tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16351743323827399282024-03-05T03:33:40.382-05:00the canary papersAll the News Fit to Line a Bird CageMantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-11569011609350992962008-08-25T04:07:00.046-04:002008-08-26T19:53:33.077-04:00What did the Bush Administration do with Aafia Siddiqui and her three children?<div align="center"><br /></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsXNT6KIIRcJvcm965kr2lQ_z4ANasrmFrRRC8fCGsRMKrsyBohqTqP2p5bkuOmFMC62ub9lx14ndPhhcrLimf1f4kqPa63e8UZKyMoePPRwVjtK1p-P0M5DE_tPZoMq6yRwgq6t4Er6I/s1600-h/pic+9.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5238462785227458498" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsXNT6KIIRcJvcm965kr2lQ_z4ANasrmFrRRC8fCGsRMKrsyBohqTqP2p5bkuOmFMC62ub9lx14ndPhhcrLimf1f4kqPa63e8UZKyMoePPRwVjtK1p-P0M5DE_tPZoMq6yRwgq6t4Er6I/s400/pic+9.jpg" border="0" /></a><span style="font-size:180%;">An American Story: </span></strong></span></div><div align="center"><br /></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>The disappearance and torture of Aafia Siddiqui at the hands of the U.S. government is also the story of a country that has lost its soul. <p></strong></span></p></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong></strong></span></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong></div><p align="center"></strong></span></p><div align="center"><br /></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;"><strong>UPDATE:</strong></span></div><div align="center"><span style="color:#990000;"><span style="font-size:130%;">To lend your voice to helping with this case, see "CONTACT INFO" in red text, below.<br /></span></div></span><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">__________ </span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="left"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="left"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"><p></span></strong></p></div><div align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;">Aafia Siddiqui is but one of many human beings over the past 7 years who have been labeled as terrorists, then covertly 'disappeared' into a secret system of prisons, where they are systematically tortured by the agents of the Bush Administration -- a government that can no longer lay claim to being quite human. Aafia's story is particularly disturbing because, in 2003, along with Aafia, 'disappeared' her three young children, aged 7 years, 5 years and 6 months of age.</span> </div><p align="left"></p><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5238460213730789922" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9MtVw22AVHiU3lXBEb0YHi-6FeXGV7SCkagpw5EjhrhLsUI3oc_-p_eDoEYKBwOLcgj0F2SbEWABnhBWkRUy8aWwYfCXUCmYICICQMIJETPAl-cerE6EHc3NTunq4TJ2K9WAioHL37Fo/s400/pic+6.jpg" border="0" /></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Massive protests have been waged in Pakistan, demanding the release of Afia Siddiqui and her children.</span> <p></span></p></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:85%;"></span></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;">To those uninitiated with the torture practices (and the<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz01hN9l-BM"> laws</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB2VGs-UTNc">or lack thereof</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1GT-BZvhrw&feature=related">regarding torturing</a>, including the torture of children) used by our government -- whether at our own hands, or at the hands of those with whom we contract to carry out this torture -- this story can perhaps be read with a comfortable detachment. To those of us who have studied the methods used by our government, and have read the stories of those who have -- and who have not survived -- the story of Aafia and her three children is unbearably haunting.</span> <p></p></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"><br /></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoW_q1O5fcGmTY_i3-iDV4BDU4FVcx66dVOT7kFkVVNvf3mP9MDYZhyLQlisUioRsjT7fWZuasULDlX_FumV4Q6lO-O75LLqb5Eo9i17yL2MKoz8D7NBWqjcY2JqbjDJKIRGPzAR3M4ew/s1600-h/pic+4.jpg"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAgv23vBN_PufJpF7BumHdlUiNX3-j0ORK3OzI6t5r_KN7q4JKcZdGIS_DyJ78DyIfWdPqCB1-jeU6Lz9pI_vg_5nMffGEHnfdNYrVF7escS-KoyDeUZqZLUrVPp5u5H_l8-Sx_UU4f0w/s1600-h/pic+5.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5238460665474105682" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAgv23vBN_PufJpF7BumHdlUiNX3-j0ORK3OzI6t5r_KN7q4JKcZdGIS_DyJ78DyIfWdPqCB1-jeU6Lz9pI_vg_5nMffGEHnfdNYrVF7escS-KoyDeUZqZLUrVPp5u5H_l8-Sx_UU4f0w/s400/pic+5.jpg" border="0" /></a></div><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;">We cannot add more to her story than has already been published. We can, however, provide links to those stories. We can also add our voices to those who proclaim her innocence. After all, we live in a country where a person's innocence is presumed, until they have proved otherwise. Or, at least, we once did. The Bush Administration has removed this right for any human deemed a terrorist suspect. For this reason, until our government restores the right of due process to "terrorist suspects" we, at the canarypapers, have taken the stance that our government must be presumed guilty, until proven otherwise.<br /><br />And, lest any of us think we're safe from those hands that would secretly imprison and torture innocent human beings, please know that, just by virture of our researching Aafia Siddiqui's story, we at the canarypapers could legally be deemed terrorist sympathisers or even terrorist suspects. Fact is, our reading habits likely long ago placed us among the hundreds of thousands of Americans already on the FBI's terrorist watch list. The Bush Administration would like us to believe that such truths belong to the realm of conspiracy theorists. Which leaves us but two choices: shall we resign ourselves to blind complacency or be banished to the minions of the conspiracy theorists? We choose the latter.<br /><br />Were there nothing to hide, our government would not work in secrecy, would not hold suspects for years in secret prisons, torturing them to extract evidence, while denying their existence or, alternately, claiming the secrecy as 'necessary' to their investigation. Were there nothing to hide, our government would not discredit those who, in seeking the truth, ask questions of our government's secret activities. <em>Were our government not committing war crimes, there would be nothing to hide.</em> We, at the canarypapers, join those who demand answers to the many questions about Aafia Siddiqui and her children. We hope that others will read her story and add their voices to the call for the truth.</span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;">____________</span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:180%;color:#990000;">CONTACT INFO #1:</span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;"><strong><em>Call the Capitol Hill switchboard at (800) 828-0498</em></strong></span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;"><strong>HOW TO</strong>: If you would like to help with this case, you can call your Senator/Representative via the above number to express your concern for the welfare of Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakastani prisoner being held in a federal detention center in Brooklyn, NY. When you call the number, above you will reach a general operator. Ask, by name, for the office of your Senator/Representative. Once connected, you will either be able to leave a voice mail or leave your message with an assistant. (Alternately, you could locate email addresses for your representatives and/or phone their local offices. Snail mail may be too slow, due to the urgency of Aafia's needs). </span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;"><strong><em>Five primary issues of importance to mention in your calls regarding the case of Aafia Siddiqui (pronounced: OFF-ia Sa-DEEK-ia) :</em> </strong></span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;">(1) She is in need medical care. According to her attorney, Aafia Siddiqui's condition has grown critical. As of Tuesday, August 26, her condition was deteriorating, and her attorney is urging that she be admitted to a hospital, </span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;">(2) that Aafia Siddiqui's 12-year old son (who is legally a U.S. citizen, and is said to be in U.S. custody in Afghanistan) be returned to the U.S., to the care of his uncle, in Texas,</span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;">(3) that an investigation be started immediately to determine the whereabouts of her other two children, now aged 9 years and 5 years of age,</span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;">(4) that Ms. Siddiqui be afforded the right of habeas corpus and be allowed unencumbered access to her attorneys, including the ability to have legal counsel without being strip-searched beforehand, and </span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;">(5) that an independent investigation be conducted to determine exactly where Aafoa Siddiqui has been for the past 5 years, and the role of the U.S. and Pakistani ISI in this case, as has been alleged by human right groups. </span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:180%;color:#990000;">CONTACT INFO #2</span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;">LINK: <a href="http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2008/2964/"><strong><em>Asian Human Rights Commission: URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME</em></strong></a></span></p><p align="left"><span style="color:#990000;"><span style="font-size:130%;">The Asia Human Rights Commission (AHRC) site at the above link has an Urgent Appeal Program, where you can direct letters (select from a pre-written letter, or customize/draft your own letter) to President George Bush and various officials in Afghanistan and Pakistan, urging them to immediately release Dr. Afia Siddiqui and her 12-year old child. The governments of Pakistan and the U.S. are also urged to reveal the whereabouts of her other two children. (The AHRC has written separate letters to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture calling for intervention in this case.) </span></span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;">_________________</span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;">LINKS FOR MORE INFO ON THIS CASE</span> </p><p align="center"><strong>The links, below, are listed in approx. chronological order, beginning with the April 2003 announcements of Aafia Siddiqui's arrest (later denied by U.S. & Pakastani authorities) and ending with the July 2008 announcement of her arrest after her 5-year disappearance, during which time Aafia alleges she was imprisoned and subjected to horrendous torture and repeated rape at the hands of Pakastani and/or U.S. authorities while imprisoned at Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan. As certain news articles have a way of 'disappearing' we have cut and paste the 2003 reports of her arrest: </strong><br /><br /></p><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">2003</span></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-73436035.html"><span style="font-size:130%;">AP (Associated Press) article excerpt, April 22. 2003:</span></a><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"> Woman sought for ties to al-Qaida <em>in custody</em> in Pakistan</span></strong> Dateline: WASHINGTON A former Boston woman sought by the FBI for questioning about possible ties to the al-Qaida terror network is in custody in Pakistan, U.S. law enforcement officials said Tuesday.<br />Two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Aafia Siddiqui, 31, was detained by Pakistani authorities in the past few days and was being interrogated at an undisclosed location. She originally is from Pakistan. The FBI in March put out a global alert for Siddiqui, who has a biology degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and wrote a doctoral thesis on neurological sciences at Brandeis University in 2001. She also visited the Maryland suburbs near ... </div><br /><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2003-04-22-alqaeda-woman-arrest_x.htm"><span style="font-size:130%;">USA Today</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: <strong>Pakistani woman in custody unlikely the one sought</strong></span><br />WASHINGTON (AP) — After initial optimism Tuesday, U.S. law enforcement officials backed off claims that Pakistan had detained a former Boston woman wanted by the FBI for questioning about possible links to al-Qaeda. Two federal law enforcement officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, initially said 31-year-old Aafia Siddiqui recently was taken into custody by Pakistani authorities. Pakistani officials never confirmed the arrest and later the U.S. officials amended their earlier statements, saying new information from the Pakistani government made it "doubtful" she was in custody. It was not clear whether a different woman had been arrested or if the initial information was wrong or misconstrued by U.S. officials. There had been several reports out of Pakistan prior to Tuesday claiming Siddiqui had been detained, but all turned out to be untrue. The U.S. officials said that while earlier reports never were given much credibility by federal authorities, Tuesday's information at first appeared legitimate. The FBI in March put out a global alert for Siddiqui, who has a biology degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and wrote a doctoral thesis on neurological sciences at Brandeis University in 2001. She also visited the Maryland suburbs near Washington in December or January, officials say. Authorities have not charged that Siddiqui is a member of al-Qaeda but believe she could be a "fixer," someone with knowledge of the United States who can support and help get things done for other operatives. She is not charged with any crime in the United States. The FBI also is seeking to question Siddiqui's estranged husband, Dr. Mohammed Khan. His whereabouts are unknown. Alerts for Siddiqui and Khan followed the FBI's announcement last month of a worldwide search for Adnan El Shukrijumah, a 27-year-old Saudi native nicknamed "Jafar the Pilot." He lived for a number of years in South Florida and authorities believe he is an al-Qaeda operative who may have been planning new attacks. His family denies any terrorist ties and he has not been located. </div><br /><br /><a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-100476579.html"><span style="font-size:130%;">UPI (United Press International) article excerpt, 4/22/2003</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: </span><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Report: First woman al-Qaida suspect detained</span>:</strong> A woman with suspected links to al-Qaida has been arrested in Pakistan, NBC News reported Tuesday, although Pakistani officials said they didn't know of any such arrest. Aafia Siddiqui, a former Boston resident, is wanted for questioning by the FBI. Her mother, Ismat Siddiqui, said her daughter disappeared from her hiding place in Karachi 10 days ago. She said that FBI and Pakistani officials she contacted told her that they had no information about their daughter's whereabouts. Pakistan's Interior Secretary Tasneem Noorani told United Press International that Pakistani authorities were not aware of ...