Granny Rant
Saturday, September 27, 2003
::: WOW ~ This Is It! ~ Robin Williams Peace Plan :::

I think it will work. What do you think?
A Heads Up ... Correction ~ plan NOT from Robin Williams
Next Question is, "Do We Care?"

Leave it to Robin Williams to come up with the perfect plan...what we need
now is for our UN Ambassador to stand up and repeat this message.

Robin Williams' plan... (Hard to argue with this logic!)

I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for
peace. So, here's one plan:

1. The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their
affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, Noriega, Milosovich and
the rest of those 'good ole boys.' We will never "interfere" again.

2. We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with
Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station
our troops at all US borders. No more will anyone sneak through holes in the

3. All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave.
We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered
up and deported to France immediately, regardless of who they are or where
they are from. France should welcome them.

4. All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days
unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in.
If you don't like it there, change it yourself and don't hide here. Asylum
would never be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers or 7-11
cashiers who won't speak English.

5. No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't
attend classes, or they get a "D" and it's back home baby!..Never to Return.

6. The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise.
This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy but will require a
temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to
cope for a while.

7. Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for
their oil. If they don't like it, we go some place else. They can go somewhere
else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up their
storage sites would be enough.)

8. If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will
not "interfere." They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or
whatever they need. Besides...most of what we give them is stolen or given to
the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.

9. Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island some place. We don't need
the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a
good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10. All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can
call us "Ugly Americans" any longer.

Now, ain't that a winner of a plan. The Statue of Liberty is no longer
saying 'Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses.' She's got a baseball
bat and she's yelling, 'You want a piece of me?'

If you agree with the above.....forward it to friends!!!!!!
::: The Awful Truth ~~ Spoken in The Worst Language :::

Warning .... some of the comments herein may be offensive, but I wanted
to present an accurate picture of what I saw while surfing re the DieBold
Black Box Voting Scandal.

The research and activism arm of BlackBox
Fri Sept 26 2003
Diebold Demands Pull-Down of Black Box Voting
We'll get to that in a minute, but first: Here's a message from our friendly neighborhood cyberthug:

---full headers below---
So your silly little web site got taken down? couldn't have happened to a nicer C*NT.

Glad the information that was given to Diebold lended a helping hand in having your bullshit bad they haven't thrown you in jail yet (big emphasis on YET).

You sure are playing a dangerous game of chicken with the authorities. What will you tell your kids when mommy goes to prison?

Maybe you and Martha Stewart can share a prison cell?

X-Apparently-To: via; Fri, 26 Sep 2003 09:43:01 -0700
Received: from (EHLO ( by with SMTP; Fri, 26 Sep 2003 09:43:01 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with QMQP id 0757B1817715 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:43:01 +0000 (GMT)
Received: (qmail 9957 invoked from network); 26 Sep 2003 16:43:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ( by with SMTP; 26 Sep 2003 16:43:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 17634 invoked by uid 1001); 26 Sep 2003 16:42:59 -0000
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404) Received: from [] by with http for; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:42:59 +0800
From: "Michael Xiang"
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:42:59 +0800
Subject: Your Pathetic Web Site
Content-Length: 716

And this:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: a question
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:13:59 +0200
From: "Engeler, William"

"You can't hide much longer"


And there is much MORE ....

Yeah whatever.

Okay, so here's what you can do to help:

Get the word out far and wide that Diebold has done this thing. More info:

1. Diebold issued a pull-down demand under DMCA for the web site, citing a link posted on a forum in the site, claiming that the link allowed web visitors to visit an unrelated page, containing Diebold internal memos, which they say they own the copyright to.

2. Not only was pulled down, but ALL of the documents, databases and programming for approximately 500 pages of material, most of which did not relate to Diebold at all, was confiscated, upon the (incorrect) advice of a North Carolina attorney named James Baker. Dozens of web pages were pulled down which had nothing whatever to do with the disputed information. First, the offending item was a post in a forum which contained a link. Nothing in DMCA allows Diebold to abuse the law to pull down unrelated web pages, but this is the direct result of their threat. To make matters more egregious, we were then prohibited from accessing the ftp server even to retrieve our files in order to place them elsewhere. After David Allen, the publisher of Black Box Voting, negotiated with the ISP, they decided to ignore their attorney's advice and reinstate access to the ftp server, and we have secured a First Amendment attorney to force the reinstatement of the site itself.

3. The confiscated pages included personal contact information for 200 activists, and the private strategy sessions for voting machine activists. received no satisfactory explanation as to what authority they were confiscated under. We will demand a formal statement from the ISP that logs every single person who looked at them, accessed the files, or made copies of them.

"The .org site had an active discussion going on among people from all over the US and world about election security and flaws found in Diebold's voting system software. The idea that these discussion boards were confiscated is rather chilling. The discussions were password protected and not open for public view.

"In addition to the impact this action will have on the election security debate, it also may represent the first time the DMCA has been used to shut down a discussion. Although I don't know much about the DMCA, I do think it wasn't written with this kind of purpose in mind."

-- Kim Alexander, California Voter Foundation

Still more: Just grab This Link and scroll down.

::: Diebold Box Scandal :::

More info at Your Vote is Not Safe

Read about this a couple of months ago. Surely the moron mainstream press
did as well! To be "fair and balanced" I did hear one mention of it.

Bev Harris, who coincidentally is being sued by Diebold, continues to be vindicated for her investigative work into the flaws of that company's voting technology and software.
Additional background on this very important issue is available via unknown news.

This is especially FUN ~~ How Bush Is NOT Going To Steal The 2004 Election

Appendix A: Legalities (read: why Diebold isn't going to sue me)

First, let me explain that I fully "confess" that I am distributing Diebold copyrighted product on my website. And I was (and am) involved in the effort to strip the encryption from some of the ZIP archives downloaded from Diebold's FTP site.

So why am I not worried?

a) I believe all this falls under "fair use". I have a history of using the Public Records Act to expose government-related misconduct, corruption and general stupidity. See also: (the first time my reporting made Matt Drudge's site) (the second time Drudge picked my stuff up - note that Perata is a well-known rabidly anti-gun politician)

...and other examples.

b) Voting is a highly "public" function, and public scrutiny over the election process is a VERY well established area of law. There have been two lower court decisions in favor of the secrecy of electronic voting systems but first, I believe those decisions were wrong and second, in those cases no specific allegations of misconduct were presented - only theoretical issues.

c) In Diebold's case, misconduct is very, VERY well established. Good God, where do we start?

By Clicking this link! FUN ~~ How Bush Is NOT Going To Steal The 2004 Election

Wonder What Russia Thinks
Friday, September 26, 2003
::: Put A Terrorist In Your Tank :::

Super post from Writerific on the ridiculous goings on of the Prince of
Darkness, Spook-Cheney, OPEC (the REAL terrorists), the Robotic Wall Street
Motley Fools, more Secret Energy Bunker Musings, and loyal Americans sigh ...
"Gee, aren't we glad we have those smart guys up there in DC to hammer out
the really tough stuff.

Just wait until the public (asleep at the main switch, with cell phone to ear)
finds out how badly the pharmaceutical industry has screwed us. Talk about
"fear as a means of promoting your position." Heard today on the news,
warnings that Americans should be aware of the worrisome trend in the
drug industry ... terrorists could use RX drugs as a weapon!

Well, that has me in the mood to run outside and scream... see ya later.
::: Here is a Really Great Slide Show About Our Troops :::

No matter how we feel about how we got there, the told lies, the disappointment of being
made a fool once again ... politics be damned ...

We Will Always Support Our Troops.

::: Environmental Group Wants Cheney's Task Force Records :::
:::::::: This one is just a straight steal folks ... Granny ::::::::

Environmental Groups Want Records of Meetings with Polluters
t r u t h o u t | Statement
Sierra Club

Wednesday 24 September 2003

Bush Administration Nearing Deal To Weaken Clean Air, Toxics Protections
For Communities Near Factory Farms.Environmental Groups Seek Records
From Bush Administration's Closed-Door Meetings With Agricultural Polluters.

Washington, DC- Newly obtained documents from the Environmental Protection Agency reveal that the Bush Administration is formalizing a back-room deal with the livestock and poultry industries that would let giant factory farm polluters off the hook for violations of the Clean Air Act and the Superfund hazardous waste law that have protected communities for decades. With this new incriminating evidence in hand, the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment filed a lawsuit today under the Freedom of Information Act, demanding that the Bush Administration divulge information about its closed negotiations with the meat industry.

"Be it Vice President Cheney's Energy Task Force or this back-room deal for the meat and milk industries,the Bush Administration continues to let polluters write the rules while leaving the public out of the process," said Ken Midkiff of the Sierra Club.

