLY GOING ON IN THE MID-EAST PART 2

WHATS REALLY GOING ON IN THE MID-EAST? PART 1

THE BEAST PART 2

THE NATIONAL ID IS NOT MANDATORY


By: Devvy Kidd August 21, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." --James Madison, Federalist No. 39, January 1788
One of the top ten issues right now is the insidious National ID. Many believe this latest Nazi-style tool is to fight the endless, vague "war on terrorism." It is no such thing. It is yet another attempt by the Congress and Bush to control we the people against our will, this time by denying you certain privileges if you refuse to comply. The sponsor of this bill is one of the most dangerous individuals in Congress, Republican James Sensenbrenner. This trasher of the Bill of Rights sponsored this junk bill, passed along party lines (261-161) which was eventually, surprise! surprise! got attached to what is called a "must-pass" Senate bill glued to the unconstitutional plundering of the people's purse to continue the unconstitutional "national building" in Iraq as well as unconstitutional stealing from the people's treasury for tsunami relief.
Because these duplicitous lawyers who serve in Congress knew they could not force this mandate on the states, it is voluntary on the part of the states. I will again quote from a document obtained and reproduced from the National Archives titled: Memorandum for Walter Zellman from Sallyanne Payton, clearly marked: Preliminary Draft for Official Use Only. Do Not Quote or Release For Any Purpose, page 4, Health Care Task Reform under Hillary Clinton:. Please note these sections:
"(b) may the federal government use other actors in the governmental system and the private sector as its agents and give them orders as though they were parts of a prefectorial system? The short answer is "no." State governments are independent, although subordinated, sovereignties, not subdivisions of the federal government.
"Although the federal government may regulate many of their functions directly [as well, for example, it subjects state water districts to the Clean Water Act], it may not require them to exercise their own governmental powers in a manner dictated by federal law. The states may be encouraged, bribed or threatened into entering into joint federal state programs of various sorts, from unemployment insurance to Medicaid; but they may not be commanded directly to use their own governmental apparatus in the service of federal policy. There is a modest jurisprudence of the Tenth Amendment that seems to have settled on this proposition. See the DOJ [Dept. of Justice] memorandum for a fuller elaboration."
What does this mean from a constitutional position? It means that the government can bribe the states, they can threaten them, but in fact, the states cannot be forced to get down on their knees to the federal government. In other words, no state of the Union has to comply with the National ID. In order to squash any rebellion, Congress then mandated that any any citizen who refuses this National ID will be prohibited from flying on commercial flights, entering any government building or opening a bank account. In the case of the State of Oregon, that state recently updated their drivers licenses and began issuing them in the new format for eight years. This will all be chucked if the people of Oregon do not demand their state legislature stand up to the feds. Tons of money wasted; multiply it by 50 states and you have massive waste for no legitimate reason.
We know for a fact that members of Congress do not read legislation they vote on. This year the House of Representatives will be in session creating mayhem and shredding the U.S. Constitution for a total of 79 days. The rest is basically a paid vacation (just like the counterfeit U.S. Senate) for junkets and fund raising. How many of them even bothered to read Public Law 109-13?
This Machiavellian new law will further bankrupt the states, i.e., the estimated cost to the Union: Somewhere $9.1 billion and $12.8 billion. All of this is completely unnecessary and it is a direct result of the 9/11 "event." This National ID under the control of the dangerous and completely useless Department of Homeland Security, run by a very evil man, Michael Chertoff, has nothing to do with fighting terrorism. It is all about people control and amassing huge data banks to snoop on Americans.
Millions of Americans are opposed to this ID and will refuse it - even if their state representatives prove too cowardly to stand up to Washington, DC. New Hampshire came close last March 2006, but Republicans killed this magnificent show of standing against tyranny. Why was there no massive outrage by the good people of New Hampshire? Because most of them do not realize the importance of stopping this "voluntary mandate" against the states and you can blame the Ministry of Propaganda, aka the media, both mainstream and cable. The states of the Union issue their own drivers licenses and that is their domain, not the federal government, but how many Americans know this? No National ID is fool proof from tampering, period. Because this is a fact that has been proven, the next logical step will be a forced bio chip under the skin as the only way to "fight the war on terrorism." Mark my words: the National ID is the gateway tool for a chip and I ask: "Where are the churches in this country?" Why are they not warning their flocks that the Mark of the Beast is just over the horizon?
States must stand up to the feds and say no. If the estimated cost to the 50 states of the Union is between $9.1 BILLION and $12.8 BILLION, you can bet the end result will be triple that due to sheer numbers and incompetence. Every state legislature and governor must notify the federal government that they will not participate and assert their sovereignty; see Marbury v Madison and U.S. v Lopez. This will not happen unless millions of Americans get in the face of their state legislators, governors and banks NOW, not next February or a week before you're to be issued this ID. How do you do this?
1. You send a short letter to your state representative and state senator or send them a copy of this column with a note that you will NOT surrender your state drivers license. Yes, you understand that by not accepting this voluntary National ID you will be prohibited from flying on a commercial air liner, AMTRAK or enter a federal building (there goes jury duty). While this might present a hardship, you will NOT surrender any more of your rights to this federal machine and if that rep or state senator does not pledge to fight the National ID, you WILL vote against them if they're up for reelection or work hard to get them recalled and thrown out of office..
2. Attend any political function or town hall meeting before the November election and make your voice heard. Let the incumbent know that you will vote against him/her in November unless they give their word right then and there that they will fight the National ID on your behalf. It is voluntary for the states and you do not want your state tax dollars, whether a direct personal state income tax, sales tax, etc - spent on this worthless and totally unnecessary federal strong arming.
3. Notify your bank in writing (politely) that you will NOT be forced to accept this voluntary National ID and if it becomes a requirement to keep your bank account with their institution, you will with draw your money from their bank at the appropriate time. Banks - especially those local ones - need your business and if they suddenly begin getting hundreds or thousands of short, concise and non threatening letters that Americans are going to start pulling out their money, there will be giant rippling effect.
The National ID is opposed by organizations which represent MILLIONS of Americans. Every organization that opposes this National ID needs to put out a short letter of guidance to their memberships that they must act NOW and go after their state lawmakers. I live in the great State of Texas and have put together my letters to my state reps and will be getting them off in the mail by the time this column is posted. It is no sacrifice for me regarding the air lines because I refuse to fly; I refuse to surrender my rights to the TSA or any other government agency in their "war on terrorism," which I know is built on a mountain of lies. Just read Patrick Briley's intense and fully researched columns on how the FBI knowingly and willfully continues to protect known terrorist organizations operating inside the US; see here.
One very important thing occurred two months before 9/11 that most have either forgotten or didn't know and it has to do with airline security. Below are excerpts from one of the public hearings on 9/11; the full statement can be read by clicking on the link:
Statement on Aviation Security for the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States Seventh Public Hearing on Borders, Transportation, and Managing Risk
by Carol Ashley Member of the Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Independent Commission Washington, D.C. January 26, 2004
"On September 11th, 2001, my beautiful 25 year old daughter, Janice, was killed in the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. She worked on the 93rd floor of Tower One. Janice’s dad, her 18 year-old brother and I were devastated by her death."
"Meanwhile, the American civilian population was blissfully ignorant of the danger. But some government officials stopped flying commercial planes, and others canceled plans to fly on September 11th. According to a CBS news report, Attorney General John Ashcroft stopped flying commercial airlines in July, 2001, due to an FBI threat assessment. [8]. San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, who was scheduled to fly into New York City on the 11th, was advised late on the night of September 10th to be cautious about air travel into New York City. [9]. On September 10th, Pentagon brass suddenly canceled flights scheduled for the 11th.[10] 4
"Did some officials have advanced warning of the danger? If so, who advised them? Why wasn't the American public warned?"
"There were two changes to aviation security regulations in the summer of 2001. Two months before the terrorist attacks, a 40 year old FAA rule allowing commercial airline pilots to carry handguns was rescinded. [16] Who was responsible for rescinding this rule? What prompted the decision to disallow a regulation which had been in existence for 40 years?"
How every convenient that a 40-year old FAA rule allowing pilots to carry hand guns was rescinded only two months before 9/11. A huge number of commercial pilots are former military and war vets. They know how to use guns and fight. Yet, only two months before that horrible day, they are suddenly disarmed. Think how different things would have turned out had all those pilots been armed to fight off some thugs with box cutters. The most complete and thoroughly researched time line of events on 9/11 is found here.