<br /><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">2004 </div><p align="center"></span></strong></p><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.nctc.gov/site/profiles/siddiqui.html">U.S. National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) website "Wanted" bulletin on Aafia Siddiqui </a></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/whos_afraid_of_aafia_siddiqui/"><span style="font-size:130%;">Boston Magazine, October 2004</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: </span><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Who's Afraid of Aafia Siddiqui?</span> </strong>She went to MIT and Brandeis, married a Brigham and Women's physician, made her home in Boston, cared for her children, and raised money for charities. Aafia Siddiqui was a normal woman living a normal American life. Until the FBI called her a terror.</div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_1-11-2004_pg7_47"><span style="font-size:130%;">Daily Times (Pakistan) Nov. 1, 2004</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: <strong>The strange story of Aafia Siddiqui <p></strong></span></p></div><div align="left"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><div align="left"></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">2006</span></strong></div><br /><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0922-07.htm"><span style="font-size:130%;">CommonDreams</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: 9/22/2006 Boston Globe article: <strong>Fate of Some CIA Detainees Still Unknown -- Missing Boston woman among them, kin say.</strong><br /></span><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">2008</span></strong></div><p><br /><a href="http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2008/2947/"><span style="font-size:130%;">Asian Human Rights Commission</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: <strong>URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME</strong></span> (This human rights appeal was issued July 24, 2008. The publicity and outcry from this and other appeals is said to have prompted the FBI's recent "discovery" and arrest of Aafia Siddiqui). </p><p><a href="http://aafiasiddiqui.com/"><span style="font-size:130%;">AafiaSiddiqui.com</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">:</span> This site includes a YouTube video of Al Jeezera news report on this case, which includes testimony by Aafia Siddiqui's family.</p><p><a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/August/08-nsd-687.html"><span style="font-size:130%;">US Dept. of Justice</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: <strong>Aafia Siddiqui Arrested for Attempting to Kill United States Officers in Afghanistan</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size:130%;"><a href="http://www.fbi.gov/terrorinfo/siddiqui.htm">FBI Bulletein on Aafia Siddiqui</a><strong>: Wanted/Seeking Information/In Custody</strong></span></p><p><a href="http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/09/stories/2008080955100900.htm"><span style="font-size:130%;">The Hindu</span></a><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">: The mystery of Aafia Siddiqui</span></strong> A diamond-smuggling Al Qaeda operative or an innocent Pakistani woman whose only crime was her Islamic identity and her headscarf? </p><p><a href="http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2008statements/1639/"><span style="font-size:130%;">Asian Human Rights Commission's August 4, 2004 article on Aafia's 'reappearance,' as her arrest is announced by U.S. and Pakastani authorities): </span></a><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">PAKISTAN: FBI is responsible for disappearances, illegal detention and torture.</span> </strong>The American Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), initially admitted that they had arrested Dr. Afia and then later denied it. Now, due to the coverage of the UA both in Pakistan and internationally, the FBI has now announced that “Dr. Afia Siddiqui is alive, she is in Afghanistan but she is injured”. No further details have been provided and the AHRC is especially concerned about the three children who were also abducted along with her. It is reported that after receiving hundreds of responses to the UA initiated by the AHRC, the American and Pakistani authorities were compelled to issue information of the whereabouts of Afia Siddiqui who had been missing for five years after being arrested by the Pakistani Intelligence Agency.....<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-size:100%;"><a href="http://yvonneridley.org/yvonne-ridley/articles/hoover-the-fbi-and-aafia-siddiqui.html"><span style="font-size:130%;">YvonneRidley.org</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;"> <strong>Hoover, the FBI, and Aafia Siddiqui</strong>.</span> </span></span>(British journalist Yvonne Ridley's account of the story.) <em>Ms. Ridley began investigating Aafia Siddiqui after hearing reports of a female prisoner, called Prisoner 650 at Afghanistan’s Bagram prison. According to reports, the Prisoner 650 had been tortured to the point where she has lost her mind. Britain’s Lord Nazeer Ahmed, (of the House of Lords), asked questions in the House about the condition of Prisoner 650 who, according to him is physically tortured and continuously raped by the officers at prison. Lord Nazeer has also submitted that Prisoner 650 has no separate toilet facilities and has to attend to her bathing and movements in full view of the other. In the course of Yvonne Ridley's investigation, she came to call Prisoner 650 "the gray lady of Bagram." As Ridley explained, “I call her the ‘grey lady’ because she is almost a ghost, a spectre whose cries and screams continues to haunt those who heard her.” Ridley's investigation added to the outcry which is said to have prompted Aafia's release and simultaneous "discovery" by U.S. and Pakastani authorities in July 2008). </em></p><p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-fg-disappeared6-2008aug06,0,3725428.story"><span style="font-size:130%;">LA Times</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: <strong>Siddiqui arrest brings attention to the 'disappeared' issue in Pakistan</strong></span></p><p><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article4463680.ece"><span style="font-size:130%;">Times Online UK</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>:</strong> <strong>Female 'terror' scientist Aafia Siddiqui facing US court after extradition</strong></span></p><p><a href="http://www.dawn.com/2008/08/07/top7.htm"><span style="font-size:130%;">Dawn.com</span></a><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">: Aafia Siddiqui appears in US court, denied bail</span></strong></p><p><a href="http://freedetainees.org/aafia-siddiqui-children"><span style="font-size:130%;">Free Detainees.org:</span></a><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"> Aafia Siddiqui & Children</span></strong></p><p><a href="http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2008/2964/"><span style="font-size:130%;">Asian Human Rights Commission</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: <strong>URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME: The US Congress must investigate Dr. Afia's case</strong></span> (This human rights appeal was issued August 8, 2008, after Aafia was brought to the U.S. and her allegations and condition became better known).<br /><br /><a href="http://www.asia-pacific-action.org/node/124"><span style="font-size:130%;">Action in Solidarity with Asia and the Pacific</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: </span>(series of three August 2008 articles on Aafia Siddiqui's case)<br /><br /><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1149949120080811"><span style="font-size:130%;">Reuters</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">: <strong>Pakistani accused of U.S. troop attack gets doctor</strong> </span>(Reuters report on Aafia Siddiqui -- <strong><em>a prisoner in U.S. care</em></strong> -- as she finally receives medical care, 4 weeks after being shot in the abdomen). <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MITv3xtQSM&feature=related">YouTube, August 8, 2008</a>: Protest in Pakistan includes Aafia Siddiqui's sister. Protesters' signs include one reading, "Can a 6-month old baby be a terrorist?" <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pizA6bhybrc">YouTube, August 8, 2008</a>: ABC propaganda news report, which makes the "official" case that Aafia Siddiqui is a terrorist, calling her "a female bin Laden," with the CIA deeming this "the most significant capture in 5 years," along with the ludicrous, inflammatory and totally unsubstantiated charges including one that she was "told by leaders to have lots of babies; raise little jihadists." No attempt is made to substantiate these charges but, rather, a jubilantly shocking account is given of her case, with no attempt to fake concern or even make mention of the fate of 2 of Siddiqui's children, aged 6 months and 5 years of age when they disappeared with their mother in 2003. <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0fofvUMefQ&feature=related">YouTube, August 12, 2008</a>: Press Conference in Islamabad on the legal and human rights issues, along with the many unanswered questions in the Aafia Siddiqui case. <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2d4iraPpDG0&feature=related">YouTube, August 12, 2008</a>: Protest for Dr Aafia Saddiqui/Speech by Yvonne Ridley <p align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;">UPDATES FROM AUGUST 24, 2008 ONWARD:</span> </strong><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;"><a href="http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=50342&Itemid=2"><span style="color:#990000;"><strong>Associated Press of Pakistan (August 26, 2008): </strong></span></a><span style="color:#990000;">Lawyer demands Dr Aafia’s shifting to hospital for urgent treatment </span></span><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;"><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/08/26/ST2008082600195.html"><span style="color:#990000;"><strong>Washington Post (August 26, 2008): </strong></span></a><span style="color:#990000;">Afghan Officials Detain American Boy, U.S. Says Mother Held by U.S. as Al-Qaeda Suspect</span></span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;"><a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/08/26/Al-Qaida_suspects_US_son_held/UPI-76341219775182/"><span style="color:#990000;"><strong>UPI</strong></span></a><span style="color:#990000;"><strong>:</strong> Al-Qaida suspect's U.S. son held </span></span></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#990000;"></span><p><p></p><p></p><p align="center">_______________________ <p></p><p align="center"></p><p align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#000000;">Links to Human Rights Reports that Discuss/Detail U.S. Involvement in Secret Detention, Renditions and Torture:</span></strong></p><p><a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AMR51/051/2006/en/dom-AMR510512006en.pdf"><span style="font-size:130%;">Amnesty International </span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">(pdf file): <strong>United States - Below the radar: Secret flights to torture and ‘disappearance’</strong></span></p><p><a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AMR51/093/2007/en/dom-AMR510932007en.pdf"><span style="font-size:130%;">Amnesty International</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;"> (pdf file) <strong>Off the Record: U.S. Responsibility for Enforced Disappearances in the “War on Terror”</strong></span> There are 3 mentions of Aafia Siddiqui in this report</p><p><a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AMR51/093/2007/en/dom-AMR510932007en.pdf"><span style="font-size:130%;">Amnesty International</span></a><span style="font-size:130%;"> (pdf file): <strong>Pakistan: Human rights ignored in the "war on terror"</strong></span> In this report, Aafia Siddiqui is #33 on the list of "individuals about whom there is some evidence of secret detention by the United States and whose fate and whereabouts" were listed as unknown at the time of the report.