In May, environmental groups obtained an industry letter documenting clandestine negotiations with the Bush Administration to shield giant factory farms from the requirements of the Clean Air Act and Superfund hazardous-waste laws. Since then, the Bush Administration has been working on a deal that would allow factory farms to continue polluting without any threat of prosecution.

The Bush Administration has rebuffed environmental groups' requests for information about the closed-door meetings, claiming that it has "not entered into any 'safe harbor' agreement." However, environmental groups recently obtained a copy of the supposedly non-existent agreement. According to that draft, the Administration would allow the meat and milk industries to ignore clean air and hazardous waste laws indefinitely, asking only that industry "monitor" its emissions.

The Bush Administration has persistently refused to address pollution from factory farms, which concentrate thousands of animals in a single location and release enormous quantities of harmful pollutants. And Utah Mike Leavitt, nominated by President Bush to head the Environmental Protection Agency, has a history of favoring polluting agricultural interests; as governor of Utah, Mr. Leavitt helped to pass a law preventing citizens from bringing state suits against agricultural businesses.

"Exempting animal factories from basic environmental laws like the Clean Air Act would put thousands of communities at risk," said Brent Newell of the Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment. "Instead of protecting those communities, the Bush Administration is working to protect polluters from the laws that safeguard the public welfare."

A copy of the draft agreement, the meat industry's memo proposing the amnesty agreement, the environmental groups request for enforcement actions, as well as other relevant documents can be found here.

Granny thinks the confirmation of Levitt bears watching. His responses on CSpan
a couple of nights ago were canned and empty at best. Me thinks they have
another Shill For Bush up for bids.

::: Poindexter Lurking In The Shadows??? :::
::: From Jim Krane - AP :::

Wednesday 23 September 2003

NEW YORK -- While privacy worries are frustrating the Pentagon's plans for a far-reaching database to combat terrorism, a similar project is quietly taking shape with the participation of more than a dozen states -- and $12 million in federal funds. The database project, created so states and local authorities can track would-be terrorists as well as criminal fugitives, is being built and housed in the offices of a private company but will be open to some federal law enforcers and perhaps even US intelligence agencies.

Dubbed Matrix, the database has been in use for a year and a half in Florida, where police praise the crime-fighting tool as nimble and exhaustive. It cross-references the state's driving records and restricted police files with billions of pieces of public and private data, including credit and property records.

They say that Matrix houses restricted police and government files on colossal databases that sit in the offices of Seisint Inc., a Boca Raton, Fla., company founded by a millionaire who police say flew planeloads of drugs into the country in the early 1980s.

"It's federally funded, it's guarded by state police but it's on private property? That's very interesting," said Christopher Slobogin, a University of Florida law professor and expert in privacy issues.

Hmmm........ Recon we could do a start up IPO on it ... or run a lottery? I'm in!
Thursday, September 25, 2003
::: United States Is Building Huge Spy-Ears In Iraq :::
::: Was Thinking I Heard This One Denied on CSpan? :::

You just have to see this ... United States building "spy-ears" in two locations ...
right out in the open ... which will probably be bombed immediately. Be sure to
check the photo from the Israeli DEBKA link below.... Amazing!!

And Lo .... Bremer a quick study in colony building.

"We are going to fight them and impose our will on them and we will capture or ... kill them until we have imposed law and order on this country. We dominate the scene and we will continue to impose our will on this country." This is US proconsul in Iraq Paul Bremer, speaking from Baghdad last Saturday.
Whatever the spin, and whatever the cost - at least in the short to medium term - in US casualties, the game plan remains to occupy and control Iraq for years. Iraqi sources inside the country and in Jordan and Egypt have confirmed information already circulated by the Israeli website (including a photo as well) DEBKA-Net-Weekly that the Americans are spending US $500 million to build two giant intelligence facilities: one north of Mosul, in Kurdish territory, and another in Baghdad's middle-class Saadun neighborhood on the Tigris River's east bank. This massive military presence may be a throwback to when the United States had a faithful regional gendarme, the Shah of Iran. But the facilities are necessary in order to enforce the economic agenda that really matters to Washington: the privatization of Iraq's economy and most of all the exploitation of its immense oil reserves.

From Israel's Debka-Net-Weekly ~~ American Snoopy

The new installations will greatly enhance America’s military, intelligence and electronic command and control over Iraq and its neighbors, notably Iran and Syria. The Mosul facility will guard northern Iraq’s oilfields and the pipelines carrying Iraqi gas and oil to Mediterranean terminals. Its instruments will reach into every corner of Iran and Syria, replacing America’s electronic eyes and ears in southern Turkey. This facility will be activated a section at a time according to need. Upon completion at the end of 2005, it will employ an operating staff of around 4,000 American intelligence personnel and electronic engineers.

***** Uh ... doesn't this sound like we might be staying a while?

DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Middle East sources report that the intelligence center going up near Mosul is causing much nervousness in Damascus and Tehran. Both governments understand that when the first sections are activated in three months time, not a single military or intelligence move of theirs will go unseen by America’s electronic spies – and that goes for terrorist activity as well.

The functions assigned the Baghdad station are different. While the Mosul center will provide early warning against external threats to the US military presence in Iraq, the Baghdad station will stand guard over America’s political and military control of the capital and its satellite towns, including the Sunni enclave cities of Falluja, Ramadi and Tikrit.
Once the Baghdad electronic station is up and running it will aid US forces in their fight against guerrilla and terrorist assailants picking off GIs almost every day. These assaults are harmful but they do not detract from the overall American control over security in the broad expanses of a large country. There is every indication that the US civil administrator Paul Bremer is gradually pulling ahead of the difficulties. His recipe is simple. No Iraqi associated in any way with the overthrown Saddam regime or the outlawed Baath party is to be allowed to take part in government. Bremer equally bars from public service all Iraqis with foreign political connections, even American.
::: What the Hey?? ::: Outrage :::
::: Witness Protection Programs :::

Ok, I give up!

What's up with these figures?

Iraqi Witness Protection Program = $100 Million allocation.

U. S. Witness Protection Program = $30 Million allocation.

Wow, they must have more exciting witnesses than we do! Or
it could be there are just MORE of them.

So ... the green eyed monster rears its ugly head.
Ok, what is up ... Comments have disappeared again!!
Now I really am pissed!!

Wednesday, September 24, 2003
::: The Latest Outrages :::
::: OR ::: A Granny Rant :::

Well, Granny is getting pissed (sorry, but it is true)!

Recently, I listened to Wolfowitz testify on Iraq and how the American people should
be willing to sacrifice for winning the peace. Well, sorry, but I blew a gasket upon
learning Pay Raises in Washington Would Proceed Like Clockwork.

I am pretty sure this was just after the politicians took off the entire month of August ~~
and I am also sure the soldiers in Iraq DID NOT get to take off the same period of

Rummy could have at least declared a congratulatory "End To Major Conflict in Iraq"
... Just for August, you understand! What would have been impressive is to have
Rumsfeld fast rope off a Black Hawk onto an American HumVee (minus the
D/U shielding) in the Sunni Triangle. But then again, I am pretty sure I heard, all during August, our troops were still dying on a daily basis in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Then ... Bush gets face time on TV last week to announce a bombshell request for
$87 Billion
for Iraq ... you know, for keeping up the military (that is fine!) and
a bit more ($20 Billion +) for various reconstruction projects.

Last week I also heard our wounded veterans, brought to Walter Reed Hospital
and treated for horrific injuries, including loss of limbs .... upon release are
presented with a $8.10 bill for food they consume for each day of their hospital stay.

The Official Story On The Food Bill ~~ No Less Disturbing

Plus ... Granny must be incredibly naive. I did not realize the soldiers had to pay for their
uniforms and apparently much more Just read below, or better still click the link:

"A uniform and boots cost $172.65. Add body armor for $1,620, a helmet for $322 and a load-bearing vest for $120.05.

Weiner said, "This will carry magazines of ammunition, grenades, and also canteens, first aid kit."

Nuclear, biological and chemical gear, including a gas mask, costs $341.75.

Weiner said, "This is the molie pack. This is to carry all of our gear - extra chow, extra clothes, extra ammunition."

Depending on the rifle they're carrying, it could cost around $700 apiece and walkie talkies are nearly $600. "

This is only the beginning. Consider the following:

***Returning vets who could be dealing with nightmares and visions of amputated limbs, heads
blown off, blood and guts strewn across the sand get this message from Bush: "Suck it up."
Funding for Post Tramatic Stress has been CUT.

***Military dependents normally covered under "Impact Aid," a program to help families
with the cost of having to move to a new area where schooling will be costly, will receive ZIP. Not funded!
George W. Whacks Aid For Military Children

"IF CYNICISM were a planet, the Bush administration would be Jupiter, the biggest of all.