Time is an issue for Americans and most do not have the luxury of being able to spend the amount of time I do researching. I would like to recommend three videos which are free on the Internet regarding 9/11: 9/11 Revisited, A presentation by Stephen Jones, Professor of Physics, Brigham Young University and Terror Storm. These videos are not silly conspiracy theories. Dr. Jones, a decent and courageous man is now a target to get him fired because of his scientific and scholarly analysis (and recent testing) regarding the molten pools of steel in the "pit" of ground zero. Actions of a desperate police state. Watch these videos with an open mind and using common sense, ask yourself, "How could this have happened?" and "What really happened that day?" Millions of Americans know the government's official story is little better than a fairy tale at this point in time. It's a painful realization, but truth must be the goal. Not party loyalty, not fear and not moral cowardice in refusing to look at the hard cold facts. [Please note: These Internet videos take time to load, but well worth the wait. I have DSL and it still takes a while if you don't let them fully load and try to play while your system downloads.]

If you are serious about refusing to accept the National ID, then now is the time to get started in creating such a back lash, the thousands of lawmakers in the 50 state legislatures will feel the heat and stand up to the feds. This is a major, critical fight and an important tool for totalitarian government we must defeat. Sticking one's head in the boob tube watching some sporting event or going to the mall will not make the truth go away, it will only further the efforts of those out to destroy this republic. Freedom is every American's duty and responsibility. Those who birthed this republic and their families spilled thousands of gallons of blood on the battlefield so we could be free. Those freedoms are being torn from us at a rapid rate and it is your responsibility to join the growing millions of Americans who refuse to surrender our rights and our nation to a one world totalitarian government.
© 2006 - Devvy Kidd - All Rights Reserved
Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty, which sold close to 2,000,000 copies. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Your complimentary copy of the 32-page report may be obtained from El Dorado Gold. Devvy is a contributing writer for www.NewsWithViews.com.
Devvy's website: www.devvy.com

Thursday, August 17, 2006

HOAXES, HOAXES EVERYWHERE

Mass murder in the skies: was the plot feasible?
By Thomas C Greene in Washington
Published Thursday 17th August 2006 09:42 GMT

Analysis

The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air; And a loud voice came forth out of the temple of Heaven, From the throne, saying, "It is done!" --Revelation 16:17
Binary liquid explosives are a sexy staple of Hollywood thrillers. It would be tedious to enumerate the movie terrorists who've employed relatively harmless liquids that, when mixed, immediately rain destruction upon an innocent populace, like the seven angels of God's wrath pouring out their bowls full of pestilence and pain.


The funny thing about these movies is, we never learn just which two chemicals can be handled safely when separate, yet instantly blow us all to kingdom come when combined. Nevertheless, we maintain a great eagerness to believe in these substances, chiefly because action movies wouldn't be as much fun if we didn't.
Now we have news of the recent, supposedly real-world, terrorist plot to destroy commercial airplanes by smuggling onboard the benign precursors to a deadly explosive, and mixing up a batch of liquid death in the lavatories. So, The Register has got to ask, were these guys for real, or have they, and the counterterrorist officials supposedly protecting us, been watching too many action movies?
We're told that the suspects were planning to use TATP, or triacetone triperoxide, a high explosive that supposedly can be made from common household chemicals unlikely to be caught by airport screeners. A little hair dye, drain cleaner, and paint thinner - all easily concealed in drinks bottles - and the forces of evil have effectively smuggled a deadly bomb onboard your plane.
Or at least that's what we're hearing, and loudly, through the mainstream media and its legions of so-called "terrorism experts." But what do these experts know about chemistry? Less than they know about lobbying for Homeland Security pork, which is what most of them do for a living. But they've seen the same movies that you and I have seen, and so the myth of binary liquid explosives dies hard.

Better killing through chemistry

Making a quantity of TATP sufficient to bring down an airplane is not quite as simple as ducking into the toilet and mixing two harmless liquids together.
First, you've got to get adequately concentrated hydrogen peroxide. This is hard to come by, so a large quantity of the three per cent solution sold in pharmacies might have to be concentrated by boiling off the water. Only this is risky, and can lead to mission failure by means of burning down your makeshift lab before a single infidel has been harmed.
But let's assume that you can obtain it in the required concentration, or cook it from a dilute solution without ruining your operation. Fine. The remaining ingredients, acetone and sulfuric acid, are far easier to obtain, and we can assume that you've got them on hand.
Now for the fun part. Take your hydrogen peroxide, acetone, and sulfuric acid, measure them very carefully, and put them into drinks bottles for convenient smuggling onto a plane. It's all right to mix the peroxide and acetone in one container, so long as it remains cool. Don't forget to bring several frozen gel-packs (preferably in a Styrofoam chiller deceptively marked "perishable foods"), a thermometer, a large beaker, a stirring rod, and a medicine dropper. You're going to need them.
It's best to fly first class and order Champagne. The bucket full of ice water, which the airline ought to supply, might possibly be adequate - especially if you have those cold gel-packs handy to supplement the ice, and the Styrofoam chiller handy for insulation - to get you through the cookery without starting a fire in the lavvie.
Easy does it
Once the plane is over the ocean, very discreetly bring all of your gear into the toilet. You might need to make several trips to avoid drawing attention. Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide / acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.
After a few hours - assuming, by some miracle, that the fumes haven't overcome you or alerted passengers or the flight crew to your activities - you'll have a quantity of TATP with which to carry out your mission. Now all you need to do is dry it for an hour or two.
The genius of this scheme is that TATP is relatively easy to detonate. But you must make enough of it to crash the plane, and you must make it with care to assure potency. One needs quality stuff to commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale," as Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson put it. While it's true that a slapdash concoction will explode, it's unlikely to do more than blow out a few windows. At best, an infidel or two might be killed by the blast, and one or two others by flying debris as the cabin suddenly depressurizes, but that's about all you're likely to manage under the most favorable conditions possible.
We believe this because a peer-reviewed 2004 study (http://www.technion.ac.il/~keinanj/pub/122.pdf) in the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) entitled "Decomposition of Triacetone Triperoxide is an Entropic Explosion" tells us that the explosive force of TATP comes from the sudden decomposition of a solid into gasses. There's no rapid oxidizing of fuel, as there is with many other explosives: rather, the substance changes state suddenly through an entropic process, and quickly releases a respectable amount of energy when it does. (Thus the lack of ingredients typically associated with explosives makes TATP, a white crystalline powder resembling sugar, difficult to detect with conventional bomb sniffing gear.)