</p><p><a href="http://www.humanrightsfirst.info/pdf/06321-etn-dos-hrf-report-gaps-det-rend.pdf"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Human Rights First</span></strong></a><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong> (pdf file): Still Missing: Gaps in the U.S. State Department Human Rights Reports on Secret Detentions and Renditions</strong> </span></p><p align="left"><a href="http://assembly.coe.int/CommitteeDocs/2006/20060606_Ejdoc162006PartII-FINAL.pdf"><span style="font-size:130%;">Parliamentary Assembly, Council of Europe </span></a><span style="font-size:130%;">(pdf file)</span><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights: Alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council of Europe member states<br /></span></strong></p><p align="center">______________<br /></p><p align="center"><em>We will add more links as time allows, particuarly links to assist with any activism to help ensure that Ms. Siddiqui is afforded the dignity of human rights and due process. A hearing is scheduled for September 3rd, so the timing is urgent. Please feel free to do your own research and to do whatever you can to help her. </em></p><div align="center"><em>____________________________________ <p></em></p></div><br /><br /><br /><br /><div align="center"><span style="font-size:85%;"></span></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:85%;"></span></div>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-72347457643927573772008-08-23T05:30:00.025-04:002008-08-23T12:08:47.977-04:00Joe Biden: Will He Rip John McCain's Face Off and Restore Truth, Justice and the American Way?<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBCa_MnQ8UWLWnlMtAeY-SJq4U_-aepIb-59bIbT5X3YoaRXBxcBKwgjjd_x2uZrUnAKA3l_1ohK1nAYxcStFc-VMTDz7quGfOk-dYGT_5NOaTSoyehv1EgyJlYeARTwfWXG30TKcONR8/s1600-h/biden.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5237663287790944754" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBCa_MnQ8UWLWnlMtAeY-SJq4U_-aepIb-59bIbT5X3YoaRXBxcBKwgjjd_x2uZrUnAKA3l_1ohK1nAYxcStFc-VMTDz7quGfOk-dYGT_5NOaTSoyehv1EgyJlYeARTwfWXG30TKcONR8/s400/biden.jpg" border="0" /></a> <span style="font-size:130%;">It's pretty bad when the best you can hope for in a VP candidate is that he will<strong> </strong>rip John McCain's face off. Today, that's about as audacious as we dare hope, having nearly lost all hope of seeing real integrity restored to American politics. Sure, we'll cast our vote for Obama-Biden, even if they, themselves, seem to have lost -- if ever they owned -- the integrity and chutzpah, to state, outright, that the emperor and his entire entourage are stark-raving naked. </span><br /><p>As is, it seems that both Obama and Biden tow the main line, the main line being a veritable sewer pipe full of lies, misinformation and innuendo spit out by Bush-Cheney, then sanctified by the media. And it is this raw sewage that forms the "truths" upon which America's domestic and foreign policy is built. This was most recently evidenced in Biden's statement on the Georgia-Russia conflict, when he said, "The war that began in Georgia is no longer about that country alone. It has become a question of whether and how the West will stand up for the rights of free people throughout the region." </p>Superman couldn't have said it better himself. No need to extrapolate on the not-so-subtle nuances of the situation -- nuances which, in another time, would have been called by name: the truth.<br /><p></p><br /><br /><p><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5237710278518940978" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 477px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 306px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" height="277" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx2QDoVULcvm9ge9NdSV1aYubfA2P5xiF7-R3mOssWLD1M8c1qB1jOT_ktNt_BK1oKhjzoEDxbi1vfaHU4QiAaX4DFpQb63EQDA-VtYIi8rUgB1p-WZFA3750pAA-DrsqJ9WjHH8gVLSg/s400/cartoon.bmp" width="472" border="0" />American politicians, on both sides, have lost their bearings and have taken with them the American people. Our politicians have been reduced -- willingly, it seems, even as they've been bribed and blackmailed, too -- into playing understudies to the real truthsayers on the world stage, reading from a playbook written by swaggering warmongers and disreputable liars & cheats. Biden's assessment of the Russia-Georgia conflict more or less echoed Obama's words, which more or less echoed the words of Condi, Bush and McCain. Nowhere in the dialogue-proper of American politics can we hope to hear the truth: "What in the hell is the U.S. doing in the first place, by funding, arming and prodding Georgia to go to war with South Ossetia and, by extension, Russia?"<br /><br />With few exceptions, truth has evaporated from our polical landscape to the extent that truth, itself, has become so audacious that it offends the sensibilities to even acknowledge that such audacities could be true. But they are. And to ensure that no one speaks these truths, the Bush Administration has effectively, by design, disgraced truth by relegating it to the minions of the conspiracy theorists.<br /><br />Last February (sometime after Edwards bowed out, yet months before discovering that Edwards was a liar and a hypocrite)we pinned our hopes onto the Obama campaign to forge a renaissance of truthfulness. Then we watched as, molecule by molecule, it evaporated, sort of like a shallow mud puddle on hot summer pavement. At first, we made concessions on his behalf: "He's doing what he has to do to get elected," we told ourselves. "The media will fry him if he doesn't give the appearance of moderating on this particular position."<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW1inHhl17nzNGCGnMQcuQVJeo5hAnRsMvLlhjQHO3YpP1-MlT5UGGr4Y7mYevdDe83Ulo5yL9iJV-pNpssiiXKsVqC4X9x92sTM4wKzN9dtsPvHz1-bENOs811E0tB9P6IuN-RqCnfB0/s1600-h/flag.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5237711097594451730" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW1inHhl17nzNGCGnMQcuQVJeo5hAnRsMvLlhjQHO3YpP1-MlT5UGGr4Y7mYevdDe83Ulo5yL9iJV-pNpssiiXKsVqC4X9x92sTM4wKzN9dtsPvHz1-bENOs811E0tB9P6IuN-RqCnfB0/s400/flag.jpg" border="0" /></a>But at some point, after staring overlong into that non-descript residual of dust on the pavement, we had to acknowledge the truth that Americans don't really want truth, and especially if it takes more than 5 words to convey that truth. What the American attention span best responds to is a dummied down, black and white, right vs. wrong version of the truth -- something that can be condensed into a sound-byte, emblazed below the talking heads on CNN -- a mantra that be quickly transcribed into email missives: freedom fries, the war on terror, the axis of evil, weapons of mass destruction, Barrack <em>Hussein</em> Obama, evil empire, surge success, I'm proud of my country, g.d. America, stay the course, chickens coming home to roost, pledge of allegiance, flag pin, elitist liberal ....<br /><br />Our politicians more closely resemble the protaganists in dime store novels than the statesmen who forged, then held together our Constitution and our country for over 200 years. But, apparently, this is what the majority of Americans want in their leaders. <p></p><p><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDpkf-lSeOwI8o6ytf_RJmSuYiS-jEDGGD_EaBzRheQd0FF91G7dIngLTGzKZBHWjpnFVOSYrhL3NQecbVNp7yKMb2IBBvMEToXbiPPniOvH7-1ICO_kuL_giQnkajrCBNwajPQFM1uL4/s1600-h/VOTER.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5237720996447599666" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDpkf-lSeOwI8o6ytf_RJmSuYiS-jEDGGD_EaBzRheQd0FF91G7dIngLTGzKZBHWjpnFVOSYrhL3NQecbVNp7yKMb2IBBvMEToXbiPPniOvH7-1ICO_kuL_giQnkajrCBNwajPQFM1uL4/s400/VOTER.gif" border="0" /></a>After all, it was "they" who voted Bush into office -- not once, but twice. And it is "they" who know, but simply don't care, that the war in Iraq that has killed upwards of 100,00 innocent Iraq citizens was waged on an elaborately designed facade of lies, so that we could steal Iraq's oil. It is "they" who slather their bumpers in American flags and who rabidly salivate over a one-inch flag pin, yet couldn't care less that our Constitution and Bill of Rights have been decimated. It is "they" who have gladly surrendered our economy, our jobs, our homes, our health, our Constitutional rights, our environment, our children's and our grandchildren's futures over to a band of theives. </p><p align="center"><em><span style="font-size:130%;">It is, therefore, "we" who are out of step with America</span></em>. <p></p><p><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_fwraIFZrv7kvQiUwEZ9z2qpoWe7E3ePiagX3MYvCbVZw_YAFhQbdTB-Hlq3XwvyLX2PMWAU1Olt749vLvCe6cAF71yNwLbgZvXSeOL75kiawmE2MoJm0AdOz_4gorampLOOeKRXaTnI/s1600-h/obama+biden.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5237645558283395138" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_fwraIFZrv7kvQiUwEZ9z2qpoWe7E3ePiagX3MYvCbVZw_YAFhQbdTB-Hlq3XwvyLX2PMWAU1Olt749vLvCe6cAF71yNwLbgZvXSeOL75kiawmE2MoJm0AdOz_4gorampLOOeKRXaTnI/s400/obama+biden.jpg" border="0" /></a>Still.... We haven't entirely abandoned all hope. Our hope, today, is that Joe Biden -- in his infamy for speaking before thinking -- will do the right thing and rip John McCain's face off. You never know. The trend could catch on: it may once again be fashionable for politicians to be so <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOtO6DvH1O8&feature=related">outraged by the b.s. </a>and lies that they will state, outright, for all the world to hear, that the emperor and his entire entourage are stark raving mad. It happened to Nixon in the 1970s. It could happen again. <p></p><p><br /><br />For this reason, and this reason alone, we are glad to see Biden on the ticket, instead of, say, Jack Reed -- an infinitely more qualified politician, who would never have made the cut with Americans: he's too honest, he's intellectual, he's thoughtful, he's solidly grounded in foreign policy and diplomacy, he's well-respected on Capitol Hill and, besides, it would have been only a matter of time before the media took note of his height, or perhaps they would have sleuthed out that he drinks lemon in his tea, or perhaps he was the best in his class at West Point -- something terribly terrible to entirely disqualify him for the office of vice-presidency. </p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-48006924159815360242008-08-17T09:36:00.011-04:002008-08-18T08:19:36.550-04:00Why Are the FBI and Attorney General Mukasey in Cahoots with Barney Fife?<p></p><br /><div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4-VQDrYt_HAvPAUiNT91PNccr9F51XeQKtTtOCHClTWDfLGDTeyk0qMjnGKShWLgbEImgwdFhd044Efmse4cN1hoPuVdFuf0lRwD2_HK-Ud4g9AC9A-PGiF9ZVfjEPKayBxw4wPRlpTU/s1600-h/barney+andy-grif-2.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5235478139147997682" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4-VQDrYt_HAvPAUiNT91PNccr9F51XeQKtTtOCHClTWDfLGDTeyk0qMjnGKShWLgbEImgwdFhd044Efmse4cN1hoPuVdFuf0lRwD2_HK-Ud4g9AC9A-PGiF9ZVfjEPKayBxw4wPRlpTU/s400/barney+andy-grif-2.jpg" border="0" /></a>Earlier this week, while America's attention was fixated on the Olympics, John Edwards' love child, and the Georgia-Russia war (necessarily in that order) this tidbit quietly slipped into the headlines: <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/48078.html">FBI to get freer rein to look for terrorism suspects</a>. Herein, Attorney General Michael Mukasey announced that the FBI and the Department of Justice have formed a brand new front in the war on homegrown terror. Working with the existing Joint Terrorism Task Force, this new effort will borrow what little is left of our constitutional rights, and hand them to the care of, say, your local <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBuPQgV8yBM">Barney Fife. </a><br /><br />Reading the above-mentioned article, it takes a little doing to get to the facts, because -- if there's one thing this administration does well, it's cloaking outrageous truths in the most innocuous language possible. It takes either a skilled translator or a patient researcher to glean facts from the language of this administration -- seeded as it is with vague euphemisms and benign jargon.<br /><br />Here is one example, pertinent to the article. The word 'agent' was repeatedly used, in reference to those specific individuals, who will be empowered with violating our constitutional rights, while tracking terrorists. While the term 'agent' is nothing new, the word drew our attention after its ninth mention in the article. Just to be sure, we decided to check on the official meaning of the word, 'agent' with specific regard to our government's work in tracking terrorists.<br /><br />The answers can be found in White House press releases from 2001-2008, along with various documents from the <a href="http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_rpt/vital.pdf">Department of Homeland Security</a>, the FBI, the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the <a href="http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bja/210678.pdf">Department of Justice</a>. As it turns out, until 2005, the word 'agent' referred to only <em>federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement officials</em>. Beginning in 2005, however, the language morphed to <em>federal, state, local, tribal and <strong>private sector</strong> officials.</em> Just to be sure, we decided to check on the official meaning of the term, 'private sector.'