These people have turned cynicism into political art, routinely claiming in public to be supportive of children, education, veterans, and other popular constituencies, while maneuvering in the back rooms to gut budgets and programs that support these very constituencies. An especially disgusting example is Bush's recent gut job on the program that provides essential school aid for the children of our troops. "

So now you get short changed because Granny is hungry!! Other rumors I have heard, but not had time to link:

*** Disabled Vets who receive pensions now have to deduct dollar for dollar from their
pensions what they receive for being disabled.
*** Combat and Hazard Pay Cut
*** Reserve Military families on wellfare.


::: Email From Dubya To Iraqi Person :::


Dear Iraqi Person,

Could y'all please stop killin' each other? The folks over here are startin' to
git madder than a feller in a canoe what done forgot his paddle! Wuts worse,
the more y'all keep tellin' folks on that com-putter thing-a-ma-bob wuts goin'
on down there, the more they don't pay no attention to my TV reporter guys on
Fox to tell 'em wut they need to know! Next thing ya know, I'll be out on my
butt come next eleckshun an' Daddy'll hafta start me another oil company so I
can look like I'm an important guy who is reely smart!

At the last meetin' I got to go to with Daddy & all his friends, Mr. Ashcroft
said wut we need to do is git Iraq some of them "Patriot Act" freedoms so we can
start lockin' more people up, but Mr. Powell told him to "keep it in his pants"
wut ever that means. Daddy & Mr. Cheney wuz laughin' an' havin a good ole time
cuz they just read some kind of profit paper fer Mr. Cheney's company that he
ain't sposed to work for anymore . uh.Halyberton or sumptin like that..Then they
wuz about to go inta whut we're gonna do in Iraq, but Mr. Cheney reminded Daddy
that it was my bed time, so I had to leave.

So, if ya'll could do me a favor, please stop all that killin' and when ya see
camera or reporter guys, just smile and tell'em just how much yer lives have
gotten better since us 'mericans came and liverated ya'll! Keep it up and Daddy
tells me after I'm re-elektid, we can liverate Iran & Syria next! Ain't that

Yer Bestest Buddy,

George W. Bush,

Pres. Of Texas & 'Merica

(Note: All spelling errors are original to the soon-to-be-unemployed chimp that
wrote them.)

Tuesday, September 23, 2003
::: Granny ~~~ What's Up? :::

Hi .... just wanted to stop by a second before work to say I am still alive
and kicking. Several items have cropped up on my agenda to keep me
from posting ... visiting grand kids, visiting parents, a minor buggie,
care of my sick doggie. Gaby the wonderhound is much better!

I have been listening and watching, though. Bush is on TV now at the
UN and I am afraid he will continue to be an ass, and repeat the same
"cowboy" rhetoric. Matter of fact, I can hear him doing so now.

What a silly toad!

Anyway, have been reading lots ... studying a huge download on the
history of Freemasonry, Illuminati and the Mormons. Whew ... quite a
project and am discovering many interesting things about these con-
nected groups.

Wow! It is difficult for me to believe our founding fathers we so tied in
with what boils down to occultism. But don't get me going this am --
no time.

Back soon! Granny

Just a P.S. here. I am NOT slamming the membership of the Masons. My
father was a Mason, wore the ring and I still have his beautiful Masonic

Monday, September 15, 2003
::: Don Wiley ::: Benito Que ::: Vladimir Pasechnik
:::Links To David Kelly Emerge In Microbiologists Deaths


Dr. David Kelly—the biological warfare weapons specialist at the heart of the continuing political crisis for the British government—had links to three other top microbiologists whose deaths have left unanswered questions.
The two American scientists he had worked with were Benito Que, 52, and Don Wiley, 57.Both microbiologists had been engaged in DNA sequencing that could provide “a genetic marker based on genetic profiling.” The research could play an important role in developing weaponized pathogens to hit selected groups of humans—identifying them by race. Two years ago, both men were found dead, in circumstances never fully explained.

In November 2001, Que left his laboratory after receiving a telephone call. Shortly afterward he was found comatose in the parking lot of the Miami Medical School. He died without regaining consciousness.

Police said he had suffered a heart attack. His family insisted he had been in perfect health and claimed four men attacked him. But, later, oddly, the family inquest returned a verdict of death by natural causes. Many questions remain about Que’s death.

Who was the mystery caller who sent Que hurrying from his lab hours before he was scheduled to leave? What attempts did the police make to track the four mystery men—after admitting Que was the “probable” victim of an attempt to steal his car? What were his links to the U.S. Department of Defense? What happened to his sensitive research into DNA sequencing? How close were his connections to Kelly?

A few days after Que died, Wiley disappeared off a bridge spanning the Mississippi River. He had just left a banquet for fellow researchers in Memphis.

Weeks later, Wiley’s body was found 300 miles down river. As with Que, his family said he was in perfect health. There was no autopsy. The local medical examiner returned a verdict of accidental death. It was suggested he had a dizzy spell and fell off the bridge. Again, there remain many unanswered questions concerning Wiley’s demise.

Why did Wiley park his car on the bridge? Why did he leave the keys in the ignition and his lights on? Why was Wiley’s car facing in the opposite direction from his father’s house, which was only a short distance away? What happened to his research into DNA sequencing? How close were his connections to Kelly?
The death of a third microbiologist—Vladimir Pasechnik, 64 —has left even more questions.
On Nov. 16, 2001, Pasechnik was found dead in bed—10 days after he and Wiley had met in Boston to discuss the latest developments in DNA sequencing.

Kelly, with government approval, had helped Pasechnik create Regma Biotechnologies. Regma was allowed to set up a laboratory in Porton Down.

It was only a month later that Christopher Davis, a former MI6 officer and a specialist in DNA sequencing as a potential weapon, announced Pasechnik’s death.

Davis had retired from MI6 and settled in Great Falls, Va. He confirmed to a reporter that Pasechnik was dead—from a stroke—a month after the microbiologist had been buried.

Details of the postmortem were not revealed at an inquest, in which the press was given no prior notice. Colleagues who had worked with Pasechnik said he was in good health.

Why was it left to Davis to announce Pasechnik’s death? Who authorized the announcement? Did an MI6 pathologist conduct the autopsy, as one source close to the service claims? Why did Pasechnik continue to visit Porton Down up to a week before his death? Who authorized his security clearance to enter one of the most restricted establishments in Britain?
Kelly’s links to the Institute of Biological Research in the Tel Aviv suburb of Nes Zions are also intriguing.

His connection to the secret biological plant began in October 2001, shortly after a commercial flight en route from Israel to Novosibirsk in Siberia was blown up over the Black Sea by a Ukrainian surface-to-air missile.

All on board the flight were killed, including five Russian microbiologists returning to their research institute in Novosibirsk—a city known as the scientific capital of Siberia. It has 50 facilities and 13 universities.
Ok folks, we have been down this road before, but there were More Dead Scientists.

Looks like it will be more difficult in the future to recruit Microbiologists!
Sunday, September 14, 2003
:::Radioactive Iraq ::: Shock & Awe People :::

And one of the most shocking aspects is how radioactive Iraq is at present.

Not only are we gifting the Iraqis with a slow cancer death, we are also pinning that medal on the chests of out troops.

::: Rumsfeld Under Fire :::

Criticism Mounts With Costs, Casualties

I have noticed Rummy has been looking a bit drawn lately. He is funny at
times (even though I know he is a person who is not concerned with the
American people's interest) and I am now thinking of his appearance on
one of the cable channels while in Iraq and taking questions. He had his
earphones in and dangli9ng down and a reporter asked him a question.
He said, "What, where is the translation?" The fellow next to him said,
"there is no translation, it is in English." Rummy was suitably sheepish.

Rumsfeld has rankled many in the military with his aggressive style and far-reaching agenda for "transforming" the military, even as he has won acclaim for his leadership of the Pentagon through the trauma of the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the building and ensuing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the war on terrorism. Now, less than five months after he helped formulate and execute a bold plan in which a U.S. invasion force drove to Baghdad and toppled the Iraqi government in 21 days, Rumsfeld is facing his greatest challenge yet.

Having demanded full authority for overseeing the occupation and reconstruction of Iraq, elbowing the State Department aside, Rumsfeld is being blamed by many in Congress and the military establishment for the problems facing the United States, which include mounting U.S. casualties and costs exceeding $1 billion a week.
Rumsfeld appears to be losing ground most dramatically on Capitol Hill, where even some conservative Republicans are expressing concern about his handling of Iraq. "Winning the peace is a lot different than winning the war," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who counts himself as a strong Rumsfeld supporter but notes that not all his colleagues feel the same. "His bluntness comes across as arrogance, and he's made some enemies on Capitol Hill, probably because of style differences," said Graham, an Air Force veteran who serves on the Armed Services Committee.

Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), the panel's chairman, struck a decidedly cool note when asked how Rumsfeld is doing. "Understandably we have some differences," he said Friday in a written response. "However, I consistently work with Secretary Rumsfeld to support the president and the men and women of the armed forces, and have a high regard for his integrity and forcefulness."
Robert McNamara for four years of Vietnam going down the toilet was absolutely convinced with a religious zeal that what he was doing was the right thing," said Thomas E. White, a retired Army general who was fired as Army secretary this year by Rumsfeld. "It wasn't until 30 years later that it dawned on him that he was dead wrong. And I think you have the same thing with Don Rumsfeld."
Yet, the difficulties in Iraq have diminished Rumsfeld's standing within the administration, according to people familiar with its inner workings, with a reduction in Rumsfeld's operating latitude. Unhappiness with Rumsfeld's freewheeling style -- he has been known to interject himself in issues usually considered beyond the purview of a secretary of defense -- had been building within parts of the administration, officials said.

But it was the Pentagon's handling of postwar Iraq that really hurt Rumsfeld's position, according to some administration officials.
Unhappiness with Rumsfeld flared on Capitol Hill months before the invasion of Iraq, when Warner stood up at a meeting of Republican senators with White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. and complained that Rumsfeld was neither cooperating nor consulting with the Senate. Warner told Card that he had never seen anything like it in 25 years in the Senate.
"I think his legislative affairs shop is awful," said one Republican senator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "It serves him so poorly. Don Rumsfeld can't be personally blamed for all of that. But the combination of personality, which some people find condescending and prickly and a little offensive -- Rumsfeld himself doesn't have any time for criticismand the fact that the groundwork hasn't been laid by a good legislative affairs staff, has created some problems."
Retired Marine Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, a former head of the U.S. Central Command who also served the Bush administration as Middle East envoy, sharply criticized the Pentagon's handling of postwar Iraqin a speech before the U.S. Naval Institute and the Marine Corps Association 10 days ago. He received an enthusiastic response from hundreds of military officers present.

In the Army, there are worries that the Iraq occupation could do long-term damage to the service. Of the 10 active-duty Army divisions, nine will have all or parts deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan this year or next.
He is absolutely convinced that he is right, that his view is correct, so all the rest of this stuff that is floating around is kind of noise, a lot of which he just dismisses out of hand, or he rationalizes somehow as consistent with this plan of his," White said.

Robert S. Gelbard, a former U.S. diplomat with experience in several peacekeeping operations, said he is puzzled by Rumsfeld's insistence that no additional troops are needed to improve security in Iraq. "What's hard to figure out is the continued adamant statements that there's no need for additional troops," he said. "That is utterly perplexing, given the security situation there."

Saturday, September 13, 2003
::::: Cheney's Energy Pirates :::::
::: Behind Schwarzenegger Recall Hoax :::

The very same Dick Cheney-Enron energy pirates who ripped off the people of California during the 2000-01 so-called energy crisis, are now out to loot the state once again--under the guise of the "recall Davis" referendum, and the candidacy of the man Lyndon LaRouche refers to as the "overpriced geek act," Arnold Schwarzenegger.

While the rationale behind the drive to recall Gov. Gray Davis is that he drove the state into a $38 billion deficit, EIR has systematically exposed (see chronology, below) that California was robbed blind by Enron, Reliant, Williams Energy, and the whole crowd of energy pirates, who criminally conspired and profiteered off energy deregulation, while virtually destroying the U.S. electric power grid.

Cheney to California: Go to Hell

The looting of California by the energy pirates, led by Enron, Dynegy, Reliant, and Williams, was already under way when George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were sworn in as President and Vice President in January 2001. But that was nothing, compared to the White House-sanctioned looting once they were in office. In 2000-01, California's annual energy bill went from $7 billion to $28 billion, as a result of deregulation and the unbridled price manipulations brought on by California's passage of energy deregulation in 1996 to take effect in 2000.
As soon as Bush-Cheney took office, they delivered a message to Californians: Go to Hell! President Bush announced a one-time-only, two-week extension of Clinton's emergency order forcing power-merchant companies to sell power to the near-bankrupt California utilities.

Vice President Cheney, appointed to head up the Administration's energy task force on day eight of the Bush Presidency, candidly told reporters the emergency order would not be renewed, and the Bush Administration would not lift a finger to help California to counter the energy pirates. "I'm a believer in markets," he babbled. "I think the notion of deregulation is basically sound. What happened in California, it was poorly executed."

Never mind Cheney's own lucrative career as CEO of the energy firm Halliburton; never mind that Enron was the largest corporate contributor to the Bush-Cheney campaign, and the other energy pirates were right behind Enron in bidding for Administration favor.
By March 2001, the piracy by the energy companies had reached the point that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), although dominated by dereg backers, had to launch a confidential probe into price manipulations by Williams Energy and Reliant. [..]

The fines were a slap on the wrist, as Williams' profits soared by 172% in the first quarter of 2001, and Reliant's jumped by 104%--largely due to the scalping of California.

All told, from the 2000-01 crisis to the present, California has been robbed of a sum greater than the current $38 billion state deficit!

Dick, Arnie, and Ken Conspire

The Cheney energy task force was a rubber stamp for Enron and the other energy pirates, who virtually wrote the text of the group's report, which was rushed to release on May 16, 2001 (a new General Accounting Office report assails Cheney for keeping the entire effort secret--see accompanying article). [..]

Cheney also spat on California in a PBS "Frontline" interview after the report was unveiled, coldly denying that the energy giants were functioning as a cartel. "The problem you had in California," Cheney lied, "was caused by a combination of things--an unwise regulatory scheme, because they didn't really deregulate. [..]

In April 2001, Cheney had met with Enron's chief executive, Kenneth Lay, a member of the Pioneers group of Bush campaign mega-contributors, who presented the Vice President with a memo laying out eight proposals. Seven of the eight, all promoting radical deregulation, were adopted almost verbatim in the Cheney report. Lay reportedly also pressured Cheney to ensure that his report made little mention of California. Cheney obliged.

In April 2001, Cheney had met with Enron's chief executive, Kenneth Lay, a member of the Pioneers group of Bush campaign mega-contributors, who presented the Vice President with a memo laying out eight proposals. Seven of the eight, all promoting radical deregulation, were adopted almost verbatim in the Cheney report. Lay reportedly also pressured Cheney to ensure that his report made little mention of California. Cheney obliged.

[..] Jason Leopold recently revealed that on May 24, 2001--one week after the Cheney report's release--Lay held a secret meeting at the Peninsula Hotel in Beverly Hills, to organize a group of GOP bigshots and Hollywood celebs to join his propaganda push against Davis, and peddle Enron's schemes for accelerated looting of the state through even more drastic deregulation.

Among the attendees: former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, infamous Drexel Burnham junk bond felon Michael Milken--and Arnold Schwarzenegger! The attendees were given a proposal titled "Comprehensive Solution for California." One key feature was that all state and Federal probes into Enron's role in the California energy crisis should immediately be shut down.

Lay knew Enron was dying, despite robbing California blind--the firm would file for bankruptcy Dec. 2, 2001[..]

Just before that meeting, on April 15, 2001, the New York Times reported on a meeting between "Bush political advisors" and the Terminator, to discuss a gubernatorial run. White House chief political advisor Karl Rove was quoted saying that a Schwarzenegger run "would be nice. That would be really, really nice. That would be really, really, really nice." In fact, Arnie had been at the White House, meeting with Rove, on April 12.

Lord Jacob's Dark Age Soire

While Schwarzenegger declined to run against Davis in 2002, he was being groomed by a much bigger group of financier pirates for some political slot. On Sept. 23, 2002, amid the Washington-London mobilization for war against Iraq, Arnold accompanied speculator Warren Buffett to a gathering at the Waddesdon Manor estate of Lord Jacob Rothschild in Britain. London Times correspondent Anatole Kaletsky, a guest at the European Economic Roundtable conference, co-sponsored by Buffett and Rothschild, wrote about the "dark age" gathering in a column on Sept. 26.

By Kaletsky's account, the meeting aimed at giving the elite financiers a preview of the hell to come, as Cheney and British Prime Minister Tony Blair steered their governments into a string of perpetual wars, starting in the Mideast, but soon to engulf Eurasia. "The apocalyptic tone was set by a hair-raising discussion of the Middle East," Kaletsky wrote.
[..] After dealing with Iraq, the pressure for 'regime change' would shift to Iran, then Saudi Arabia, Syria and Pakistan... As if an ever-expanding war were not bad enough, the economic outlook presented to the gathered plutocrats was even grimmer, since it was not overlaid with the blustering confidence of the Washington war party.... The economic experts--including James Wolfensohn, president of the World Bank, Paul Volcker, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, and, of course Buffett himself--all emphasized the impotence of monetary and fiscal policy after the collapse of one of the greatest speculative bubbles of all time. [..]