Mrs. Satan

By now you'll be asking why these jihadist wannabes didn't conspire simply to bring TATP onto planes, colored with a bit of vegetable dye, and disguised as, say, a powdered fruit-flavored drink. The reason is that they would be afraid of failing: TATP is notoriously sensitive and unstable. Mainstream journalists like to tell us that terrorists like to call it "the mother of Satan." (Whether this reputation is deserved, or is a consequence of homebrewing by unqualified hacks, remains open to debate.)
It's been claimed that the 7/7 bombers used it, but this has not been positively confirmed. Some sources claim that they used C-4, and others that they used RDX. Nevertheless, the belief that they used TATP has stuck with the media, although going about in a crowded city at rush hour with an unstable homebrew explosive in a backpack is not the brightest of all possible moves. It's surprising that none of the attackers enjoyed an unscheduled launch into Paradise.
So, assuming that the homebrew variety of TATP is highly sensitive and unstable - or at least that our inept jihadists would believe that - to avoid getting blown up in the taxi on the way to the airport, one might, if one were educated in terror tactics primarily by hollywood movies, prefer simply to dump the precursors into an airplane toilet bowl and let the mother of Satan work her magic. Indeed, the mixture will heat rapidly as TATP begins to form, and it will soon explode. But this won't happen with much force, because little TATP will have formed by the time the explosion occurs.
We asked University of Rhode Island Chemistry Professor Jimmie C. Oxley, who has actual, practical experience with TATP, if this is a reasonable assumption, and she tolds us that merely dumping the precursors together would create "a violent reaction," but not a detonation.
To release the energy needed to bring down a plane (far more difficult to do than many imagine, as Aloha Airlines Flight 243 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Flight_243) neatly illustrates), it's necessary to synthesize a good amount of TATP with care.

Jack Bauer sense

So the fabled binary liquid explosive - that is, the sudden mixing of hydrogen peroxide and acetone with sulfuric acid to create a plane-killing explosion, is out of the question. Meanwhile, making TATP ahead of time carries a risk that the mission will fail due to premature detonation, although it is the only plausible approach.
Certainly, if we can imagine a group of jihadists smuggling the necessary chemicals and equipment on board, and cooking up TATP in the lavatory, then we've passed from the realm of action blockbusters to that of situation comedy.
It should be small comfort that the security establishments of the UK and the USA - and the "terrorism experts" who inform them and wheedle billions of dollars out of them for bomb puffers and face recognition gizmos and remote gait analyzers and similar hi-tech phrenology gear - have bought the Hollywood binary liquid explosive myth, and have even acted upon it.
We've given extraordinary credit to a collection of jihadist wannabes with an exceptionally poor grasp of the mechanics of attacking a plane, whose only hope of success would have been a pure accident. They would have had to succeed in spite of their own ignorance and incompetence, and in spite of being under police surveillance for a year.
But the Hollywood myth of binary liquid explosives now moves governments and drives public policy. We have reacted to a movie plot. Liquids are now banned in aircraft cabins (while crystalline white powders would be banned instead, if anyone in charge were serious about security). Nearly everything must now go into the hold, where adequate amounts of explosives can easily be detonated from the cabin with cell phones, which are generally not banned.

Action heroes

The al-Qaeda franchise will pour forth its bowl of pestilence and death. We know this because we've watched it countless times on TV and in the movies, just as our officials have done. Based on their behavior, it's reasonable to suspect that everything John Reid and Michael Chertoff know about counterterrorism, they learned watching the likes of Bruce Willis, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Vin Diesel, and The Rock (whose palpable homoerotic appeal it would be discourteous to emphasize).
It's a pity that our security rests in the hands of government officials who understand as little about terrorism as the Florida clowns who needed their informant to suggest attack scenarios, as the 21/7 London bombers who injured no one, as lunatic "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, as the Forest Gate nerve gas attackers who had no nerve gas, as the British nitwits who tried to acquire "red mercury," and as the recent binary liquid bomb attackers who had no binary liquid bombs.
For some real terror, picture twenty guys who understand op-sec, who are patient, realistic, clever, and willing to die, and who know what can be accomplished with a modest stash of dimethylmercury.
You won't hear about those fellows until it's too late. Our official protectors and deciders trumpet the fools they catch because they haven't got a handle on the people we should really be afraid of. They make policy based on foibles and follies, and Hollywood plots.
Meanwhile, the real thing draws ever closer. ®