</div><div align="justify"><br /><strong>Are You a Terrorist? Only Your Hairdresser Knows for Sure</strong><br /><br /></div><p align="justify">Turns out, a 'private sector' agent can be most anyone. All that's needed is a keen eye for spotting terrorists and the opportunity to spot them. Is your neighbor a computer specialist? A department store security guard? A meter maid? A city sanitation worker? A private eye? A sheriff's deputy? A dog catcher? A beautician? An unemployed mama's boy? An ex-con? A murderer? He or she may have a keen eye for spotting terrorists.<br /><br /><br /></p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXIL6zYFf3p-mS1_liX5oQH2lDkIVFNCq2P5qhQNXJzUEQWdCAdPojQ7G_X5nR-ap6SqwWjiXV49tSnwn18UFWbRQ1mHyWc5BoLbG8ceM5O1JLpdKAwzHdgkJNqkTm0xOtZG_D_T7G9Fw/s1600-h/barney+phone.jpg"></a><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5235327370882635538" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPvw7uQrj6r-Gvzf-BoU_iP8iRUv5CJhIiDRyVhE8kv0d0p8GnZJ-g9cuErc15Fo8QJsW9vjGIOFtcrJuk3wDSFkMB94yV3plhrRwINxuoomGNBv65pK6HEKLSa1ds4eRC9b9JY6_eRfY/s400/barney+floor.jpg" border="0" /> <p align="justify"><br />Or maybe you, yourself, have a keen eye for spotting terrorists. If so, the FBI will <a href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/08/paid_informants.html">pay you royally to work as an informant</a>. How about your co-worker? Your ex-spouse? Your ex-spouse's lover? Any of these people have a grudge against you? They could become a paid informant. What about your <a href="http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2008/070208_stasi_informants.htm">meter reader</a>, the cable guy, the garbage man, the clerk at <a href="http://www.portlandcopwatch.org/PPR39/spying39.html">city hall</a>? Have any <a href="http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/01/11/neo-nazi-threatmaker-accused-of-working-for-fbi/">neo-Nazi friends</a>? Know anyone who <a href="http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=20317">needs a few extra bucks?</a> If so, they can become a paid <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/07/fbi-proposes-bu.html">informant</a> and finger you to a keen-eyed official, who has the authority to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nora-ephron/how-to-foil-a-terrorist-p_b_50474.html">deem you a terrorist suspect, then launch an investigation </a>-- tapping your phone, monitoring your computer and cable TV habits, and physically spying on you. You may even get to be the focus of a <a href="http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=13749">real live sting operation</a>! Naturally, there are many in this country who wouldn't feel the least bit threatened to <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn05012006.html">investigated as a terrorist suspect</a>, because <em>they</em> know they're not terrorists and, besides, as President Bush often reminds us, eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.<br /><br /></p><div align="center"><strong>Are You <em>Sure</em> You're Not a Terrorist?</strong></div><p align="justify">So you think the FBI could never accuse you of being a terrorist? Before taking that leap of faith, it'd be good -- just to be sure -- to make sure you know the offical definition of a <a href="http://www.welfarestate.com/pamphlet/">'terrorist suspect.'</a> (<---- <span style="font-size:85%;"><em>our apologies for the source, but this was the clearest copy we could find on the fly</em></span>).<br /></p><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5235326746336373298" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjISFHPOqLuv22GY559CrVQc-qDdZbzlLxs9d925VkRRtGe94by2zzBYdP9jAdQztNMO9mXCAW2hlhSTS8u7JxHu7P16kknxJerPQyecjFzWH2lQaxz4ittanoAGYDSAhPexBqlyz16in8/s400/barney+big+eyes.jpg" border="0" /> <p align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">You May Be A Terrorist, and Not Even Know It</span></strong><strong></strong><strong></strong><strong></strong><strong></strong><br /><strong><br /></p><div align="justify"></strong><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/21/60II/main594974.shtml">The reality is, just because *you* know that you're not a terrorist suspect, doesn't mean that *they* will also know. </a>For instance, if you write a letter-to-the-editor speaking out <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/19/AR2005121901777.html">against cruelty to animals</a>, or in <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2004/311204fbispying.htm">defense of free speech</a> or environmental issues, or if you are a <a href="http://www.citypages.com/2008-05-21/news/moles-wanted/">vegan</a>, or a <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/August2006/080806_b_surveillance.htm">peace activist</a>, or a <a href="http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/05/375993.shtml">protester,</a> or have a bumper sticker related to any of these issues, the FBI (via local law enforcement or a <a href="https://tips.fbi.gov/">tip</a> from a keen informant) may deem you a domestic or homegrown terrorist. Alternately, your name (and the names of your friends & associates) may be entered into the FBI's terrorist database. Do you wear certain ethnic clothing, or <a href="http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080703/news_1n3terror.html">associate with certain ethnicities</a>, or are you a black activist, or do you resemble one, or are you a <a href="http://www.infocusnews.net/content/view/15942/135/">Muslim</a>, or do you <a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/07/10/muslim_profiling/print.html">resemble a Muslim</a>? You may be a terrorist suspect. </div><div align="left"></div><br /><div align="justify"><a href="http://www.justicedenied.org/issue/issue_25/brandon_mayfield.html">Do you have fingerprints?</a> You may be a terrorist suspect.<br /><br />And what if you're some (or none) of the above, yet get stopped for a speeding ticket by the local Barney Fife....? Are you wearing bulky clothing? Did you forget your driver's license? Are you <a href="http://www.varaces.org/terror/TerrorQuickReferenceCard.pdf">alone and nervous</a>? You may be a terrorist suspect.<br /></div><p align="justify"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5235323657651896098" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjASa5e6agPsGXBWo9y08ctBsoWNT4UroEHfQzfL4fhlHmnPy0Usr5b3i0q8oOeQO24Wzx4mqR88EoKTLZH0Qfmpzmwy9qlIv6lSWO366eG_-x0kLG_wBILvScc3_uC7wVECpuV-KPkts/s400/barney+sheriff+mayberry.jpg" border="0" /><br />Of course, the Bush Administration has been <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jul2002/tips-j22.shtml">using these tactics for years now.</a> But as the FBI, the CIA and Department of Justice reach further into our lives, who's to say any one of us couldn't be shoe-horned into their profile? We, here at the canarypapers, are free-thinkers. We disagree with nearly everything. We especially disagree with everything the Bush Administration has ever done. So I guess you could say we're defenders of the Constitution. We certainly make enough references to it in our rantings on the Bush-Cheney regime. We're vegans too, which is another strike against us but, fortunately, we're too anti-social (woops) to attend <a href="http://earthfirst.com/fbi-on-the-trail-of-dangerous-vegan-potluck-dinner-attendees/">vegan potluck dinners</a>. Of course Zeus -- darn him to heck -- insists on using his nickname, which is another strike against him and, by association, me. </p><p align="justify">We'd like to think that <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gvi2sBwSKE&feature=related">justice would prevail</a> if our viewpoints were ever used as evidence to accuse us of heinous crimes we didn't commit. Better still, we'd like to think we live in a country where something like this could never happen. But the truth is, <a href="http://www.truthinjustice.org/corrupt-FBI.htm">justice doesn't always prevail. </a></p><p align="justify"><em>"If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They'll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government."</em> <span style="font-size:85%;">--Dwight D. Eisenhower<br /></p><p></span></p><p align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9_JO0pAGvnUNlOokSXpaAmmh7xhnh3Jj6vknXfRTDJ8z1qo6yfDC3dUFNAFv-usAy9kpRU2uegJEGw_3u9_PZQBXOxJNLs89Y0x2o9QYNGBQ_ThI4rj6SAUG9hupCF_n393afybY9CXY/s1600-h/barney.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5235477559620308402" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9_JO0pAGvnUNlOokSXpaAmmh7xhnh3Jj6vknXfRTDJ8z1qo6yfDC3dUFNAFv-usAy9kpRU2uegJEGw_3u9_PZQBXOxJNLs89Y0x2o9QYNGBQ_ThI4rj6SAUG9hupCF_n393afybY9CXY/s400/barney.jpg" border="0" /></a>The power to arbitrarily brand people as terrorist suspects is serious business. It becomes dangerous business <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OHdRvfpSIU">when placed in the hands of the wrong person, even if that person happens to be the Attorney General of the United States. </a>This sort of power belongs in corrupt dictatorships, not democratic societies. </p><p></p><p><p></p><p><p></p><p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5CmL0Ydum0IV7qXBN9jH-1941Xv1y2TpdtjaUFgQvy-SI0lAJBuvwFNKkHsRBscG7s5l5-a-s_eXp7_c0D9rRjHWrBbPZwgFFp_ZaliLjYXuZgADLFDvfC8iz9eAhyphenhyphenVkaWi6EfBjbJqU/s1600-h/checkpoint+chickie.jpg"></a></p><p></p><p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><p></p><p><p></p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5CmL0Ydum0IV7qXBN9jH-1941Xv1y2TpdtjaUFgQvy-SI0lAJBuvwFNKkHsRBscG7s5l5-a-s_eXp7_c0D9rRjHWrBbPZwgFFp_ZaliLjYXuZgADLFDvfC8iz9eAhyphenhyphenVkaWi6EfBjbJqU/s1600-h/checkpoint+chickie.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5235483937615483010" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5CmL0Ydum0IV7qXBN9jH-1941Xv1y2TpdtjaUFgQvy-SI0lAJBuvwFNKkHsRBscG7s5l5-a-s_eXp7_c0D9rRjHWrBbPZwgFFp_ZaliLjYXuZgADLFDvfC8iz9eAhyphenhyphenVkaWi6EfBjbJqU/s400/checkpoint+chickie.jpg" border="0" /></a></p><p align="justify">This would be a good time to call and/or write your state representatives and any other member of Congress inclined to respond to such issues. Protest this dangerous intrusion into our constitutional rights. Tell your representative you are <strong>AGAINST</strong> implementing Attorney General Mukasey's 5 new guidlines to transform the FBI/Department of Justice anti-terrorism unit into an elite national security organization, <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/speeches/2008/ag-speech-0808133.html">as announced on August 13th</a>.<br /></p><p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5CmL0Ydum0IV7qXBN9jH-1941Xv1y2TpdtjaUFgQvy-SI0lAJBuvwFNKkHsRBscG7s5l5-a-s_eXp7_c0D9rRjHWrBbPZwgFFp_ZaliLjYXuZgADLFDvfC8iz9eAhyphenhyphenVkaWi6EfBjbJqU/s1600-h/checkpoint+chickie.jpg"></a></p><p align="right"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_lmiSMbqyq3m_oY1Y1EHuc0Esrwg2WJWrbYfVZmkMfpHFg_kH4Q2yAd2tkBniy5gXJzEsHXIDdSUbes0u8Q1gCJrwJkkEGZU9J6RGCdkH5uqFsY3yc4vsDjF3t4I8q5YvBLMkaZ2OoZU/s1600-h/checkpoint+chickie.jpg"></a></p><p align="right"></p><p align="right"></p><p align="right">Tell 'em Checkpoint Chickie sent you. <p></p><p align="left"><p></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-size:100%;">_________________________</span></span></p><p align="center"> </p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-80592136760903448322008-08-16T07:23:00.022-04:002008-08-16T12:08:35.994-04:00Is Obama the Antichrist? First, the Good News...<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFMGQdtutXN5-KzceFgbpbz1yzzPNqGXNozMbI4_7cGALYP6p73J22M6jXcT5vQgQyJkSInRcYSsErC2yNxKg2G9GPoNKOJgxH-fEkJrNTifqr-0nw69wohpi1_AEZt8ONvKtgyl1xsNg/s1600-h/obama+shaved+ice.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5235133867094009154" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFMGQdtutXN5-KzceFgbpbz1yzzPNqGXNozMbI4_7cGALYP6p73J22M6jXcT5vQgQyJkSInRcYSsErC2yNxKg2G9GPoNKOJgxH-fEkJrNTifqr-0nw69wohpi1_AEZt8ONvKtgyl1xsNg/s400/obama+shaved+ice.jpg" border="0" /></a>As Barack Obama sat in Hawaii, placidly munching on shaved ice with his daughters, the, uh, liberal media was at work on an important question: Is Obama the Antichrist? This question, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQoV_Ngl-G8">posed on Friday by </a><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQoV_Ngl-G8">CNN</a>, surely marks the pinnacle in the liberal media's campaign to expose the *real* truth about Barack Obama. Here, they have reached the mountaintop. It's all downhill from now because, as character assassinations go, one simply cannot top the Antichrist. That's the good news.<br /><br />The bad news is that, the same Americans who voted Bush, Cheney & Co. into office (<em>not once, but twice</em>) are the same Americans who will be pondering the Antichrist question over the next few days. The same Americans who vigorously flapped their wings over a 1" flag pin -- yet who have spent the past 7 years utterly indifferent to the dismantling and desecration of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights -- will be deciding, for themselves, the answer to the Antichrist question. The same Americans to whom all the evidence has been presented (<em>that the war in Iraq is for oil -- not WMDs, not Osama bin Laden, not 9-11</em>), are the same Americans who perversely still support this ungodly war that has killed and maimed hundreds-of-thousands of innocent men, women and children in Iraq. That these are the same Americans who will be choosing our next president, is bad news indeed. Or maybe not.<br /><br />It is worth mentioning, that some people have theorized that CNN intentionally orchestrated the Antichrist-question to reinforce the theme of McCain's recent ad, titled, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mopkn0lPzM8">"The One." </a>While we are indifferent to this theory, CNN's Antichrist hijinks do stand as evidence to our own theory: <em>The media coverage of Obama has been little more than an underhanded dart game, waged by hollow puppet heads, orchestrated by fools drunk on power and money.