In July 2000, a somewhat less elite collection of financiers, technocrats, and politicians than those assembled by Lord Jacob at his British manor, had gathered at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City, to anoint George W. Bush and Al Gore as Wall Street/London-vetted Presidential candidates, because both men would hand financial crisis management to the Federal Reserve and the banks.

According to accounts by Reuters and the Scotsman,>b> the Waddesdon Manor event similarly vetted the Terminator as the man for this season of wars and financial catastrophes.

Enter George Shultz

To make clear that Schwarzenegger is out to rape California in the tradition of Dick Cheney's Enron: On the opening day of his quest for the governor's mansion, Schwarzenegger showed up with his new chief campaign economic advisor, George Shultz, the man who installed Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle as top campaign policy wonks for George W. Bush, and who in 1971 was the official who convinced President Nixon to end the Bretton Woods system, thus triggering more than 30 years of global speculative looting and physical economic breakdown.

In recent years, Shultz, while retaining his status as director of the Bechtel Corp. (a key benefactor, along with Halliburton, of the Bush-Cheney Iraq War), has become a celebrity in his own right-- by peddling the legalization of drugs and the total deregulation of the global financial system. Not even the International Monetary Fund would survive Shultz's axe. He proposes a totally Darwinian global financial system, in which only the fittest would survive. Perhaps Shultz should take a second look at his new protege, since many years of steroid abuse have turned his Mr. Universe legendary pectorals into flabby feminine breasts.

Thursday, September 11, 2003
::: NeoCons Near The Edge of The BushCliff :::
::: Or ::: What Is Up At PNAC? :::

It seems I am hearing criticism of Dubya, Rummy, Cheney or someone
"up there" in power. Could this be part of the White House Wars
we have been hearing about?

More Troops for Iraq

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld says that, on the security front in Iraq, "it seems to me that the trajectory we're on is a good one." But it is hard to find anyone else who agrees with that assessment. Certainly not the British - who now are thinking about increasing their force levels in Iraq. Certainly not the Shiites - who, for lack of security, are now discussing how to reconstitute their own militias. Certainly not even U.S. commanders - who, if you listen carefully to what they are saying, admit that there are not enough front-line troops to handle what needs to be done in Iraq.

Secretary Rumsfeld's response is that we need to turn things over to the Iraqis as soon as possible. Sounds fine in theory or even over the long run. Yet there is no way to train a large, effective and loyal Iraqi force in the time frame required. Despite this reality, the secretary resists any idea that more U.S. troops are needed
But the reality remains that, while the situation in Iraq is not as dire as many of the president's most fearsome critics suggest, we do face a serious security problem there. With a sound strategy and adequate resources, it can be addressed. However, it can't be if we pretend the problem doesn't exist or ask others to carry out tasks that only the U.S. and its allies can reliably accomplish.

More From The New American Century Guys

Gerecht on Post-Saddam Iraq

I would like to draw your attention to the following piece (“Help Not Wanted”) by Reuel Marc Gerecht in this week’s Weekly Standard. Gerecht, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and senior fellow at the Project, argues that “internationalizing” Iraq’s reconstruction will make the democratic transformation of the nation more difficult, not less.

“In the Muslim Middle East, in the age of bin Ladenism, where the rulers and ruled are constantly assessing American strength and purpose, multilateralism, when it is so evidently cover for a lack of patience and fortitude, is never a virtue….When Washington talks about the need to share the pain, what these men hear is that America wants to run.”

Gerecht ~~ Weekly Standard

The organizing principle behind the American occupation of Iraq, so advises a chorus of influential voices, ought to be the foreign policy equivalent of financially syndicating risk. America's budget deficit is too big, the costs of administering and reconstructing Iraq too high, and the killing of U.S. soldiers in the country too frequent for the United States to bear alone the burden of transforming Iraq into a stable, democratic country. A recent post-conflict reconstruction report issued under the auspices of the Center for Strategic and International Studies asserts that "the scope of the challenges, the financial requirements, and rising anti-Americanism in parts of Iraq argue for a new coalition that includes countries and organizations beyond the original war-fighting coalition."
Irrespective of whether we should seek to have Europeans, Pakistanis, or Indians dying with or in lieu of Americans, irrespective of whether murderous hard-core Baathists and Sunni fundamentalists would feel less "occupied" and less murderous seeing Turks in their country, and irrespective of whether the economically stressed, antiwar countries of the European Union would actually give meaningful financial aid to Iraq, the idea of a "new coalition" to oversee the reconstruction of Iraq is entirely unwise. It would probably encourage the worst political and cultural tendencies among Iraqis, even among those who are profoundly pro-Western. It could easily send a signal throughout the Middle East and beyond that the Bush administration doesn't have the stomach to transform Iraq, let alone the region.
Just consider the difficulties the Bush administration has had pre- and post-war because of the profound and petty differences between the State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Pentagon. Though diminished, those differences persist. And they have had at times baleful repercussions for the post-Saddam administration of Iraq, confusing Iraqis about what American intentions really are. Now imagine layered on top of this U.S. debating society Europeans, Arabs, Pakistanis, and so on, all with their own national and cultural predilections.

It ought to be self-evident that Washington would not want any military or security assistance from any Muslim state that is not a functioning democracy, which essentially rules out everyone but Turkey. The Arab Sunni states, all ruled by dictators or princes, have to varying degrees an interest in not seeing a stable, democratic, Shiite-dominated Iraq born in their midst. America's toppling of Saddam Hussein may possibly provoke an intellectual and political earthquake in the Middle East, but we can be certain that the states of the Arab League, which refused to recognize the legitimacy of Iraq's new governing council, will try hard to preserve the status quo. And the Turks have an awful reputation in Iraq, both among the Kurds, who have long-standing ethnic troubles with their northern neighbors, and among the Arab Shia, especially their clergy, who see the Turks as propagators of a secularism hostile to Islam. The Bush administration went to great lengths to keep the Turks out of northern Iraq during the war. Having Turkish soldiers at Iraqi street corners would be one of the swiftest ways of torpedoing the country.
None of this means, however, that the Iraqis who detest the French or the Russians or the United Nations would fail to use any of these parties against the American administration in Iraq if by doing so they could advance their own interests. The process of drafting Iraq's new constitution over the next 12 months may turn out to be a bruising affair, as the various groups in the country try to advance their concerns. This battling will likely be healthy, revealing the seriousness of the Iraqis' constitutional intent. The Arab Sunnis, Arab Shia, and Kurds could naturally try to introduce outside parties into the internal Iraqi debate to gain advantage or protect their flanks. The United States is going to have a discreet (one hopes), front-row, judge-and-jury seat. The U.S. officials who oversee this affair may be tested severely, as the Iraqis wrangle among themselves about what belongs in a constitution.

Hmmmm .......... these fellows are a riot!
::: September 11 :::

Spinning Sept. 11 Into a Useful Political Ploy

It amazes me how shallow the scar tissue protecting me from
the vast well of emotional shock and sadness really is. With
a few mere images, backed by hearfelt, well performed ballads,
my eyes burn again with tears.

The sorrow is just below the surface and I wonder how long
that will be true. Perhaps is will be ever so.

Yet .... this is true as well

It's two years since we counted planes — one, two, three, four — as they crashed into one tower and then another, and then the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania soil. Two years since we stopped in our daily tracks, gasps replacing the ordinary hum of a back-to-school morning, shock trumping every other emotion except horror. And fear.

Of course, everything did not change. Eventually, we used up the duct tape, put away the gas masks and ate the emergency supply of granola bars. But we retained that muscle memory of the world as a dangerous place in which we are high-risk patients.
The day, with its emotional scars and lessons, is being manipulated, handcuffed to the "war on terrorism." Nearly every battle, every action, every foreign policy, every call to follow the leader, is justified — no, sanctified — in the name of Sept. 11.
Did you read the story about a young Florida woman who was determined to sew a quilt for the family of every American soldier who died in the Iraq War? As the death toll rose to over 300, she remained committed to her kindness and to the war. "We have to stay there as long as it takes and take care of it once and for all," she explained. "No one wants another Sept. 11."

When does the small, repeated exploitation of this belief become the big lie? What do we make of a patriotism of fear?

::: President Dean & Vice President Clark :::

Well, whaddaya think?

Published on Thursday, September 11, 2003 by the Washington Post

Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean has asked retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark to join his campaign.
Clark, in a telephone interview yesterday, said he did not want to comment about the private meeting. Asked about reports that the two men had discussed a wide range of issues, including endorsing Dean, joining the campaign, possible roles in a Dean administration and the vice presidency, he said only, "It was a complete tour of the horizon."