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

ITS NOT FASCIST WHEN WE DO IT

Wednesday, 16 August 2006
Reporter Christopher Bollyn Beaten by Chicago Cops

By Christopher Bollyn
American Free Press

It's after 2 a.m. in the morning, my deadline is tomorrow, and I have been beaten up by the local police and my right elbow is sorely hurting, but I need to write down exactly what happened to me today before I go to sleep. Otherwise I will forget important details.
I was harassed, beaten, and shocked with a Tazer-like gun in my front yard before my wife and children, and then abused for 6 hours by the ADL-trained local police. I have every reason to believe it is because of my journalistic investigation into 9/11. I have been threatened before in my career as a journalist, but this is the first time I have been intentionally beaten and abused – by the cops.
I have investigated 9/11 since it happened and looked into the many unanswered questions of the terror attacks. I discovered last year that I had had at least two FBI informants crawling around my house for years. This is the main reason I do not feel safe in the United States. It is also why I spend much of the time in Europe or at safe houses in this country, with fellow 9/11 researchers like Ellen Mariani and Eric Hufschmid. I have two small children.
I have only been at my old home in Hoffman Estates for a couple of weeks, mainly because my road-weary children dearly love this old red house, which is the only home they have ever known. It is just a simple Hoffman-Rosner suburban Chicago tract home that my late parents bought in 1957, but it's home.
I had noticed an unusual amount of police activity around my house since I returned. We live on a quiet side street where one might normally see a police cruiser once or twice a week. Since I returned I have noticed all kinds of police cars and devices in the immediate proximity of my house.
But yesterday there was something very unusual around my house. It was an unmarked car with three armed men with body armor driving around my block as I rode my bike to the store. Who in the heck is that? I thought to myself. It looks like they are going to my house, but I won't be there, I thought.
Then today, the same time and the same car with three men passed slowly by my house where the neighborhood kids were playing. "Hello, FBI," I said from my porch and waved.
The man in the front passenger seat waved back. I immediately alerted my wife and kids. Helje said I should stop them and ask them what they want.
For background, today I was working on two rather big stories and I made a lot of phone calls to the Embassy of Israel, the S.E.C., the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and to an old Israeli living in New York who I have suspicions may be a key player in 9/11. I'd like to discuss this lead but I can't at this point.
All of my calls were about 9/11 related, except for the calls to the Embassy and local consulate of Israel. These were standard journalistic inquiries about Israel casualties and losses in Lebanon. The Embassy press department didn't like my questions, but I told them it's my job. I wanted to know about the number of dead and wounded and if 60 Merkava tanks had been taken out, as Hezbollah claims.
Then I also asked where exactly the two Israeli soldiers had been abducted. I told them that there were at least 15 newswire stories that said the soldiers had been captured in the Lebanese village of Aitaa al-Shaab – inside Lebanon. He was surprised to hear that, too.
Apart from my un-disclosable investigation, the other calls were about how Jacob "Kobi" Alexander was able to flee with more than $60 million dollars last week, several months after it was public knowledge that he and the other Israelis working with Comverse Technology, Ltd. had swindled hundred of millions through fraudulent stock options trades. This has been going on for years, and The Wall Street Journal and Globes (Israel) reported the names and the amounts last March. For crying out loud, my newspaper, American Free Press, reported it in April 2005.
I wanted to know from the SEC and the U.S. Attorney's office how this Kobi Alexander was able to wire $60 million to his account in Israel and flee New York without any body stopping him. "If I wired $5 million to Norway the whole NSA and FBI would be all over me," I said.
The U.S. Attorney's office said they "expect" Kobi will turn himself in. Note to the wise: Don't count on it.
Kobi Alexander was one of the owners and developers of Odigo software which allowed Israelis to communicate instantly on 9/11. It was via the "buddy system" on Odigo software, which allows one to communicate to a large group of people that share a trait, such as the Hebrew language, that thousands of Israelis were warned not to go to the twin towers on 9/11.
Kobi Alexander's Mossad-linked company, Comverse Technology, was a developer and owner of Odigo since early 2000, something The New York Times does not consider to be part of "All the News that's Fit to Print." Comverse makes a black box system called the "Audio Disk" that police, intelligence and security agencies, and governments around the world, have attached to their phone networks. This simple device allows the Israeli employees of Comverse back in Tel Aviv to hear and intercept all the data being exchanged by these naive agencies...everything.
Hello...?
I had finished all of my calls and watched the first part of the Lou Dobb's news program on CNN and was on my way to the store, when I stepped out on the stoop and saw this threatening dark car full of obvious agents of some sort. I immediately warned my wife and kids and rode the bike to the store.
Something is not right, I said to myself, and I stopped at the local wine shop and asked to use the phone. I called 911 and told them that a strange car with armed men is driving around my neighborhood for no apparent reason. I was told that a police car would meet me at my house in 20 minutes.
I was just in my house a few minutes when the very same suspicious car stopped in front of my house and three armor-clad men stood on my driveway. I had just been calling the police department and put down the phone. I was more than a little surprised to see these armor-clad thugs on my driveway.
My wife and 8-year old daughter were already there and I asked these men who they were and why they were harassing my street. Why are you driving around with this unmarked car around my house, I asked? Who are you, anyway? They were not at all willing to identify themselves and were very confrontational, to say the least.
I ran to my front door to call my brother when the three of them tackled me and shocked me with some sort of stun-gun. The three men then sat on me and pushed my face in the dirt, handcuffed me and put me in their car.
Remember, I had called 911 because of a suspicious car in my neighborhood, a neighborhood I have known since 1957, when my parents helped found this town.
I have two small children, after all, and this car looked very threatening to me. This is what I call my normal neighborhood obligations, but I discovered that they are actually watching us. They even joked about it at the station later. "We are watching you," they said.
It should be noted that my neighborhood does not have any crime or gangs or anything of that nature that would warrant an undercover squad to patrol around my house day after day. This is why it is so suspicious. And why are they patrolling around my house?
As they pummeled me, my wife was pleading for me and my daughter was crying. I really wanted my brother, my neighbors, and my son to come help me but before even one minute had passed there were dozens of cops and firemen in my front yard.
Where did they all come from so quickly? How were so many police in my neighborhood at the same time? This is most unusual, as Hoffman Estates is spread out all over northwest Cook County, but there were at least 5 squad cars and at least 10 officers in my front yard within one minute of my being beaten up on my lawn.
Sitting in the squad car with handcuffs on is when the private abuse began. Officer Fitzgerald indulged in offending me, my late mother, a village pioneer, and then threatened to beat me.
When another officer came to the car, he told me that this guy was going to beat the ---- out of me. When I repeated what he said word for word, he would say, "I didn't say that."
He then started to drive me to the station, which is about three miles away from the old village center where I live. Bombarded with continuous verbal abuse, when I would say something from the back-seat he would slam on the brakes so that my head hit the plexi-glass separation window. Typical Chicago cop torture treatment; rough the guy up on the way to the station. This is exactly the kind of thing that I ran against when I ran for mayor of this town in 2001.
I decided to lean back on the seat and not say another word.
When we got to the station, there was a host of white-gloved cops waiting for me in the police garage. When Officer Fitzgerald drove in to the garage, he told the 10-12 waiting cops: "He says cops are a bunch of ……….. You can take care of him now."
When they took me out, I informed them that I am a journalist and will write about their treatment. The verbal abuse now came from all sides. They told me I should get out of town, etc. I told them that my dear parents had founded Hoffman Estates, but they didn't care.
When I was in the station they forcibly stripped off my belt and tore of my shirt leaving me clad only in shorts and undershirt. I asked why I was being detained and they told me that I had resisted arrest and threatened the police with my fists, two complete lies.
I was never the subject of any arrest. I had called to police to report a suspicious vehicle driving around my home!
I was thrown into a cell with no water. I asked for a drink of water and was told, "Drink from the toilet."
Why am I being treated this way, I wondered?
At midnight, an officer came to my cell and asked if I could pay $100 to get out. What I am being charged with, I asked? I called the police and they beat me up in my front yard, I protested.
What did I do to deserve that?
My older brother had posted bail and shortly after midnight, I was pushed out onto the street with a good two-mile walk home.
I am shocked at how I was treated, because although my journalism gets me into trouble with police in many places, I have never been treated so brutally in my life. I honestly believe this brutal treatment is connected to my 9/11 research.
I intend to seek asylum in Norway or Switzerland. I can read the writing on the wall.
Investigative journalists are not safe in Iraq – or the United States.

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

FROM THE HORSES MOUTH

Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11
by Bill Christison
www.dissidentvoice.org
August 14, 2006