</em> That this game has served to discredit Obama, while validating the campaign of the most feeble and incompetent presidental candidate this country has ever seen, does speak of higher purposes.<br /><br />Will the McMedia's Antichrist dart stick and draw blood as effectively as the flag pin issue did? Or, better still, will this be the hoped-for coup de grâce to Obama's campaign? Nah. This election will be decided on a passing whim, depending entirely on which way the wind happens to be blowing, come November 4th. If we've learned anything over the past seven years, it's that most Americans don't really care about America. If they did, they wouldn't have stood silent to the wholesale rape of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the economy, the environment, the planet, the moral conscience of our country.... <em>Yeah, but we're busy, we're tired, we're distracted, we're broke and, besides, this stuff is depressing. </em>A whim is all it takes. Come November 4th, whoever can promise the likes of a $36 gas holiday, will be carried on America's shoulders, all the way to the White House. Besides, if Americans really, really cared about <a href="http://vodpod.com/watch/419656-dick-cheney-the-unauthorized-biography-cbc">the Antichrist</a>, they would have long since <a href="http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/int3.pdf">dethroned</a> him.Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-26108020513907361972008-08-15T07:43:00.008-04:002008-08-27T14:15:21.984-04:00A Bibliography: The Truths About Georgia's War Against South Ossetia<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjL1UejK3L0lNbw4U5BgPYFEUpKOyINOwnAolhKcMndlJilC1haCMVw0_LPUwsDcVHeiUn9ZEPSCqRI6LQR2Q2yQxFoBtKgjM8AdnKtF2FJUf71V5ZXNrsSgLz7-8zGBDHJc4W54SrQWKM/s1600-h/cartoon.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5234705282266622754" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjL1UejK3L0lNbw4U5BgPYFEUpKOyINOwnAolhKcMndlJilC1haCMVw0_LPUwsDcVHeiUn9ZEPSCqRI6LQR2Q2yQxFoBtKgjM8AdnKtF2FJUf71V5ZXNrsSgLz7-8zGBDHJc4W54SrQWKM/s400/cartoon.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /><div align="center"></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><p align="justify"><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>As a counterpoint to the pervasive U.S. media propaganda about Georgia's invasion of South Ossetia, we are offering links to websites devoted to more accurate and truthful news and perspectives on the U.S.-Georgia offensive against South Ossetia. We'll add to the list as time permits. </p></strong></span><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong><p></strong></span></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong></p></strong></span><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong><p></strong></span></p><p align="center"><strong>__________ </p></strong><strong><p></strong></p><p align="center"><strong></strong></p><p align="center"><strong>AUGUST 20, 2008</strong></p><p align="center"><strong>It's not rocket science, folks. </strong></p><p align="left">Just this past weekend, there seemed to be hope. Georgia and Russia each signed the 6-point peace deal (although, granted, the U.S. pulled a sleazy, petty, underhanded trick and deleted the preamble from Georgia's copy of the peace plan, which stated that the document was the result of an agreement between the presidents of Russia and France. </p><p align="left">Still.... Sleazy, petty, underhanded, preamble-deleting tactic aside, a potentially catastrophic war appeared to have been averted as of this past weekend. All that was left was drafting this plan into a U.N. Security Resolution. Yet, here we are today: four of the six points have disappeared; inserted in their place is incendiary language that is not only a flagrant affront to Russia, but is spawned from false premises -- outright lies -- and completely contradicts the terms of the freshly-signed six-point peace plan. The newly-inserted language is the verbal equivalent of Georgia's August 7th brutal attack on South Ossetia. In other words, it has the U.S. written all over it. </p><p align="left">The events of today add just a bit more insult to injury. Russia countered the ridiculous 2-point draft U.N. resolution with something the media is now terming, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN2042774020080820?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0">"its own"</a> draft U.N. resolution. The fact is, "its own" draft is no more and no less than the very 6-point peace plan that all sides agreed to and signed this weekend. Here's the view from elsewhere in the world: </p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13329">AntiWar.com</a>: "<strong>The Narrative Versus the News: Journalism in the age of perpetual war</strong>" (excellent article, includes Georgia war)<br /></p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.lewrockwell.com/latulippe/latulippe89.html">LewRockwell.com</a>: "<strong>Neocon Crybabies</strong>" Although the unfolding drama in the Caucasus has been a tragedy for its innocent victims, the response by America’s political and media elites has been an entertaining and delusional farce. </p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/49307.html">McClatchy</a>: "<strong>Pentagon, White House at odds over aid to Georgia</strong>" The White House is frustrated, the officials said, but the Pentagon is unperturbed.</p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,174057,00.html">Military.com</a>: "<strong>Hegemon Hijinks</strong>"</p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.moscowtimes.ru/article/600/42/370003.htm">The Moscow Times</a>: "<strong>How Sarkozy Ended the Fighting"</strong> In clinching a six-point truce between Moscow and Tbilisi in three days, French President Nicolas Sarkozy carried out a diplomatic tour de force that could cement his legacy.But the actual documents signed by Presidents Dmitry Medvedev and Mikheil Saakashvili are not identical, and there is a third copy of the peace plan with the signatures of the leaders of Georgia's separatist republics, Abkhazia's Sergei Bagapsh and South Ossetia's Eduard Kokoity.</p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN2042774020080820?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0">Reuters</a>: "<strong>Russia Circulates Own Draft U.N. Resolution</strong>" </p><p align="left"><a href="http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=304545">Reuters:</a> "<strong>White House: Russia needs to return any U.S. equipment</strong>" (Bush issues lost and found notice on the U.S. arms given to Georgia's military to wage its brutal war on South Ossetia. ) </p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/19/rice/index.html">Salon</a>: <strong>Rice: Military power is "not the way to deal in the 21st century"</strong> Whatever one's views are on the justifiability of each isolated instance, it's simply a fact that the U.S. invades, bombs, occupies, and interferes in the internal affairs of other countries far more than any other country on the planet. It's not even a close competition.<strong> </strong></p><p align="center"><strong>AUGUST 19, 2008</strong></p><p align="center"><em><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="color:#339999;"><strong>Were this war truly about democracy and human rights -- and not oil -- the conflict would have been long ago resolved with simple diplomacy.</strong></span> </span>-- <span style="font-size:85%;">Zeus</span></em></p><p align="center"><strong>A re-cap of the events leading to the war in Georgia: </strong></p><p align="center">THE PUPPET REGIME</p><p align="left">In 2004, the Bush Administration installed puppet-President Saakashvili in Georgia, under the guise of removing a corrupt leader and bringing democracy to Georgia. Three years later, in November 2007, the Georgian citizens, who formerly supported Saakashvili, were now protesting in the streets, charging him with corruption and demanding his resignation. The Georgian military (now armed to the teeth with U.S. democracy)<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrP9n0fKl0o&feature=related"> brutalized the protestors </a>with high-tech, mob-control weaponry from the U.S. Saakashvili was re-elected in a corrupt, rigged election, much like the previous two U.S. presidential elections, only more violent. </p><p align="center">U.S. AGGRESSION AGAINST RUSSIA</p><p align="left">In mid-July 2008, the U.S. and Georgia staged joint NATO military exercises on the Russian border, which heightened existing tensions between Russia and the U.S.-Georgia. Two weeks later, Georgia attacked South Ossetia, one of two Russian-allied, independent states within Georgia's borders. Russia counter-attacked, claiming defense of its ally. The <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ne49NgWgy8&feature=related">U.S. media correctly reported</a> that Georgia had invaded South Ossetia. War ensued, soon joined by a fullscale propaganda war, as the U.S. media stopped reporting that Georgia had started the war, and began blaming Russia. Russia termed Georgia's assault a U.S. war-by-proxy. </p><p align="center">A PLAN FOR, UH, PEACE</p><p align="left">As tensions escalated, a peace plan was forged. The plan called for, among other things, a cease in hostilites and for both sides to return to their pre-war positions: <em>Georgia in Georgia, and Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia</em>. Georgian president, Saakashvili, initially refused to sign the plan, because it was "just a political document." The U.S. and Georgia upped the war rhetoric, defying the terms of the peace plan AND the wishes of the South Ossetians and Abkhazia, by <a href="http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=301422">insisting that these two independent states would now fall under Georgia's contro</a>l. To make it look like Russia (not the U.S.) was defying the peace plan, the U.S. media began referring to South Ossetia and Abkhazia as "ethnic Georgia," and accusing Russia of refusing to leave Georgia. Russia's anger escalated. It stepped-up its assault in Georgia-proper, and began destroying U.S. military installations within Georgia, deeming them a threat to Russia. Bush responded by announcing the U.S. installation of missile bases in Poland. Russia accurately deemed this a threat against Russia, and threatened a nuclear response to these missiles being placed in Poland. </p><p align="center">MORE PEACE</p><p align="left">Concurrent to the bilateral threats of nuclear holocaust, a 2nd peace plan was drafted, which reinforced and clarified Russia's right to defend South Ossetia and Abkhazia until such a time when international discussions could take place to establish the political future of these two states. <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20080816&articleId=9855">Russia signed the plan</a>. Saakashvili signed a peace plan, too, which <a href="http://en.rian.ru/world/20080816/116085152.html">Russia claims lacked the introductory clause </a>contained in the peace plan Russia signed. While the U.S.-Georgia may have agreed, on paper, to the plan, they are hoping that no one will notice that they are, in practice, violating the treaty by insisting that South Ossetia and Abkhazia belong under Georgia's control, even tho neither state wants to be under Georgia's control. The U.S. is further insisting that Russia withdraw entirely from the two independent states, despite that the treaty allows Russia's presence there. These covert lies are a flagrant display of agression against Russia. In this, the Bush Administration is forcing Russia's hand. If one didn't, uh, know better, it would appear that the U.S. <em>wants</em> to go to war with Russia.</p><p align="center">MEANWHILE, THE <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmHyw5_zumc">PROPAGANDA WAR </a>RAGES ON.... </p><p align="left">Russia claims to be destroying U.S. stocks and supplies at Georgia's military installations, which it deems as threats to Russia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia.The U.S. has promised to replace whatever military arms Georgia has lost in this war. U.S. is accusing Russia of slaughtering Georgians, which seems true, but to what extent is difficult to discern because both the South Ossetian and the Abkhazian armies are now ruthlessly attacking Georgia-proper. These armies likely have Russian backing, the same way Georgia has U.S. backing, ergo, the U.S. and Russia are staging covert wars against each other. <a href="http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/conflicts/18-08-2008/106135-provocation-0">Russia also claims </a>that Georgian and U.S. mercenary forces are dressed in Russian military garb, attacking their own citizens in Georgia and filming it, to use as propaganda to further villify Russia to the world community, gaining support for future aggression against Russia. What a mess. </p><p align="left">Let us be the among the first to state the obvious: <strong>When a peace plan is drawn up and signed, it is customary for all parties to then abide by the agreement.