Later, an adviser quoted Clark as saying, "I have only one decision to make: Will I seek the presidency?"

It was the fourth time Dean and Clark have met face-to-face to discuss the campaign. No decisions were made at the California meeting because Clark is still considering a run for president. Clark is scheduled to make a speech Sept.19 at the University of Iowa, when many political insiders expect him to announce his intentions.
Last week, Dean said the United States should not "take sides" in the Middle East conflict and said that an "enormous" number of Israeli settlements would have to be dismantled as part of a peace agreement. Yesterday, Dean shifted course, saying the settlements should be left to negotiators.

The governor's original comments angered a number of Jewish leaders and drew rebukes from two rivals, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.). Dean came under fire yesterday from a group of House Democrats for his comments on the Middle East. "This is not a time to be sending mixed messages," the Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), wrote to Dean.

Hmmmm ... well ... I thought it was brave of Dean to speak his mind. (Perhaps a possible negative career move, though) . The Israelis and Palestinians are never going to get it together if the negotiators don't get some backbone and insist on both sides towing the line and following the road map.

::: Who Is Counting The Dead In Iraq? :::
::: From Helen Thomas Her-Own-Self :::

The Pentagon has meticulously reported the American fatality toll in Iraq, now up to 286. That number includes 183 deaths from hostile fire since the start of the war. It also includes 148 dead since May 1 when President Bush declared the end of major combat operations. A Pentagon spokesman said that 1,105 U.S. service personnel have been wounded since the war began.
On March 18, two days before the U.S. invasion, Barbara Bush had an interview with ABC-TV's Diane Sawyer.

''Why should we hear about body bags and deaths and how many, what day it's gonna happen?'' Mrs. Bush declared. ''It's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?'' Maybe she is right, but I don't think so.

Hmmmm ..... This woman is our President's MOM ... just thought I would remind you!
Helen continues ....

I asked Pentagon officials: ''How many Iraqis have been killed in this war?'' The answers were given ''on background'' -- meaning that the Pentagon spokesmen requested anonymity. The spokesmen were honest. They clearly were following orders from the policymakers when they replied that the Iraqi fatality toll was simply not our concern.

The reply to my first Pentagon call was: ``We don't track them (Iraqi dead).''

Weeks later I pursued the question and was told by a Defense Department official: ''They don't count. They are not important,'' meaning the casualty figures.

You cannot make this stuff up!!
Wednesday, September 10, 2003
::: Bush Again Folks ~~ Witness :::
::: Executive Order 13290 :::

Read it and Ponder ...

::: From The Brits - ::: A Comprehensive Look At 9/11
::: And The Bogus War On Terror :::

The 9/11 attacks gave the US an ideal pretext to use force to secure its global domination

Honestly people, this one is so well put together, I hate to leave any out, but I will try to leave some out ... these NeoCons and BushBoys not only followed their PNAC blueprint for oil grabbing and setting up the new global U.S. Empire ... they are even talking about regime change in China. Damned arrogant, if you ask me.

Oh ... and don't forget Bush Sr.'s reference to OFU ... that equals One Fodder Unit or Ordinary American.

Meacher does an excellent job on the piece and depending on which article or blog you read, Meacher resigned. ....... OR ....... Mecher was Sacked

Meacher Speaks

Massive attention has now been given - and rightly so - to the reasons why Britain went to war against Iraq. But far too little attention has focused on why the US went to war, and that throws light on British motives too.
We now know that a blueprint for the creation of a global Pax Americana was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice-president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), Jeb Bush (George Bush's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences, was written in September 2000 by the neoconservative think tank, Project for the New American Century (PNAC).
The PNAC blueprint supports an earlier document attributed to Wolfowitz and Libby which said the US must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role". It refers to key allies such as the UK as "the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership". It describes peacekeeping missions as "demanding American political leadership rather than that of the UN". It says "even should Saddam pass from the scene", US bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait will remain permanently... as "Iran may well prove as large a threat to US interests as Iraq has". It spotlights China for "regime change", saying "it is time to increase the presence of American forces in SE Asia".
The document also calls for the creation of "US space forces" to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent "enemies" using the internet against the US. It also hints that the US may consider developing biological weapons "that can target specific genotypes [and] may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool".

Finally - written a year before 9/11 - it pinpoints North Korea, Syria and Iran as dangerous regimes, and says their existence justifies the creation of a "worldwide command and control system". This is a blueprint for US world domination. But before it is dismissed as an agenda for rightwing fantasists, it is clear it provides a much better explanation of what actually happened before, during and after 9/11 than the global war on terrorism thesis. This can be seen in several ways.

First, it is clear the US authorities did little or nothing to pre-empt the events of 9/11. It is known that at least 11 countries provided advance warning to the US of the 9/11 attacks. Two senior Mossad experts were sent to Washington in August 2001 to alert the CIA and FBI to a cell of 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation (Daily Telegraph, September 16 2001). The list they provided included the names of four of the 9/11 hijackers, none of whom was arrested.

All of this makes it all the more astonishing - on the war on terrorism perspective - that there was such slow reaction on September 11 itself. The first hijacking was suspected at not later than 8.20am, and the last hijacked aircraft crashed in Pennsylvania at 10.06am. Not a single fighter plane was scrambled to investigate from the US Andrews airforce base, just 10 miles from Washington DC, until after the third plane had hit the Pentagon at 9.38 am. Why not? ...
Nor is the US response after 9/11 any better. No serious attempt has ever been made to catch Bin Laden. In late September and early October 2001, leaders of Pakistan's two Islamist parties negotiated Bin Laden's extradition to Pakistan to stand trial for 9/11. However, a US official said, significantly, that "casting our objectives too narrowly" risked "a premature collapse of the international effort if by some lucky chance Mr Bin Laden was captured". The US chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Myers, went so far as to say that "the goal has never been to get Bin Laden" (AP, April 5 2002). The whistleblowing FBI agent Robert Wright told ABC News (December 19 2002) that FBI headquarters wanted no arrests. And in November 2001 the US airforce complained it had had al-Qaida and Taliban leaders in its sights as many as 10 times over the previous six weeks, but had been unable to attack because they did not receive permission quickly enough (Time Magazine, May 13 2002). None of this assembled evidence, all of which comes from sources already in the public domain, is compatible with the idea of a real, determined war on terrorism.

The catalogue of evidence does, however, fall into place when set against the PNAC blueprint. From this it seems that the so-called "war on terrorism" is being used largely as bogus cover for achieving wider US strategic geopolitical objectives. Indeed Tony Blair himself hinted at this when he said to the Commons liaison committee: "To be truthful about it, there was no way we could have got the public consent to have suddenly launched a campaign on Afghanistan but for what happened on September 11" (Times, July 17 2002). Similarly Rumsfeld was so determined to obtain a rationale for an attack on Iraq that on 10 separate occasions he asked the CIA to find evidence linking Iraq to 9/11; the CIA repeatedly came back empty-handed (Time Magazine, May 13 2002).

In fact, 9/11 offered an extremely convenient pretext to put the PNAC plan into action. The evidence again is quite clear that plans for military action against Afghanistan and Iraq were in hand well before 9/11. A report prepared for the US government from the Baker Institute of Public Policy stated in April 2001 that "the US remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma. Iraq remains a destabilising influence to... the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East". Submitted to Vice-President Cheney's energy task group, the report recommended that because this was an unacceptable risk to the US, "military intervention" was necessary (Sunday Herald, October 6 2002).

Similar evidence exists in regard to Afghanistan. The BBC reported (September 18 2001) that Niaz Niak, a former Pakistan foreign secretary, was told by senior American officials at a meeting in Berlin in mid-July 2001 that "military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October". Until July 2001 the US government saw the Taliban regime as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of hydrocarbon pipelines from the oil and gas fields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean. But, confronted with the Taliban's refusal to accept US conditions, the US representatives told them "either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs" (Inter Press Service, November 15 2001).

Given this background, it is not surprising that some have seen the US failure to avert the 9/11 attacks as creating an invaluable pretext for attacking Afghanistan in a war that had clearly already been well planned in advance. There is a possible precedent for this. The US national archives reveal that President Roosevelt used exactly this approach in relation to Pearl Harbor on December 7 1941. Some advance warning of the attacks was received, but the information never reached the US fleet. The ensuing national outrage persuaded a reluctant US public to join the second world war. Similarly the PNAC blueprint of September 2000 states that the process of transforming the US into "tomorrow's dominant force" is likely to be a long one in the absence of "some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor". The 9/11 attacks allowed the US to press the "go" button for a strategy in accordance with the PNAC agenda which it would otherwise have been politically impossible to implement.