However horrendous the crimes of two of the world’s great liars and terrorists in Gaza and Lebanon, it is imperative that we not let the deeds of Ehud Olmert and George W. Bush distract us from another recent event.
The U.S. alliance with Israel and the power of the lobby that lets Israel so easily influence U.S. foreign policy have been major factors in allowing the monstrous slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. What is happening in these lands may also encourage Olmert and Bush to start new hostilities in Syria and heavy, possibly nuclear, bombings in Iran -- and this entire mess of neocon pottage may lead to a new World War and clashes of civilizations and religious fundamentalisms that these two wretched politicians seem quite literally to want to impose on the rest of us. It’s a tough case to make that anything else going on in the world -- anywhere -- could possibly be of equal importance.
But on July 29 and 30, and then again on August 1, something else happened that increasing numbers of people believe is of equal importance. On these dates C-SPAN rebroadcast a panel discussion, held originally in late June, sponsored by an organization called the American Scholars’ Symposium to discuss what really happened on September 11, 2001. Held in Los Angeles, the meeting lasted two days, and the C-SPAN rebroadcast covered one almost two-hour wrap-up session. The meeting was attended by 1,200 people interested in hearing something other than the official story of 9/11. The TV audience was evidently large enough to spur C-SPAN to broadcast the panel discussion five separate times in four days.
Even a month late, this is a lot of airtime for stories that many people call conspiracy theories -- and for which many others use nastier descriptions. It is possible that the head of C-SPAN, Brian Lamb, so strongly disbelieves the conspiracy theories that he felt giving them ample publicity would discredit them further. It is equally possible, however, that Lamb, who seems honestly to believe in presenting various sides of most issues as fairly as he can (although not always giving every side equal time), tried to do exactly that on the many legitimate questions raised about what actually happened on September 11. In any event, C-SPAN has made a major effort to bring information on the principal theories about 9/11 to the mainstream U.S. media. Lamb cannot be blamed for the coincidence that recent heavy military activity in Gaza and Lebanon is nearly drowning out his efforts.
Let’s address the real issues here. Why is it important that we not let the so-called conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 be drowned out? After spending the better part of the last five years treating these theories with utmost skepticism, I have devoted serious time to actually studying them in recent months, and have also carefully watched several videos that are available on the subject. I have come to believe that significant parts of the 9/11 theories are true, and that therefore significant parts of the “official story” put out by the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are false. I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. The items below highlight the major questions surrounding 9/11 but do not constitute a detailed recounting of the evidence available.
ONE: An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. Hard physical evidence supports this conclusion; among other things, the hole in the Pentagon was considerably smaller than an airliner would create. The building was thus presumably hit by something smaller, possibly a missile, or a drone or, less possibly, a smaller manned aircraft. Absolutely no information is available on what happened to the original aircraft (American Airlines Flight 77), the crew, the “hijackers,” and the passengers. The “official story,” as it appeared in The 9/11 Commission Report simply says, “At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour. All on board, as well as many civilians and military personnel in the building, were killed.” This allows readers to assume that pieces of the aircraft and some bodies of passengers were found in the rubble of the crash, but information so far released by the government does not show that such evidence was in fact found. The story put out by the Pentagon is that the plane and its passengers were incinerated; yet video footage of offices in the Pentagon situated at the edge of the hole clearly shows office furniture undamaged. The size of the hole in the Pentagon wall still remains as valid evidence and so far seems irrefutable.
TWO: The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them. A plane did not hit Building 7 of the Center, which also collapsed. All three were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11. A substantial volume of evidence shows that typical residues and byproducts from such demolition charges were present in the three buildings after they collapsed. The quality of the research done on this subject is quite impressive.
If the judgments made on Points ONE and TWO above are correct, they raise many “Who done it” questions and strongly suggest that some unnamed persons or groups either inside or with ties to the government were actively creating a “Pearl Harbor” event, most likely to gain public support for the aggressive foreign policies that followed -- policies that would, first, “transform” the entire Middle East, and second, expand U.S. global domination.
These first two points provide the strongest evidence available that the “official story” of 9/11 is not true. If the government could prove this evidence false, and its own story on these points correct, all the other data and speculation supporting the conspiracy theories would be undermined. It has provided no such proof and no answers to growing questions.
Other, less important points supporting the theories include the following.
THREE: For at least one hour and 45 minutes after the hijacking of the first aircraft was known, U.S. air defense authorities failed to take meaningful action. This strikes some “conspiracy theorists” as valid evidence that the U.S. Air Force was deliberately restrained from acting. Maybe so, but my own skepticism tells me that the inefficiency of U.S. defense forces is likely to be just as plausible an explanation.
FOUR: Some of the theorists believe that the 19 named hijackers were not actually the hijackers. One claim is that the names of the hijackers were not on the manifests of any of the four aircraft.
FIVE: None of the 19 hijackers’ bodies were ever autopsied (since they were allegedly totally destroyed in the crashes, including even the people in the Pennsylvania crash).
SIX: At least five of the alleged hijackers (or persons with identical names) have since turned up alive in the Middle East. Nonetheless, the FBI has never bothered to re-investigate or revise the list of hijackers. Does this suggest that the FBI knows that no one in the administration is interested in reopening any further investigations?
SEVEN: Numerous pilots have allegedly told the theorists that none of the 19 hijackers could have flown the airliners well enough to hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon with as much accuracy as was displayed. The debate on this issue simply raises more doubt about the government’s charge that the people it has named as hijackers are the real hijackers.
EIGHT: No one, except possibly government investigators who are not talking, has seen the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. Some of the conspiracy theorists suggest that it was deliberately destroyed before it hit the ground; others suggest that the plane actually landed in Cleveland and that passengers then were whisked away to some unknown destination. What happened to them at that point is simply a large question mark that makes it more difficult to believe this particular scenario.
NINE: Machinations in the U.S. stock market in the days before 9/11 suggest that some inside players in the market knew or suspected that United and American Airlines stock would soon drop. Two of the four of the aircraft involved in 9/11 were, or course, United planes and the other two were American Airlines planes.
It should be reemphasized that these items do not make up a complete list of all the charges made by the theorists, but they are a good sample. Anyone interested in perhaps the best summary of these charges should watch the video “Loose Change.”
To repeat, points ONE and TWO above are the most important. If something other than an airliner actually did hit the Pentagon on 9/11, and if the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center actually were dropped to the ground by controlled demolitions rather than by anything connected to the hijackings, the untrue stories peddled by The 9/11 Commission Report are clearly susceptible of being turned into major political issues.
A Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll taken from July 6 to 24, 2006 concluded that “more than a third [36 percent] of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them, so that the United States could go to war in the Middle East.” The poll also found that “16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.”
A poll done by the Zogby polling organization two months earlier, between May 12 and 16, 2006, and using questions worded somewhat differently, suggested even more strongly that the issue could become a “big one” if aggressively publicized. This poll concluded that 42 percent of Americans believed there had indeed been a cover-up of the true events of 9/11, and an additional 10 percent of Americans were “unsure.” The co-author of the poll, W. David Kubiak, stated that, “despite years of relentless media promotion, whitewash, and 9/11 Commission propaganda, the official 9/11 story still can’t even muster 50 percent popular support.”
Whichever of these polls is closer to the truth, it would seem that there is considerable support for making a major political issue of the subject.
This should be worked on at two different levels. At the first level, the objective should be long-term, centered on making a maximum effort to find out who the individuals and groups are that carried out the attacks in New York and Washington. Then, these people should be tried in an international court and, if possible, convicted and punished for causing so many deaths. Such a trial, accompanied by actual change in U.S. policies, would show that some people on this globe are at least trying to move closer to more just and decent behavior in human relationships around the world.
At the second level, the short term, the task should be to immediately set to work as hard as is humanly possible to defeat in this year’s congressional election any candidate who refuses to support a no-holds-barred investigation of 9/11 by the Congress or a high-level international court. No more evidence than is now available is needed in order to begin this process.
A manageable volume of carefully collected and analyzed evidence is already at hand on both items ONE and TWO above. Such evidence should be used right now to buttress charges that elements within the Bush administration, as well as possibly other groups foreign or domestic, were involved in a massive fraud against the American people, a fraud that has led to many thousands of deaths.
This charge of fraud, if proven, involves a much greater crime against the American people and people of the world than any other charges of fraud connected to the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. It is a charge that we should not sweep under the rug because what is happening in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, Syria, and Iran seems more pressing and overwhelming. It is a charge that is more important because it is related to all of the areas just mentioned -- after all, the events of 9/11 have been used by the administration to justify every single aspect of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East since September 11. It is a charge that is more important also because it affects the very core of our entire political system. If proven, it is a conspiracy, so far successful, not only against the people of the United States, but against the entire world. Finally, it is a charge too important to ignore simply because the U.S. government refuses to discuss it. We must force the Bush administration to discuss it.
Discussions aggressively pushed day after day about what really happened on 9/11 will be one of the most important tasks between now and early November. Such discussions can, one hopes, provide progressives with a way to jolt voters out of their apathy and inchoate willingness to support the status quo that they think gives them security -- and encourage more voters to stop supporting Bush, the Republicans, and the wobbly Democratic politicians who might as well be Republicans. A major issue like this, already supported by many voters, may prove particularly important in a congressional election year when new uncertainties in the Middle East, new possibilities of terrorism against the U.S. in retaliation for recent large-scale acts of Israeli/U.S. terrorism in Gaza and Lebanon, and the corrupt almost-single-party U.S. political system combine to make it more likely that supporters of Bush will retain their majority this November.
In terms of electoral impact, it would not matter whether heavy publicity did in fact force the administration to accept a new high-level investigation of the 9/11 events. Initially, the principal goal would be to contribute heavily to the defeat of both Republicans and Democrats who refuse to support wholeheartedly a major new investigation by Congress or an international court. This might result in the defeat of more Republicans than Democrats in November, but ultimately the hoped-for goal should be the end of a system in which Democrats are barely different from Republicans, along with cutbacks in the political power of wealth and the foreign and domestic lobbies paid for by wealth. These are the dominant features of our system today that have practically eliminated meaningful democracy in the U.S. This failure of democracy has happened before in U.S. history, but this time it is likely to last longer -- at least until U.S. policies begin to pay as much attention to the needs of the world as they do to selfish or thoughtless needs of the U.S. and of its military-industrial complex. Attacks on the criminal events surrounding 9/11 might speed this process.
Virtually no members of Congress, Democratic or Republican, will relish calling for a further investigation of 9/11. For right now, in addition to other motives, the issue should be used to go after those political prostitutes among elected office-holders who should also be defeated because they are so easily seduced by money and power to vote for immoral wars against weak enemies.
At the Los Angeles meeting of the American Scholars’ Symposium, one of the main speakers, Webster Tarpley, summarized his own views on the events of 9/11. He emphasized that “neocon fascist madmen” had perpetrated the 9/11 “myth.” He went on to say, “The most important thing is that the 9/11 myth is the premise and the root of the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War and the coming attack on Iran. ... We must ... deprive [the myth’s perpetrators] of the ability to stampede and manipulate hundreds of millions of people [with their] ... cynically planned terrorist events.”
Let’s give Webster Tarpley and other mistakenly labeled conspiracists who have labored in the wilderness for so long three cheers.
Bill Christison is a former senior official of the CIA. He was a National Intelligence Officer and the Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis before his retirement in 1979. Since then he has written numerous articles on U.S. foreign policies. He can be reached at: kathy.bill@christison-santafe.com.