</strong> </p><p align="left">This war is an evil game. We fault the Bush Administration for starting this war and for sidestepping the terms of the peace plan by intentionally perpetuating this war through lying and using aggressive war rhetoric to exacerbate tensions and undermine any possibility for a real peace. That innocent people are, indeed, being slaughtered in this game is criminal. Many in the U.S., including presidential candidate, McCain, want to see more slaughtering. They want the U.S. to bomb Russia, even if this means fullscale nuclear holocaust. Americans are so enamored of the Bush brand of democracy, that it's worth the annilhation of all life on this planet to spread this democracy. Even as Americans are still stinging from the knowledge that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with spreading democracy and freedom, and had everthing to do with controlling Iraq's oil. Oh, the short memories of these stupid, stupid Americans, who are once again eating Bush's war propaganda like candy. So who's the puppet now? </p><p align="left"><strong>Unless U.S. citizens want to see the entire planet engulfed in nuclear holocaust, they would be well-advised to call their representative to voice opposition to Bush-Cheney's support of Georgia and this war for oil. Were this war truly about democracy and human rights -- and not oil -- the conflict would have been long ago been resolved with simple diplomacy. </strong></p><p align="center"><strong>AUGUST 18</strong></p><p align="left"><em>It seems the closest we can find to truth in the media on this war is through political cartoons. The above cartoon sums things up quite well. With propaganda occupying all sides of this war, it's a rarity to find verifiable, trustworthy, factual news articles. Here are a few we found for August 16-18: </em></p><p align="left"><a href="http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=302133">ANTIWAR.COM</a>/REUTERS: "<strong>Georgia rebel region sacks government, declares emergency</strong>" The president of Georgia's separatist region of South Ossetia fired his government on Monday and declared a month-long emergency to cope with the aftermath of an armed conflict with the central government.</p><p align="center"><strong>AUGUST 17, 2008</strong></p><p align="center"><strong>...</strong></p><p align="left"><strong></strong></p><p align="center"><strong>AUGUST 16, 2008</strong></p><p align="left"><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080901/akhvlediani">THE NATION</a>: "<strong>Ceasefire and Chaos in Georgia</strong>" After nearly two weeks of war, most of Georgia remains in chaos. A bridge thirty miles west of the capital city of Tbilisi was blown up on Saturday afternoon, severing the country's east-west rail link. </p><p align="left"><a href="http://english.pravda.ru/world/ussr/106115-0/">PRAVDA</a>: "<strong>Georgian President Saakashvili eats his tie on TV live "</strong> The BBC has recently aired a TV report, in which Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili ate his tie. The report was about the situation in the area of the conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia. The footage showed Saakashvili making a call to a top Western official. It could be clearly seen that Mr. Saakashvili was having a nervous breakdown. Watch the video <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kid379OjuC0" target="_blank">here</a> </p><p align="center"><strong>AUGUST 14-15, 2008 </p></strong><p><a href="http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=13305">ANTI-WAR.COM</a>: "<strong>Blowback From Bear-Baiting</strong>" <em>Reveling in his status as an intimate of George Bush, Dick Cheney, and John McCain, and America's lone democratic ally in the Caucasus, Saakashvili thought he could get away with a lightning coup and present the world with a fait accompli.</em> </p><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/08/14/10994/">COMMON DREAMS.ORG</a>: "<strong>Putin’s War Enablers: Bush and Cheney</strong>" -- <em>All sides have committed massacres and behaved abominably. There are no clean hands involved.... Still, not everyone in NATO agrees that Saakashvili is a hero. While traveling with the negotiating team of President Nicolas Sarkozy, one French official </em><a href="http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking_news_detail.asp?id=2750&icid=4&d_str=20080813"><em>observed</em></a><em> that “Saakashvili was crazy enough to go in the middle of the night and bomb a city” in South Ossetia. The consequence of Russia’s riposte, he said, is “a Georgia attacked, pulverized, through its own fault.”</em></div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/081208.html">CONSORTIUMNEWS</a>: "<strong>Washington Post and the Great Disconnect</strong>" On Tuesday, the sub-head for the Washington Post’s lead editorial read, “The West confronts an unfamiliar sight: a nation bent on conquest.”</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3596">FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING (FAIR):</a> "<strong>Georgia/Russia Conflict Forced Into Cold War Frame</strong>" -- U.S. corporate media frequently evoked the Cold War as a key to understanding the conflict between Russia and Georgia over South Ossetia. This was certainly true of the media themselves, which generally placed black hats or white hats on the actors involved depending on whether they were allied with Moscow or Washington.</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2008/0815/1218747921949.html">IRISH TIMES</a>: "<strong>Rivals say they plan to remove Georgian president</strong>" -- <em>Georgian opposition politicians have wasted no time in trying to undermine president Mikheil Saakashvili, who remains broadly popular in Georgia but is still widely perceived in the country as having started the war with Russia.</em></div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/345250">THE NATION</a>: "<strong>Georgia's First Mistake: Taking McCain Seriously</strong>" -- <em>What was Mikheil Saakashvili thinking when he started poking at Russia in a manner that Mikhail Gorbachev correctly observes has "turned out to be a time bomb for Georgia's territorial integrity."? That question is easily answered.</em></div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/14/AR2008081403332_pf.html">WASHINGTON POST</a>: "<strong>McCain's Focus on Georgia Raises Question of Propriety</strong>" -- <em>After Chiding Obama, He Dwells on Crisis as a President Might <p></em><br /></p></div><div align="center"><strong>______________________________ </strong><p><br /></p></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong>AUGUST 14, 2008 <p></strong><br /></p></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Question of the Day: <p></span></strong><br /></p></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><em><span style="font-size:130%;">Who's telling the truth: the U.S. or Russia? <p></span></em><br /></p></div><div align="center"><em><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></em></div><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Answer: <p></span></strong><br /></p></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></div><br /><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><em>We can't speak for Russia, but we can state, unequivocally, that the U.S. has stacked lies upon lies into this conflict, the core lie being that Georgia is a sovereign, fledgling democracy. Georgia is a U.S.-installed puppet regime, a corrupt, pseudo-democracy run by thugs, guilty of myriad crimes against its people, not to mention its more recent crimes -- war crimes -- committed against the independent territory of South Ossetia. That the lies of the U.S. administration have been so thoroughly promulgated through the media into a deliberate propaganda campaign to canonize Georgia and demonize Russia is a reckless and dangerous thing to do. For these reasons, we cannot accept, on its face, any information originating from the U.S. administration. We suspect, however, that Russia is now doing some of the same. The fact is, none of us knows the truth -- not even those in charge of the facts. As we've seen in other wars for oil over the past several U.S. administrations, truth is the first victim of war. By the time it returns home (if ever) its pertinence is merely academic. The damage has long-since been done. <p></em></span><br /></p></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><em>_______________________________________ <p></em></span><br /></p></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="left"></div><br /><div align="center"><strong>AUGUST 13, 2008</strong><strong> <p></strong></p></div><div align="left"><br /></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13292">ANTI-WAR.COM</a>: "'Poor Little Georgia' – Not!" Bill Kristol and the Menshevik myth of democratic Georgia " <p></p></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote><div align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;"></span>".... <span style="font-size:85%;">refusing to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states allows the U.S. and the European community to maintain the <a href="http://antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=10511">fiction</a> of Russian "<a href="http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS176US231&q=%22Russian%20expansionism%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn">expansionism</a>." According to <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26142758/">Washington</a>, the Russians invaded "Georgia"; Saakashvili's <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2519908/Caucasus-in-crisis-Georgia-invades-rebel-region.html">invasion</a> of South Ossetia doesn't qualify as <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7548611.stm">aggression</a>, since how can you invade your own country? South Ossetia and Abkhazia are part of Georgia, you see. Just like a small mammal is part of the anaconda that swallowed it whole..... </span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">....(The) dictatorial tradition is today carried on by President Mikheil Saakashvili, who <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkEOHVuOJIk">unleashed</a> police on demonstrators, injuring 500 people, during the hotly contested elections and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHxQZmMRysU">shut down</a> independent media with the same alacrity displayed by his Menshevik predecessors. It is little short of astonishing that Kristol holds up this smarmy regime of small-time hoodlums with big-time regional ambitions as some kind of model, the ideal U.S. ally whose fate we might even go to war over. Georgia, in Kristol's view, is worthy not only of U.S. support, but of membership in an imaginary "<a href="http://www.reason.com/news/show/34607.html">League of Democracies</a>," <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/05/AR2007080501056_pf.html">a neocon project</a> touted by <a href="http://tinyurl.com/5lm3ro">John McCain</a> and pushed by the neocon-dominated wing of the GOP as the "conservative" answer to the United Nations." <p></span></p></div></blockquote></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/08/13/10961/">COMMONDREAMS.ORG</a>: This War Has Been Approved by Your Government</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/13/russia.georgia1">THE GUARDIAN</a>: Mikhail Gorbachev Speaks: "We had no choice." Leaders in the Caucasus must stop flexing military muscle and develop the grounds for lasting peace.</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/13/russia.georgia">THE GUARDIAN</a>: "Bush rebuking Russia? Putin must be splitting his sides"<br />Moscow has to take some of the blame. But it is the west's policy of liberal interventionism that has fuelled war in Georgia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/13/georgia.russia3">THE GUARDIAN</a>: 'I've never heard anything so monstrous as people shelling a hospital' Tom Parfitt travelled to Tskhinvali, in a trip organised by the Kremlin, to witness first hand the destruction caused by the battle for South Ossetia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080818/scheer2">THE NATION</a>: "Georgia War: A Neocon Election Ploy?" Is it possible that this time the October surprise was tried in August, and that the garbage issue of brave little Georgia struggling for its survival from the grasp of the Russian bear was stoked to influence the US presidential election? </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080818/ames2">THE NATION</a>: "The War We Don't Know" Five days after Georgia invaded and seized the breakaway separatist region of South Ossetia, sparking a larger-scale Russian invasion to drive Georgian forces back and punish their leaders, Russia surprised its Western detractors by calling a halt to the country's offensive. </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060710/cohen">THE NATION</a>: "The New American Cold War" Published almost exactly two years ago, this article by Stephen F. Cohen provides a backdrop against which to understand the current Russian-Georgia crisis.</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKWBT00955820080813">REUTERS</a>: "Pentagon says no plans to control Georgia ports" (<em>We, here at the canarypapers, wonder just where Georgia President, Mikheil Saakashvili, got the, uh, crazy idea that Georgia's "ports and airports would be taken under the control of the U.S. defense ministry"?) <p></em><br /></p></div><div align="center">___________________________________ <p></p></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Question of the Day: <p></span></strong></p></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong><strong><br /></strong><span style="font-size:130%;"><em>Why is there an outpouring of world aid being sent to Georgia, the instigator of this brutal war, and not to South Ossetia, where up to 2000 innocent citizens died and thousands more were injured in Georgia's savage attack? <p></em></span></p></div><div align="center"><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Answer: <p></span></strong><strong><br /></p></div></strong><strong><div align="center"><br /></strong></div><span style="font-size:130%;">*ding* </span><br /><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><em>Because, gradually, over the past week, <strong>the U.S. media have stopped calling South Ossetia and Abkhazia by their proper names</strong>, <strong>and have started calling them "ethnic Georgia."