The overriding motivation for this political smokescreen is that the US and the UK are beginning to run out of secure hydrocarbon energy supplies. By 2010 the Muslim world will control as much as 60% of the world's oil production and, even more importantly, 95% of remaining global oil export capacity. As demand is increasing, so supply is decreasing, continually since the 1960s

This is leading to increasing dependence on foreign oil supplies for both the US and the UK. The US, which in 1990 produced domestically 57% of its total energy demand, is predicted to produce only 39% of its needs by 2010. A DTI minister has admitted that the UK could be facing "severe" gas shortages by 2005. The UK government has confirmed that 70% of our electricity will come from gas by 2020, and 90% of that will be imported. In that context it should be noted that Iraq has 110 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves in addition to its oil.

A report from the commission on America's national interests in July 2000 noted that the most promising new source of world supplies was the Caspian region, and this would relieve US dependence on Saudi Arabia. To diversify supply routes from the Caspian, one pipeline would run westward via Azerbaijan and Georgia to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. Another would extend eastwards through Afghanistan and Pakistan and terminate near the Indian border. This would rescue Enron's beleaguered power plant at Dabhol on India's west coast, in which Enron had sunk $3bn investment and whose economic survival was dependent on access to cheap gas.

Guess that Enron thing didn't pan out ... heard today the first of the Enron Criminals did the "perp walk" today.

Terrific article. It would be wise to click in and read the small portion I managed to leave out. Just could not help myself!
::: Bush To New Yorkers: Drop Dead :::

WOW Straight from TruthOut ... my fav!

The White House directly interfered with planned Environmental Protection Agency warnings about the toxic fallout from the World Trade Center explosions. It had "competing considerations" that came before protecting the health of the people of New York. Among them were re-opening the stock exchange as quickly as possible, and limiting clean-up costs and liability claims.

Because of Bush's lies, thousands of Americans will suffer cancers, emphysema, heart attack, stroke, birth defects, stillbirths, sterility, eye/ear/nose/throat disease and much more.

There have been few toxic events to match the explosions that pulverized the two World Trade Center towers. The short-term deaths of three thousand people will be dwarfed over the long term by the lethal fallout.

These were two of the last big buildings constructed with asbestos, whose health effects are infamous. Once ingested, the fibers can and do make cells cancerous. Thousands of miners and others exposed to asbestos have filed lawsuits against Johns-Manville and others.

The EPA knew that spewing all that asbestos into New York's air was a horrific event, and that lives could be saved by taking certain public precautions. Bush stopped that from happening.

The WTC also contained countless computer screens, light fixtures, calculators, telephones, network servers, paging systems, copy machines and much more high-tech office equipment laden with mercury and other toxic metals. The concrete, flooring, plastics, chemical cleaners, furniture, metal struts, window glass---all that was also pulverized into a horrific brew of murderous dioxins, furans and lethal powders with hideous killing power.

Where did it all come down? Who has breathed it? How many were elderly? Who might be uniquely sensitive? How many were pregnant, with vulnerable embryos? How far did their lethal powder spread through the region? Where is it now? How long will those poisons kill again and again and yet again? What could be done to prevent further sickness and death?

::: Bush Aides Admit Missteps on Iraq :::

Under and Over Estimates

One day after President Bush gave the nation a cautious view of rebuilding efforts in Iraq, senior administration officials for the first time acknowledged that they vastly underestimated the damage to the country's infrastructure and greatly overestimated the amount of oil revenue that could be used to help rebuild the war-torn country.

So is ... "Ooopps ... what Americans get?

In April, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told Congress that revenue from Iraqi oil would be $50 billion to $100 billion over a two- to three-year period and would cover a substantial portion of U.S. costs to rebuild the country. But yesterday, in a briefing with reporters, senior administration officials said the revenue will be nowhere near that high.

"Any sort of estimates in this kind of situation are very difficult, particularly so in a country like Iraq that had so little clear visibility to the outside world on everything that was going on," said one of the administration officials, speaking on the condition he not be named. "So I think it is fair to say that the level of decay and underinvestment in the Iraqi infrastructure was worse than almost anyone on the outside anticipated."
Of the $87 billion Bush asked for on Sunday night, $21 billion would go to rebuild the infrastructures of Afghanistan and Iraq. Administration officials said Iraq would get the lion's share of that $21 million. The final $66 billion would cover the military costs of occupying both countries. Iraq again is the heavy focus, with $51 billion slated to be spent on the military there.

Personally, I want to know where every penny goes, don't you?
::: Just General Ramblings :::

Does anyone else wonder why Bush, Republicans and the Fox Boys continue
to refer to Iraq as a mud village full of illiterates? A reporter or pundit today
bragged about the U.S. re-opening schools. And he actually said something
about Iraqi children going to school for the first time. I suppose that is
possible, but weren't we told repeatedly how well educated the Iraqi people
were. Those guys better watch out ... Americans may stop believing them.

I still want to know why we are incapable of reparing the electricity, water and
other essentials in Iraq. Isn't Bechtel all that? And Halliburton has
not managed to get enough oil for the Iraqis to have oil for themselves...
well, maybe they have now, but a short while back, Iraqis were lined up like
the 70's in America. Then I heard they were pumping oil to Turkey. Not up to
speed on this, but since I am rambling here ... I guess I can have a pass. Yes?

Watching Wolfowitz squirm on CSpan last night before the Senate Committee
was better than chocolate ice cream. He kept speechifying on and on ...
expounding on the sacrifices American would have to make. Well ... Hear
this: Americans would be more willing to sacrifice if the elite would stop
profiteering from the war.
Stop the scramble for another country's oil,
stop rewarding each other with billion dollar contracts, and the ultimate
slap in the face to the American people: stop giving yourself raises all
the time when Americans can barely make ends meet!

The above in particular really gets me steamed. What bald-faced arrogance.

Ok... back soon ... gotta check the puppie and cook, but have a great post to
make if I can get the zoo under control this evening......

::: Idiot Bush Holds Forth :::
::: Under Banner of "Homeland Security" :::

It gets more difficult every day to listen to Dubya's bull.
He keeps repeating the same horse hockey ~~ the
same stuff everyone knows is a LIE.

"....... and those terrorist networks are no more ...
we are making progress ... so they cannot strike
the United States again .... blah, blah, blah."

Just nauseating!

And not only that.... Homeland Security is such a joke!
When quizzed by Congress, neither Ridge or his hirelings
could answer most of the questions put to them. There
were two guys on there one night (never got their names,
I came into the broadcast late) who did not answer a
single question!

Plus ... even though I have not checked the details, I
have heard the program is severely underfunded.
That is just like all the other programs ... botched!

The only thing Bush has funded are the Tax Cuts.

A Big Thank You and A Hug For All Who
Responded and Wished My Doggie Well

Gaby Update:

Sunday was the worst day so far. She was so terribly sad and weak, but now
she is moving better, the 6" gash on her hip is healing beautifully, one (even
longer) is not doing so hot, but that is because I cannot get the little witch to
stop licking the stiches. However, I am on her case, using betadine (not very
tasty) and am planning to get some BFI powder. The vet said that particular
place was two 4-5 inch gashes which he sewed as one. And there is one down
deep on her lower belly we have not even tried to glimpse.

That Saturday (or maybe Friday ... have lost track) night when the vet lifted
the towel, I knew by the look on the his face ... Gaby was hurt very badly
and might not make it. But when he called later around eleven to let me know
how it went and he gave me more detail, and I became more and more worried.

I also told him he'd better fix that mutt, cause if it was a choice between me
and the dog, my hubbie would have me on the pike.

This AM I threatened her with taping her belly, using gauze pads, but she
seemed altogether unimpressed. She just looks up at you with big weenie-
dog eyes ... you know about those, I'm sure.

Already the spoiled rotten queen of the house, my hubbie and I are fearful
she will be asking for the car keys and money for a steak joint before long.
She had me holding a bowl of water under her mouth so she could drink.
So I expect to see her flying down the road any day now, weenie-dog ears
flapping in the wind..

Thanks again for your concern. Granny, Hubbie, and the Zillion cats
::: Enron et al Wrote Bush Energy Policy :::
::: From The Democratic National Committee :::

Decided to post this one straight out as well ... seems kind of important.

Aug 27, 2003

Enron, Other Big Energy Companies Wrote Bush Energy Policy

A report from the General Accounting Office showed that the White House's 2001 energy policy was written largely by Bush cronies and campaign donors in the energy industry. The policy heavily favors energy companies, largely at the expense of our environment, especially national parks and other protected lands.

According to the Washington Post:

An energy task force, led by Vice President Cheney, relied for outside advice primarily on "petroleum, coal, nuclear, natural gas, electricity industry representatives and lobbyists," while seeking limited input from academic experts, environmentalists and policy groups, the GAO said.