Monday, August 14, 2006

SCARY, VERY SCARY

Which Travelers Have 'Hostile Intent'? Biometric Device May Have the Answer

By JONATHAN KARP and LAURA MECKLER August 14, 2006; Page B1

At airport security checkpoints in Knoxville, Tenn. this summer, scores of departing passengers were chosen to step behind a curtain, sit in a metallic oval booth and don headphones.
With one hand inserted into a sensor that monitors physical responses, the travelers used the other hand to answer questions on a touch screen about their plans. A machine measured biometric responses -- blood pressure, pulse and sweat levels -- that then were analyzed by software. The idea was to ferret out U.S. officials who were carrying out carefully constructed but make-believe terrorist missions.
GE Security CEO Louis Parker demonstrates some of the company's airport screening devices.
The trial of the Israeli-developed system represents an effort by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration to determine whether technology can spot passengers who have "hostile intent." In effect, the screening system attempts to mechanize Israel's vaunted airport-security process by using algorithms, artificial-intelligence software and polygraph principles.
Neither the TSA nor Suspect Detection Systems Ltd., the Israeli company, will discuss the Knoxville trial, whose primary goal was to uncover the designated bad guys, not to identify threats among real travelers. They won't even say what questions were asked of travelers, though the system is generally designed to measure physical responses to hot-button questions like "Are you planning to immigrate illegally?" or "Are you smuggling drugs."
The test alone signals a push for new ways to combat terrorists using technology. Authorities are convinced that beyond hunting for weapons and dangerous liquids brought on board airliners, the battle for security lies in identifying dangerous passengers.
The method isn't intended to catch specific lies, says Shabtai Shoval, chief executive of Suspect Detection Systems, the start-up business behind the technology dubbed Cogito. "What we are looking for are patterns of behavior that indicate something all terrorists have: the fear of being caught," he says.
The Israeli-developed system combines questions and biometric measurements to determine if a passenger should undergo screening by security officials.
Security specialists say such technology can enhance, but not replace, existing detection machines and procedures. Some independent experts who are familiar with Mr. Shoval's product say that while his technology isn't yet mature, it has potential. "You can't replicate the Israeli system exactly, but if you can incorporate its philosophy, this technology can be one element of a better solution," says Doron Bergerbest-Eilon, chief executive of Asero Worldwide consulting firm and a former senior official in Israel's security service.
To date, the TSA has more confidence in people than machines to detect suspicious behavior. A small program now is using screening officers to watch travelers for suspicious behavior. "It may be the only thing I know of that favors the human solution instead of technology," says TSA chief Kip Hawley.
The people-based program -- called Screening Passengers by Observation Technique, or SPOT -- began undergoing tests at Boston's Logan Airport after 9/11 and has expanded to about a dozen airports. Trained teams watch travelers in security lines and elsewhere. They look for obvious things like someone wearing a heavy coat on a hot day, but also for subtle signs like vocal timbre, gestures and tiny facial movements that indicate someone is trying to disguise an emotion.
TSA officers observe passengers while consulting a list of more than 30 questionable behaviors, each of which has a numerical score. If someone scores high enough, an officer approaches the person and asks a few questions.
"All you know is there's an emotion being concealed. You have to find out why the emotion is occurring," says Paul Ekman, a San Francisco psychologist who pioneered work on facial expressions and is informally advising the TSA. "You can find out very quickly."
More than 80% of those approached are quickly dismissed, he says. The explanations for hiding emotions often are innocent: A traveler might be stressed out from work, worried about missing a flight or sad because a relative just died. If suspicions remain, the traveler is interviewed at greater length by a screener with more specialized training. SPOT teams have identified about 100 people who were trying to smuggle drugs, use fake IDs and commit other crimes, but not terrorist acts.
The TSA says that, because the program is based on human behavior, not attributes, it isn't vulnerable to racial profiling. Critics worry it still could run afoul of civil rights. "Our concern is that giving TSA screeners this kind of responsibility and discretion can result in their making decisions not based on solid criteria but on impermissible characteristics such as race," says Gregory T. Nojeim, associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington legislative office.
Mr. Shoval, the Israeli entrepreneur, believes technology-based screening is the key to rolling out behavior-recognition techniques in the U.S. With experience in counter-terrorism service and the high-technology industry, Mr. Shoval developed his Cogito device with leading former Israeli intelligence officials, polygraph experts and computer-science academics.
Here is the Cogito concept: A passenger enters the booth, swipes his passport and responds in his choice of language to 15 to 20 questions generated by factors such as the location, and personal attributes like nationality, gender and age. The process takes as much as five minutes, after which the passenger is either cleared or interviewed further by a security officer.
At the heart of the system is proprietary software that draws on Israel's extensive field experience with suicide bombers and security-related interrogations. The system aims to test the responses to words, in many languages, that trigger psycho-physiological responses among people with terrorist intent.
The technology isn't geared toward detecting general nervousness: Mr. Shoval says terrorists often are trained to be cool and to conceal stress. Unlike a standard lie detector, the technology analyzes a person's answers not only in relation to his other responses but also those of a broader peer group determined by a range of security considerations. "We can recognize patterns for people with hostile agendas based on research with Palestinians, Israelis, Americans and other nationalities in Israel," Mr. Shoval says. "We haven't tried it with Chinese or Iraqis yet." In theory, the Cogito machine could be customized for specific cultures, and questions could be tailored to intelligence about a specific threat.
The biggest challenge in commercializing Cogito is reducing false results that either implicate innocent travelers or let bad guys slip through. Mr. Shoval's company has conducted about 10 trials in Israel, including tests in which control groups were given terrorist missions and tried to beat the system. In the latest Israeli trial, the system caught 85% of the role-acting terrorists, meaning that 15% got through, and incorrectly identified 8% of innocent travelers as potential threats, according to corporate marketing materials.
The company's goal is to prove it can catch at least 90% of potential saboteurs -- a 10% false-negative rate -- while inconveniencing just 4% of innocent travelers.
Mr. Shoval won a contract for the Knoxville trial in a competitive process. Next year, Israeli authorities plan to test Cogito at the country's main international airport and at checkpoints between Israel and the West Bank, where the goal will be to catch genuine security threats while testing the logistics of using the system more broadly. The latest prototype costs about $200,000 a machine.
Even though his expertise is in human observation, U.S. behavior-recognition expert Dr. Ekman says projects like Cogito deserve a shot. He expects technology to advance even further, to devices like lasers that measure people's vital signs from a distance. Within a year, he predicts, such technology will be able to tell whether someone's "blood pressure or heart rate is significantly higher than the last 10 people" who entered an airport.

MANUFACTURED TERRORISM

TERRORISM? SO MANY VOLUNTEERING FOR SUICIDE, FOR WHAT?