</strong> This way, the U.S. can neatly pretend that the regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia are *not* Russian-allied, autonomous regions within Georgia, and pretend, instead, that they *are* Georgia, itself, (which they are not, and have not been since 1991). The beauty of this lie is three-faced: (1) The U.S. can now pretend that Georgia never invaded South Ossetia (after all, <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13292">how does a country invade itself?</a>) and therefore claim that Georgia didn't start this war, and didn't slaughter thousands of South Ossetians. (2) The U.S. can now invade South Ossetia under the guise of offering humanitarian aid to "ethnic Georgians" (despite that Russia is already tending humanitarian aid in South Ossetia), and can also accuse Russia's presence in both autonomous regions (which is allowed under the terms of the peace deal) of being a breach in the peace deal, since -- in the make-believe world of George Bush and the U.S. media -- South Ossetia and Abkhazia no longer *quite* exist. (3) This way, if Russia protests the U.S. invasion of these two territories, the U.S. can now -- in words, anyway -- claim to be supporting the sovereign democracy of Georgia-proper (and, heavens no, not in Russian-allied territories), and can then accuse Russia of most anything, including hampering the U.S. relief efforts in Georgia, and thereby gain world support for.... for what? War? <p><br /></em></span><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></p></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;">And just what happens, from here, to the tens of thousands of South Ossetians, who fled to the safety of Russia in the wake of Georgia's brutal assault, is any one's guess. </span></div><br /><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></div><br /><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;">__________________________________________ <p></span></p></div><div align="left"></div><br /><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong>AUGUST 1-12, 2008 <p></strong></p></div><div align="center"></div><br /><div align="left"></div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/70926">American Chronicle</a> - Bush Administration Behind Conflict Between Russia and Georgia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13285">Anti-War.com</a> - The Real Aggressor: Georgian invasion of South Ossetia sets the stage for a wider war</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://chimesofreedom.blogspot.com/2008/08/how-bbc-is-deliberately-distorting-news.html">Chimes of Freedom</a> - How the BBC is Deliberately Distorting the News from the Georgia Region</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.creative-i.info/?p=318">Creative i</a> - Israel and U.S. Behind Georgian Aggression?</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.creative-i.info/?p=317">Creative i</a> - The Real Reason Behind the Military Buildup of Ex-Soviet Republic of Georgia and Its Invasion of Russian South Ossetia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/08/11/georgias-aggression-on-south-ossetia-is-ethnic-cleansing-media-briefing-of-russias-general-staff/">Dandelion Salad</a> - “Georgia’s aggression on South Ossetia is ethnic cleansing" plus media briefing of Russia’s General Staff</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/08/11/bushs-war-in-georgia-will-it-be-the-flyswatter-or-the-blunderbuss-by-mike-whitney/">Dandelion Salad</a> - “Bush’s War in Georgia; Will it be the Flyswatter or the Blunderbuss?"</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/08/11/georgia-vs-south-ossetia-a-story-of-genocide-see-the-ugly-face-of-war/">Dandelion Salad</a> - "Georgia vs. South Ossentia: A Story of Genocide" (plus, "See the Ugly Face of War") </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/08/10/american-says-us-georgia-to-answer-for-violence/">Dandelion Salad</a> - American Says U.S. and Georgia to Answer for Violence</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/images/news/2008/Georgia-TB-34848.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news/article.cfm%3Fid%3D2997&h=200&w=300&sz=17&hl=en&start=12&sig2=jka5juZH9IsCl93Zt1bP9Q&tbnid=e4Qxvj0a-t-M7M:&tbnh=77&tbnw=116&ei=wMSiSLOwBKGcepHBxbkP&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsouth%2Bossetia%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG">Doctors Without Borders (MSF)</a> - Assess medical needs of wounded in South Ossetia & Georgia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav080408.shtml">EurasiaNet </a>- GEORGIA: TENSIONS FLARE OVER BREAKAWAY SOUTH OSSETIA (three days before war started)</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20080808&articleId=9772">Global Research</a> - South Ossetia: The War Has Begun!</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9773">Global Research </a>- South Ossetia says over 1,000 dead after Georgian attack </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/georgia/images/georgia-area.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/south-ossetia.htm&h=663&w=800&sz=64&hl=en&start=4&sig2=NRgLZefjgGmZypTyv2PHpg&tbnid=K_fyjzaOc2GdlM:&tbnh=119&tbnw=143&ei=wMSiSLOwBKGcepHBxbkP&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsouth%2Bossetia%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG">GlobalSecurity.org</a> - August 12 Conditions on the Ground, Peacetalks & Propaganda</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/09/georgia.russia1">The Guardian </a>- Plucky little Georgia? No, the cold war reading won't wash</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20474.htm">Information Clearing House</a> - "Bodies are lying everywhere. It's hell."</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/putin-wins-probably.html">Lenin's Tomb</a> -Putin Wins, Probably</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080818/ames">Nation (The)</a> - Getting Georgia's War On</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/editorial/17337/georgia039s-folly">Otago Daily Times </a>- Georgia's folly</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20469.htm">Pravda</a> - War between Russia and Georgia orchestrated from USA</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/08-08-2008/106028-twofacedgeorgia-0">Pravda</a> - The Two-Faced, Underhanded Foreign Policy of Georgia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL1556589920080715">Reuters</a> - U.S. Troops Start Training Exercises in Georgia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008107643_webgeorgia12.html">Seattle Times</a> - Russia orders halt to military action in Georgia (Tuesday, August 12)</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/5568/">Spiked</a> - Georgia: the messy truth behind the morality tale</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=58221">Turkish Weekly</a> - Russia Warns Georgia Over South Ossetia (one day before the war started)</div><br /><div align="left"><em>***see also YouTube video clips, below, for addt'l current news reports</em></div><blockquote><div align="center"><a href="http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/5568/">"Armed and goaded by Washington, Georgia took the brash, irrational step of launching a real-world military venture to take back South Ossetia from its Russian ‘peacekeepers’." </a></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong>BACKGROUND STORIES (2004-2008) DOCUMENTING GEORGIA'S LEAD_UP TO THIS WAR: </strong></div></blockquote><p></p><div align="center"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7009085707">All Headline News</a> - Police Clearout Shuts Down Georgia's Pro-Opposition Media Station</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8942">Anti-War.com</a> - Comrade Cheneyvs. President Putin</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=10511">Anti-War.com</a> - Does Putin Not Have a Point?</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.blackanthem.com/News/U_S_Military_19/U-S-Georgia-Azerbaijan-Armenia-and-Ukraine-conduct-exercise-in-Georgia17660.shtml">BlackAnthemMilitaryNews</a> - U.S., Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Ukraine conduct exercise in Georgia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/010408a.html">Consortuium News</a> - Bush, Georgia & Authoritarianism</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3472781,00.html">Deutsche Welle</a> - Russia, US Swap Warnings as Condoleezza Rice Visits Georgia </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.defenddemocracy.org/in_the_media/in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=225687">Foundation for Defense of Democracies</a> - Georgia on His Mind - George Soros's Potemkin Revolution</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2006/11/mil-061103-rianovosti01.htm">GlobalSecurity.org</a> - Georgia must stop hostile actions to improve relations with Russia</div><br /><div align="left">The Guardian - <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/01/georgia.oil">Georgia on Their Mind</a></div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.nhc.no/php/files/documents/land/Georgia/Election_report_Georgia.pdf">Human Rights Centre June 2008 Report</a>: "Georgia's Parliamentary Elections - Unprecedented Brutality and Election Fraud"</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/18/europe/georgia.php">International Herald Tribune</a> - Russia warns Georgia on 'provocations'</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/44909/page/1">Newsweek</a> - (2006) War in the Caucasus? The dispute between Georgia and Russia has all the makings of a tragic conflict. </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1072674.html">Radio Free Europe</a> - Overwhelming Support For South Ossetia Independence </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1079097.html">Radio Free Europe</a> - Criticism Mounting Over Georgia's State Of Emergency</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1051664.html">Radio Free Europe</a> - Georgia: Groups Urge U.S. To Tie Aid To Human Rights Progress </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003991354_wdig03.html">The Seattle Times </a>- Thousands protest delay in Georgia's election</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/news/arms_build_up_as_georgia_prepares_war_on_abkhazia_south_ossetia.html">The Tiraspol Times</a> - Georgia in US-financed arms race for war on Abkhazia, South Ossetia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1130-06.htm">Toronto Sun</a> - Shevy's Big Mistake: Crossing Uncle Sam<br /><a href="http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=40987">Turkish Weekly</a> - South Ossetia votes for independence, West and Russia split </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.workers.org/2007/world/georgia-1122/">Workers World</a> - Mass Protests Shake Former Soviet Republic <p><br /><p></p></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong>***VIDEOS: <p></strong></p></div><div align="center"></div><br /><div align="left"></div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3zLy_aBVQ0&feature=related">YouTube Video</a> "Russia Today" news broadcast, 7/12/07: Georgia and South Ossetia: the propaganda war goes on</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV0jbfVT6Us&NR=1">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" news broadcast, 4/4/08: Putin says NATO expansion a 'direct threat to Russia' </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBrM3X33O6Y&feature=related">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" news broadcast, 4/29/08: Russia Not Planning War with Georgia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQpeBvBEvds&feature=related">YouTube</a> - "AlJazeera" news broadcast, 8/5/08: Ossetian Children Evacuated to safety</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1Hy4XC7tO4&feature=related">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" news broadcast, 8/8/08 : Georgia begins war to retake South Ossetia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-hkyJLZLJo&feature=related">YouTube</a> - "Freedom Movement Info" video, 8/9/08: Georgian aggression and war crimes against Ossetia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsH3n4BNktU&NR=1">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" news broadcast, 8/10/08: A Reporter's View from South Ossetia, calls it "a massacre"</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Xp-4-YyNCU">YouTube</a> - Still-photo slide show of the damage in South Ossetia, August 11, 2008</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVNblG9PJMk&feature=user">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" broadcast, 8/12/08: CNN (<em>stupidity or complicity</em>?) airs misleading footage of Tskhinvali ruins (in South Ossetia) to portray "devastating" damage to Gori, Georgia! </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8fcJgP2mcU&feature=user">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" broadcast, 8.12.08: McCain's & Obama's statements on the war</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3XotT8ZSwc&NR=1">YouTube</a>: "WorldNews4You" video, 8/12/08: Russia & Europe draw up peace plan</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZyGaQkdRaQ&feature=user">YouTube</a>: "WorldNews4You" video, 8/12/08: Western allies vs. Russian allies -- mixed to peace plan from world leaders </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3R-aZf5QDk">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" broadcast, 8.13.08: McCain & Obama statements mirror Bush party line, vs. statements of unknown US presidential candidate, Gloria LaRiva, who speaks the truth </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh9rrLRX1gM&feature=user">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" broadcast, 8/12/08: South Ossentian survivors speak out</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhFPcNxybIs&feature=user">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" broadcast 8/12/08: Reports on the ground: Cities destroyed in South Ossetia, 2000 dead, thousands injured, 35,000 refugees. Georgia firing on fleeing refugees, even as peacetalks under way. </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7i2CQh4cAo&feature=user">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" news broadcast, 8/13/08: Saakashvili uses western media as his weapon against Russia</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi4cFY8keb4">YouTube</a>: "Russia Today" news broadcast 8/13/08: No more fighting, but victims' misery continues</div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EQIZ2lGzTs&feature=user">YouTube</a>: "Russia Today" news broadcast 8/13/08: Severely wounded airlifted to Moscow </div><br /><div align="left"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OsdoQk84uc">YouTube</a> - "Russia Today" broadcast, 8/13/08: A child born as the war began</div><br /><p align="center"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5233604756457960226" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLp9OiHZfBFedLkT36A3S61rOX_RBZPRR6g9EnAdXGxSV570wpGktkCz8kXQgfgXai2d-i1ZVty4key_YQQRrD57ZW7uoxKbtp1o1sj7zaZHUqudo0zKDAD4Ni0uqhTmP3BT976XopMDY/s400/georgia+protesters.jpg" border="0" />TENS OF THOUSANDS OF GEORGIANS PROTEST AGAINST BUSH-CHENEY'S PUPPET REGIME PRESIDENT, MIKHEIL SAAKASHVILI, ACCUSING HIM OF, AMONG OTHER THINGS, LEADING GEORGIA AWAY FROM DEMOCRACY</p><br /><p align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">__________________________________________</span></strong></p><br /><p align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;"><em><strong>Lastly, some additional words to chew on:</strong></em></span></p><span style="font-size:130%;"><em><strong><br /><p align="left"></strong></em></span></p>1.) This is a war for oil. Much like Iraq. More like Somalia.