The White House has strongly resisted the GAO investigation, taking the agency to court to avoid releasing documents that show how often the administration met with industry representatives when crafting its plan. The GAO report took the administration to task for continuing its secrecy over who it met with and what was discussed in task force meetings.

Those meetings included a private half-hour session between Cheney and Kenneth Lay, chairman of Enron, the energy company that was President Bush's biggest donor throughout his political career before it declared bankruptcy in December 2001.

The Cheney Energy Task force released its energy policy in 2001 to wide praise from the energy industry, which would receive subsidies and favorable tax breaks under the recommendations. Environmental activists opposed the policies, especially those that called for increased drilling in national parks and other areas protected by the federal government.

The task force's recommendations included drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Democrats have stood up to Republicans on drilling in ANWR, and are continuing the fight as the GOP keeps pushing for the destructive plan. [Washington Post, 8/26/03]


::: Memo To President Bush: While You Were On Vacation :::

Dear President Bush,
August has been a difficult month for Americans. While you were vacationing at your ranch and raising millions of dollars for your re-election campaign, American soldiers kept dying in Iraq, the American economy continued to flounder, and new reports emerged describing just how little your administration cares about our environment. But at least someone got some good news: your friends at Dick Cheney's Halliburton have been awarded even more uncontested contracts for oil in Iraq.

We wanted to make sure that as you returned from your vacation, you were fully up-to-date. Please review the following stories below to learn what happened while you were clearing brush on your ranch.

All stories available if you follow this link

Associated Press: "Bush Less Sure-Footed in Postwar Iraq as Casualties Mount."

Los Angeles Times: "US Military Strength Called Lacking in Iraq; Republican Senators Are Among Those Saying More Troops Are Needed to Speed Rebuilding Efforts."

New York Times: "Senators Assail Two Officials for Lack of Postwar Details."

Los Angeles Times: "US Suspects It Received False Iraq Arms Tips."

San Antonio Express-News: "VA Seeks to Care for More With Less."

Wall Street Journal: "The Economy: CBO Projects Deficit Next Year of $480 Billion."

USA Today: "Gas Costs a Record $1.74 a Gallon."

Wall Street Journal: "Medicare Legislation Said to Be in Danger Without Bush Push."

Los Angeles Times: "The Nation: Nation's Jobless Plight Worsens."

Newsday: "EPA Misled Public On 9/11 Pollution."

New York Times: "Draft of Air Rule Is Said to Exempt Many Old Plants."

San Jose Mercury News: "Bush Administration Says It Won't Regulate Carbon Dioxide."

Washington Post: "Halliburton's Deals Greater Than Thought"

Associated Press: "Bush Less Sure-Footed in Postwar Iraq as Casualties Mount."
Bush Is Under Bi-Partisan Pressure To Change Course As Number Of Post-War Deaths Surpasses Those Killed In Open Conflict. On August 26, the same day Bush spoke to American veterans, the US casualty count in Iraq reached a tragic milestone. The number of troops who have died in Iraq after May 1, when Bush declared an end to open conflict in Iraq, reached 141 -- surpassing the total who died before May 1. The Associated Press noted, "With casualties climbing and criticism growing, Bush is under intense pressure to do something differently -- something to stop the deaths of U.S. soldiers, quell acts of terrorism and turn on the electricity and water for frustrated Iraqis. At home, Democrats and Republicans alike are demanding answers... Struggling for solutions, the administration is divided on some of the central points. In the meantime, U.S. soldiers are dying at the rate of more than one a day." [Los Angeles Times, 8/27/03; Associated Press, 8/27/03]

Monday, September 08, 2003
::: Granny Struggling With Personal BS :::

I find myself in an ever MORE vile mood lately ... partially because my little
weenie dog got eaten by a huge black dog ... a rottie, I think. She is alive,
but stitched up all over and we are heartsick.

She (Gaby) looks sooooo sad, and she is sore and can barely move or

I am very MAD! My husband is very MAD! Even the cats are MAD!

Sunday, September 07, 2003
::::: -----> Alert! Alert! Alert! <----- :::::
::: Nazi Snake In The Grass is Hising :::

Everybody please help watch John Ashcroft and the Justice Dept.

First, when the bill was leaked, Ashcroft tried lying to Americans about
(Patriot II ~~~ the end of freedom in America), claiming the bill
was just a proposal and not a bill ready for passage.

B.S. I read the leaked bill myself and it is the most professionaly drafted and
polished collection of papers I have seen in a long time. It was Ready!

The Center for Public Integrity has obtained a draft, dated January 9, 2003, of this previously undisclosed legislation and is making it available in full text (12 MB). The bill, drafted by the staff of Attorney General John Ashcroft and entitled the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003, has not been officially released by the Department of Justice, although rumors of its development have circulated around the Capitol for the last few months under the name of “the Patriot Act II” in legislative parlance.
When told that the Center had a copy of the draft legislation, he said, “This is all news to me. I have never heard of this.”

After the Center posted this story, Barbara Comstock, director of public affairs for the Justice Dept., released a statement saying that, "Department staff have not presented any final proposals to either the Attorney General or the White House. It would be premature to speculate on any future decisions, particularly ideas or proposals that are still being discussed at staff levels."

The following text was printed at the top of each page:
Confidential---Not For Distribution
Draft---January 9, 2003,

Now With Bill Moyers Show

An Office of Legislative Affairs “control sheet” that was obtained by the PBS program "Now With Bill Moyers" seems to indicate that a copy of the bill was sent to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert and Vice President Richard Cheney on Jan. 10, 2003. “Attached for your review and comment is a draft legislative proposal entitled the ‘Domestice Security Enhancement Act of 2003,’” the memo, sent from “OLP” or Office of Legal Policy, says.

Bill Moyers interview with Chuck Lewis
MOYERS: I just go through here, you know? "Will give the Attorney General the unchecked power to deport any foreigner?"

LEWIS: Right.

MOYERS: Including lawful permanent resident aliens. It would give the government the power to keep certain arrests secret until an indictment is found never in our history have we permitted secret arrests. It would give the government power to bypass courts and grand juries in order to conduct surveillance without a judge's permission. I mean these do really further upend the balance between liberty on the one hand and security on the other.
LEWIS: Well, they do. They reduce judicial oversight with the secret intelligence courts instead of saying the court may do this now it's the court will do this. They can have ex parte conversations where they go into the judge without anyone else around. In terms of information about detainees, not only can they detain anyone they'd like to detain, there is no public information about it.

Journalists cannot find out the names of — we detained over a thousand people after September 11th because we thought they might all be terrorists. Not one of them was really found with any criminal charges to be a terrorist. And we don't know the names of almost all those people, still. And so it does appear that everything that folks might be concerned about with the Patriot Act, this is times five or times ten is what I look at it. I see it very serious.

MOYERS: You and I have had this kind of discussion often, we go back a long way together. The foundation that I serve on has been a big supporter of yours and you've been a big supporter of our journalism. If we were fighting terrorists instead of being journalists, wouldn't we want this kind of power in our hands?

LEWIS: Well, we would, but we operate in a democracy and there's other considerations. I mean I think, you know, there's no question, if you're in law enforcement, this is gonna make it easier for you to do your job. The problem is, we have a history in our country, just in our lifetime, in the last quarter century.

Where we've seen FBI and CIA abuses of ordinary citizens. Where mail has been opened, where homes have been broken into. Where infiltration has occurred in political groups. Informants have been used, misused. People's lives have been ruined. People have committed suicide because of the pressures brought against them by the government, by these kinds of secret intelligence agencies.

This is not a completely crazy idea to worry about the power of the government. And it was curbed and rolled back in the '70s. And there is something obviously occurring here in the public space around the whole issue of liberty and security right now.

And it is clearly changing and it's moving towards security. And the question for us as a people is what is the right balance. And I think my biggest personal concern is that there ought to be a debate about this. So the Patriot Act jammed through Congress in six weeks.

There was a Congressional — there was a Senate hearing that lasted an hour and a half, there were no questions to the Attorney General by the senators. This is too important for our country. Whatever anyone's point of view, this should be a conversation that the country should have.

And if I'm afraid they're waiting for a war or something and then they're gonna pop this baby out and then try to jam it through.

MOYERS: You mean that if it were not rolled out and discussed publicly until the United States has had war in Iraq, people might not pay as much attention to it as they would now.

Interesting, huh. In August 2003, Ashcroft took his show on the road ...
in an attempt to drum up support for his new Victory Act

WASHINGTON - Attorney General John Ashcroft is hitting the road to rally support for the Victory Act, which would further expand his powers to go after Al Qaeda and narcoterrorists, the Daily News has learned.
Ashcroft will starting pushing the Vital Interdiction of Criminal Terrorist Organizations Act later this month in a 10-day, 20-state Victory tour that includes a stop in New York.


Powered by Blogger