Dorothy A. SeeseAugust 11, 2006 WWW.NewsWithViews.com

When someone is willing to give up his or her life to strike back at a perceived enemy for vengeance, we might write them off as just a loose nut who went over the edge. When either an organized group, or cells of radical believers in some religion or cause, begin recruiting numbers of individuals who allegedly are willing to blow themselves up the media labels them "terrorists" and that seems to explain their behavior, but in fact, it confuses the issue. We first have to define a terrorist, then we need to know what common bond these people have that enables them to willingly make the supreme sacrifice for their beliefs. For the general media, the answer is simple: label them "Islamic radicals" and that is all the explanation that is needed -- the boys are headed for a grand afterlife with Allah.
Then there is a peculiar non sequitur about these "radical Islamists" in that none of them have been identified as coming from the countries which the US and its ally, the UK, have militarily or verbally attacked to spread democracy and freedom -- e.g., Iraq, Iran or Syria. They come from Egypt, or they are British subjects, Arabians, and now presumably Pakistanis. If you think this is beginning to foul up the matrix of this "terrorism" game, you're right. Even the world's finest computers freeze at this strange code, and the human mind has to sound the TILT button.
Of further interest is that neither the US nor the UK have launched any counterstrikes against the native lands of these "terrorists" ... whether it be Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt or Morocco. Or Libya... remember Lockerbee!
Are there such radical Islamic bonds between individuals of the Arab world that folks are standing in line to become suicide bombers, willing to blow up the very airliners in which they are flying, to make a statement in behalf of their Arab or Islamic national friends, while the natives of those lands aren't involved in the plots? There is something a bit abnormal about that line of thinking. Al-Qaida? Does it have a roster of suicide-prone radical Islamists who are waiting to find a way to blow up themselves and a few hundred assorted airline passengers on behalf of Palestinians, Lebanese and Iraqis?
Is the president of Iran being encouraged to step up his nuclear program by a few handfuls of Islamic extremists who pay the supreme price to let him know they're with him, as they go on their way to join Allah?
Or does this whole outbreak of seemingly scheduled terror attacks simply point the finger, and the world's eyes, at nations who are different from us and hence, need to be liberated and reindoctrinated? Just as folks are beginning to feel safe flying in aluminum tubes with heavy engines through unpredictable weather while they breathe recycled but not disinfected air where one can exhale tuberculosis but not smoke, we get yet another bomb scare. Maximum coverage is given to the stringent prohibitions, precautions, arrests, inconveniences, and military presence by "our side" while little to nearly nothing is said about the less than illustrious "terrorists" who allegedly would have done the deed had our side not caught them.
Of course, all these terrorists are really jealous of our "freedom" in the US and UK, and the American public hands more of their former freedoms over to the government for safekeeping ... as in handing over the chickens to the fox to protect. Furthermore, they're folks who are so zealous for their enslaved condition, they're willing to die for it, while we "free" people cower at the very thought of death. (Keep the computer running, it's beginning to make strange sounds from the score of an old Hitchcock movie.)
Now airline passengers to and from Heathrow Airport (which is being avoided by the airlines with greater intensity than it would if bubonic had been discovered there) are tossing their shampoo and hair mousse into the airport trash cans under the watchful eye of the police. So what has been accomplished?
1. Americans and perhaps Brits are being acclimated to the environment of police surveillance and presence in formerly quiet public places where people once took their children for an afternoon of watching the planes take off and land. It used to be advertised on Phoenix radio that parents could spend little to nothing for an entire afternoon with their children by taking them to the airport, that is, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. That ceased on September 11, 2001.
2. The US has invoked "Code Red" for the first time, after a lot of orange alerts.
3. Our leadership, if besieged by enough code red situations, will be "justified" in invoking martial law and suspending habeas corpus and all remaining particles of the Bill of Rights, so that we Americans can feel safe.
4. We're always reminded that these foiled terrorists are Islamics while being informed that Islam is a religion of peace ... which besmacks of doublespeak at the highest levels of leadership.
5. The obvious cure for all this terrorism will eventually be unveiled and it will be to unite the planet under one world government, with one world elite leadership under one great leader, and one amalgamated race of humans who have one world religion of spirituality. Thus, all being one, we will have unity, and we will not have dissent. (Dissenters will disappear as quickly as a bullet can travel or cyanide can kill.)
It isn't amusing to me to visualize just how amused the Arab leaders must be at our panic in the streets and the failure of Americans in particular to defend their nation by throwing out the leaders under whose guidance all the events since Nine-Eleven have taken place. Oh yes, the documents were ready to be signed, the police were ready to be placed at their posts, the media were drooling for the next non-event with which to terrify the public, and otherwise normal folks are eager to surrender more freedoms for a safety no government can give. A real terrorist strikes without warning, and has a reason. Faux terrorists are caught so that what was prevented can never be proved, but is assumed as fact by government pronouncements and media coverage, particularly of events of the past.
I have observed that when all eyes are drawn to the concourses of airports, it is well to look down the halls of leadership's house and find out which are the war rooms. What is going on while we're distracted? If, IF the media would focus on some of those things about to come to pass, we might find out more about why we're having our attention riveted on a non-event.
But, even if you are drawn to suspect that all is not well, you will be very, very careful to whom you say such things, perhaps only to your spouse or your parent, because they may be listening. They may have your computer tapped, also your phones and faxes. You put on your American flag lapel pin just as some others put on their mark of allegiance in 1933 Germany. It symbolizes your patriotism, your loyalty to this country, whatever it is and is becoming.

You still need your American flag on Memorial Day, however, to remember those who died and the freedom that is also among the dead.
Those who "hate us for our freedom" should in fact love us, or at least pity us, for the brainless fools we have become under a leadership of tyrants equal to the world's worst. It isn't that the American people are evil as a whole, at least no more so than other sin-infected humans, but we're more deceived than most people about ourselves, our nation, and our leadership.

Some folks are indeed radicals, but it is doubtful that those religious fanatics make up an organized or even loosely affiliated cache of suicide bombers. Most of them are occupied fighting one another. We need to learn over again how to think, and figure out what makes sense even if we are afraid we will hate the answer.
And, we need to figure out what sign is referred to when we read "in hoc signo vinces."

© 2006 Dorothy A. Seese - All Rights Reserved

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

THE BEAST

THE REAL ID CARD - IMPECCABLE TIMING

Nancy Levant August 9, 2006 WWW.NewsWithViews.com

At large, the American people are still unaware of the issuance of the Real ID card forthcoming in May of 2008. This new national/international ID card, and its interactivity with national/international databases, can access our medical, financial, driving, Social Security, license(s), firearms registrations, and political status inside its high tech/little nano brain. In essence, it holds our private lives on a swipe-able card that is then privy to any organization, retailer, or person requesting our identification or our money. In other words, our life histories accessible upon command from one 2X3 inch card.
Having no choice but to comply, most American people will accept their new national/international ID card. It is my understanding that without the card, we will be denied bank accounts in the United States of America, a driver’s license, and the right to fly on airplanes unless we have been issued a Real ID card. One might imagine that global retailers might require the Real ID to purchase food and gasoline. Take a look at your current driver’s license. Check the expiration date. 2008 would be a good global guess.
For those of us who have seen United Nations military vehicles in the United States, and who have also noticed convoys of military tanks being transported through the wilderness areas of our nation – the same areas that have been locked down and away from the American people via Biosphere Reserves and conservation corridors - we have realized for a great many years that, as one patriot stated, the “stage was being set” for difficult times on American soil – the key issue that mass media ignores at its professional finest. So, with stages being set, one must also look to the timing of the Real ID card, and to 2008 in general. Let us not forget all the other paramilitary systems in our nation, like the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, Citizens Corp groups, Neighborhood Watch groups, C.O.P.S. (Community Oriented Policing Services), the militarizing of law enforcement departments, and the many new for-hire corporations that offer private armies with weapons for a price. And then, of course, there are the U.N. peacekeeping forces, which the American military has been actively involved with for many, many decades while, simultaneously and incrementally, our “leaders” have been closing our homeland military bases during these same decades.
The professional timing of the Real ID card in 2008, and its mandatory issuance, brings to mind several forthcoming coincidences and issues. The collecting and databasing of all personal information of every American adult – coinciding with the CFR’s North American Community – and all global government infrastructures in place and play, one must consider the following:
How are “domestic terrorists” determined and identified?
Who will be held in the Civilian Labor Camps on American soil?
What is the real issue behind the “identity theft” propaganda?
Why are the off-limits American wilderness areas crawling with secret military operations?
And why the mandatory issuance of an ID card that sums up every American citizen with one swipe?
One cannot help but to almost laugh when it comes to considering how directly global intentions rest beneath our noses. So easy to see, yet so blindly the public goes about its merry and dull way. On that note, the Real ID card will ultimately seal your fate. You will be a compliant and completely identifiable slave to the New World Order, or you will be its enemy – and your Real ID will determine which global creature you shall be. Therefore, America, let us not in-fight. The fact of our demise as free people exists no matter whose research is right or wrong. The stage is, in fact, being set for our nation’s conquering. The Democrats and Republicans have seen to this fact and have worked steadfastly to raise their one-world government. They knew from the beginning that people with property, firearms, and rights were their primary problems, or in other words, the people of the United States of America and other westernized nations. Our “leadership” is not what they seem.

The public acceptance of the Real ID in May of 2008 seals the deal. It will be more than interesting to see which of our friends, neighbors, and family members will willingly sign onto their fate as new “citizens” of the global police state. Just keep telling yourselves that you voted them into office. So did I. As such, we have a lot of soul searching to do and very, very little time – about 21 months. Are we going to continue to allow our “representatives” to march off with this nation and our Constitutional freedom, or are we going to unite and reclaim OUR nation? Ignorance is never bliss. It is abject slavery, and this time, the enslavement is backed by a system far greater than concepts or perceived notions of freedom.

It’s past time to do more than wave flags, wear patriotic tee shirts, hats, and pins. It’s time to serve through action and duty to this nation. Start an A.C.E. (Americans for Constitutional Enforcement) chapter in your neighborhood NOW. Request an information packet (contactus@a4ce.org) and create your local chapter. It’s YOUR job and Constitutional duty to save our nation and to preserve freedom. We have been betrayed. For the sake of your children, open your eyes and act. The only potential answer is to UNITE for freedom and to command that freedom with one voice. Then, as a nation UNITED in knowledge, we can rid ourselves of our “representative” globalists. Now, please stop the bickering and bitching, especially of the partisanship flavor, and get to WORK. Global government is non-partisan minus the master-slave divide.
You may also request a mailed copy of the A.C.E. Information Packet by sending $10.00 to A.C.E., P.O. Box 293, Iron Mountain, MI 49801.

© 2006 Nancy Levant - All Rights Reserved

Monday, August 07, 2006

HE SAID WHAT?

Who Wants A Master Race To Enslave Humanity?

"OUR RACE IS THE MASTER RACE. WE ARE DIVINE GODS ON THIS PLANET. WE ARE AS DIFFERENT FROM THE INFERIOR RACES AS THEY ARE FROM INSECTS. IN FACT, COMPARED TO OUR RACE, OTHER RACES ARE BEASTS AND ANIMALS, CATTLE AT BEST. OTHER RACES ARE CONSIDERED AS HUMAN EXCREMENT. OUR DESTINY IS TO RULE OVER THE INFERIOR RACES. OUR EARTHLY KINGDOM WILL BE RULED BY OUR LEADER WITH A ROD OF IRON. THE MASSES WILL LICK OUR FEET, AND SERVE US AS OUR SLAVES."
Now, who said it?
Was it Hitler?
Was it Stalin?

Menachem Begin(Israeli Prime Minister, 1977-1983)

GET READY FOR A 3RD WORLD LIFESTYLE

WHY ARE AMERICANS IGNORANT OF 'AGENDA 21'?




Joyce Morrison August 6, 2006 WWW.NEWSWITHVIEWS.COM

The United Nations Agenda 21 was signed by the United States in 1992 and 14 years later, people are still in the dark. If you were to ask at random the question, "Have you heard of Agenda 21?" the answer would be an over-whelming "No," although it is being implemented in every local community.
Agenda 21 is a 40 chapter document listing goals to be achieved globally. It is the global plan to change the way we "live, eat, learn and communicate" because we must "save the earth."
"Its regulation would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system," according to Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools.
Maurice Strong, Secretary-general of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro said, "...[C]urrent lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat consumption and large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations.
In other words, the Global plan is for us to live on the level of third world nations. That means no box mixes or microwave meals, limited use of fuel of any kind, no air-conditioning and very little meat. When the cost of freon skyrocketed, when mad cow disease hit, the National Animal Identification System introduced, the price of fuel soared, it has become apparent that given time, these sustainable controls will be put into place - one way or another - and the Global Governance is powerful.
In 1992, Agenda 21 began to change our lives. In that same year, Al Gore wrote his book, Earth in the Balance. To advance his cause, he has now written another piece of fiction entitled, An Inconvenient Truth about global warming…..he even starred in the movie. He also thinks he invented the internet.
Although groundwork had been laid, it took a Bill Clinton to actually introduce something so invasive to our nation and get by with it without the public becoming aware. President Clinton appointed his "President’s Council on Sustainable Development" and he literally gave away the rights and freedoms the framers of the Constitution had provided.
People in the United States may not know about Agenda 21 and the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, but people around the world do. They know that Chicago has one of the greatest numbers of activities existing at the local, neighborhood and/or microregional level. They also know that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitors and promotes activities in this field through their Office for Sustainable Ecosystem and Communities.
Found on a Slovakian website: "To the leading countries in the field of development but especially of practical using of sustainable development indicators belong to the U.S.A. At the top level these activities are promoted by the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (1996), which defined a set of ten national goals toward sustainable development. These goals express in concrete terms the elements of sustainability. Alongside the goals are suggested indicators that can be used to help measure progress toward achieving them.”
Agenda 21 is certainly not a secret. The internet is full of how Agenda 21 has been fulfilled through Smart Growth planning, land use, sustainable development and extreme environmentalism. The so-called agenda is grant driven to your city council or county board in terms of sustainable, visioning, partners, tourism and stakeholders, along with consensus and other terms with the intent to make you believe we are running out of all our resources and we must do our part and "save for tomorrow. [See Agenda 21's Table of Contents.]
It has nothing to do about “saving anything” – it has everything to do with “control.” Sadly, very few congressmen even know Agenda 21 is actually running our country when they are voting to send grant money back home. Agenda 21 is incentive driven as the planners know that greed in the heart of man will be his downfall.
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR, has oil we need to be drilling for the security of our nation. Environmentalists don’t seem to understand we are dependent on foreign oil from nations who do not like us and our nation’s defense is at stake. The area where drilling would occur is just a dot in this vast land, yet they would gamble the strength of our nation in behalf of their favorite word --"pristine."
At the same time, technology is advancing and we may not need the oil later. But we do need it now.
Henry Lamb of Eco-logic, Restructuring the U.N.,
The world changed on 9-11. No longer can the world tilt at the windmills of a fantasized "global village." No longer can visions of "sustainable development" be justified in a world where "sustainable freedom" is the only possible solution to the economic and power vacuum that foments acts of terrorism.
There is a better way.
Nations can and, ultimately, must learn to live as neighbors, free from the web of "international laws" that dictate which activities are "sustainable" and which are xenophobic and unacceptable. Nation-to-nation relationships, just like neighbor-to-neighbor relationships, should be fashioned voluntarily, driven by mutual benefit. For the first time in a century, the United States may be exploring this possibility.

Henry Lamb is right. We can live as neighbors with other nations but we do not need to live under a "web of international law." There are dedicated citizens in the United States who are wise enough to set our nation’s guidelines without following Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development as set forth by the United Nations. [See DVD: Liberty or Sustainable Development?]

One of the main goals of Agenda 21 is to redistribute the wealth to third world countries and to bring our great nation to its knees in the name of socialism, fascism, communism or some other “ism.” Our founding fathers founded this nation on the belief of a Sovereign God and we have been blessed. Do you know the Gods of the nations to which we would become equal?

© 2006 Joyce Morrison - All Rights Reserved