<br /><br />2.) Georgia is a corrupt, pseudo-democracy -- a puppet-government, installed by Bush-Cheney. The rosy coup that hailed President Saakashvili into office turned out to be a farce. The people who cheered him IN now want him OUT. Increasingly reviled by Georgians (much like Bush in our country, and for many of the same reasons) Saakashvili is the target of widespread protest, which he violently suppresses. Georgia's recent history is a carbon copy of our own (stolen elections, the firing of Supreme Court judges, a powerless Congress, and media censorship).<br /><br />3.) The U.S. has given billions to Georgia over the past 10 years (70% of Georgia's budget is spent on defense) and has been training and arming their military -- recently staging JOINT exercises called "Partnership for Peace" right at Russia's border.<br /><br />4.) Georgia invaded South Ossetia. Not the other way around. South Ossetia did not need or ask to be "saved" by Georgia. Russia came to South Ossetia's defense AFTER they were attacked by Georgia. Georgia slaughtered 1500 people in South Ossetia on the first day of this war.<br /><br />5.) About the 'disproportionate' force Russia is waging against Georgia .... The death toll, as of yesterday, was Georgia 40; South Ossetia 2000. At least the Russians have not targeted innocent men, women and children, as the U.S. and Georgia forces have in South Ossetia.Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-42644873954266975412008-08-09T12:01:00.058-04:002008-08-15T14:34:39.315-04:00Media Whiteout: Who's the Real Bully in the Russia-Georgia War?<div align="center"></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><p></span></p></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1Xpvj979qg">It's the United States, as the Bush Administration Uses Georgia as a Pawn in Its Latest War for Oil -- This Time for Control of Pipelines in South Ossetia </a></div><p align="center"></span></p><div align="center"><span style="font-size:180%;"></span><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></div><br /><br /><div align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5232600952875268386" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAooY_zLxHWq16zBvFilyiUilTOWHwh2TZ34raAGrymvl2GFa_lHCyfbeUyYxOcJIshER7_VBC_Y_8S89igLyA6J1CQS-P7wzUYRbvQIq9r_8SuP-J3FfjO0Qe9_YFUeTX2Mt9afpCACw/s400/tank.jpg" border="0" /></span></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:85%;"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNw9C8MP_n8">The View on Friday</a>, as <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvw01ye8sfM">US-Backed Troops </a>from Georgia <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFyi4qyZgmk&feature=related">Invade South Ossetia</a></span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFyi4qyZgmk&feature=related"> </a></div><br /><br /><p></strong></p>Looks like business as usual: The U.S. <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/01/georgia.oil">installs</a> a <a href="http://www.nhc.no/php/files/documents/land/Georgia/Election_report_Georgia.pdf">corrupt</a>, <a href="http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1051664.html">pseudo-democratic</a> <a href="http://www.workers.org/2007/world/georgia-1122/">puppet regime </a>in an <a href="http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/70926">oil-strategic country</a>, then arms and trains its military to the teeth, so that they can (and, rest assured, they always do) stage a U.S. war-by-proxy, so that the <a href="http://canarypapers.blogspot.com/2008_07_20_archive.html">US can wrest control of yet more oil-strategic territory.</a> Only, this time, Bush-Cheney are playing a game of Russian Roulette, their guns aimed straight into the mouth of World War III.<br /><br /><div align="center"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/09/georgia.russia1"><strong>U.S. Backed Georgia Military Sends Tanks into South Ossetia</strong></a><strong><br /><br /></div></strong>For years, Washington has been <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1130-06.htm">supporting and/or installing Georgian politicians</a> who are <a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/010408a.html">favorable</a> to the U.S. oil agenda -- most recently the corrput autocrat, Mikhail Saakashvili -- while pouring military aid into the Georgia, and arming and training their troops for... for.... For what? <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20080808&articleId=9772">For war.</a> This has been <a href="http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/08-08-2008/106028-twofacedgeorgia-0">utterly clear </a>to Russia over the past several years, and <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL1556589920080715">especially over the past several months</a>, as they've watched U.S. and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV0jbfVT6Us&NR=1">Georgia forces amass on the Russian border</a>, as part of the euphemistically named <a href="http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3472781,00.html">"NATO Partnership for Peace program."</a><br /><br /><div align="justify">Russia has been <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/18/europe/georgia.php">warning</a>, for several years <a href="http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=58221">now</a>, against <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1Hy4XC7tO4&feature=related">Georgia invading South Ossetia</a>. Russia has also, through its Foreign Ministry, urged treaties to forge peaceful resolutions to the escalating tension between Georgia and South Ossetia. And as these <a href="http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav080408.shtml">efforts have failed</a>, the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBrM3X33O6Y&feature=related">warnings </a>have only grown stronger: Do not attack South Ossetia. <em>Or else.</em> These efforts have all fallen on deaf ears -- the treaties left unsigned by U.S./Georgia leaders -- with the reporting of this history virtually whited-out by the U.S. media and its allies, with very few exceptions. By the same token, the Bush Administration's repeated promises to put <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/44909/page/1">"heavy pressure"</a> on Mikhail Saakashvili to not attack South Ossetia have fallen on deaf ears in Russia. Perhaps this is due to the billions of dollars the U.S. government has spent arming and training Georgian soldiers to fight the war on terror, while waging <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3zLy_aBVQ0&feature=related">chronic aggression against South Ossetia </a>and performing those joint <a href="http://www.blackanthem.com/News/U_S_Military_19/U-S-Georgia-Azerbaijan-Armenia-and-Ukraine-conduct-exercise-in-Georgia17660.shtml">"peace exercises"</a> at the Russian border.<br /><p></p></div><div align="center"><strong><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVNblG9PJMk&feature=user">Are the U.S. Media Guilty of Stupidity or Complicity? Or Both? </a>You Decide.</strong></div><div align="center"></div><div align="left">Courtesy of the U.S. media (and the media of all allies of the U.S., who depend on our ill-gotten oil) the truth about this war is in white-out mode, replaced by the sort of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVNblG9PJMk&feature=user">propaganda and lies </a>necessary to bolstering support for waging an illegal, immoral war that has been called, by one reporter in South Ossetia, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsH3n4BNktU&NR=1">"a massacre"</a> of its citizens. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8&feature=related">Much like the war in Iraq.</a> This dearth of media truth and balance in the U.S. media nicely dovetails into the Bush Administration's claims that Russia "does not want peace," and that Russia is the savage, the war monger in this scenario. The media accounts of this war make increasingly rare mention to the fact that it was U.S.-backed Georgia (<em>not Russia!</em>) that <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-hkyJLZLJo&feature=related">instigated this war </a>-- invading South Ossetia and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Xp-4-YyNCU">destroying their towns, their homes, and brutally killing their citizens</a>. Either the media are stupid or complicitous: 90% of South Ossetia's citizens are Russian; and South Ossetia has been harmoniously allied with the Russian government for years now. These are not opinions or conspiracy theories. They are facts.</div><p><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080818/ames">"... Now you're starting to see the American media shift its coverage from calling it 'Georgia invading Ossetian territory,' to the new spin, that it's 'Russian imperial aggression against tiny little Georgia.'"<br /></p></a><p></p><p>Our media have ignored <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQpeBvBEvds&feature=related">the build-up to this war</a>, the same as they are now whitewashing the real bully in this war. The media, instead, perpetuate the myth that South Ossetia is somehow being "saved" by the U.S. and Georgia, despite that they <strong>do not want</strong> to be "saved" from a willing alliance with Russia. Make no mistake: <strong>This is a war of choice. This is a war for oil. This is a war started by the Bush Administration, using Georgia's <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWlQ_fzECl4&feature=user">Mikhail Saakashvili</a> as its pawn, and Russia as the ruse. </strong>Perhaps our administration didn't really believe all those Russia warnings of retaliation. Perhaps Bush-Cheney thought their Georgia pawns and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS-9_1TaYU0&NR=1">mercenary armies </a>could overwhelm the pro-Russian province of South Ossetia (and likely their neighbor, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVOlQ6zyOh0&feature=user">Abkhazia</a>, too) as brutally as America's Ethopian pawns have overwhelmed Somalia. Or, perhaps Bush-Cheney couldn't care less what anyone things or says about the atrocities they commit in the name of spreading freedom and democracy. </p><p>As recent history has shown, the war crimes of the Bush Administration are so layered in lies that -- by the time the rest of the world figures out the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4MHcPfh9Z0&feature=user">real truth </a>-- the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjeRhxV2qgo&feature=user">death and destruction </a>are little more than a footnote in the history of one more nation, swallowed up by the Bush-Cheney war machine. Soon forgotten in George Bush's crafty war rhetoric will be the 1500 South Ossentian citizens -- that's 1500 innocent men, women, children and vulnerable elderly citizens -- who were <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvw01ye8sfM">brutally slaughtered</a> in the first day alone of this war. The rest of South Ossentia citizens -- those 'lucky' ones, who have scrambled for safety, toward the Russian border, and whose lives have been forever altered as their homes and their villages have been decimated -- will likely not even be allowed the trivial dignity of a footnote.<br /><br /><br /></p><div align="justify"></div><strong>And this aspect deserves bold-face type: these citizens are fleeing -- <em>not into Georgia</em>, but into Russia.</strong> Whose media version does this part of the story fit? The American media version -- in which Russia is waging an unprovoked and 'disproportianate' war on Georgia? The American version, in which the U.S. and Georgia merely sought to save the poor little, independent province of South Ossentia from the evil empire? Or the version told by both <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfA5XfxQOPw">Russia </a>and <a href="http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=12945236&PageNum=0">South Ossetia </a>-- versions that paint Georgia and the U.S. as <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28czc1qo0HQ&NR=1">war criminals</a>, slaughtering innocent citizens in their illegal invasion of South Ossetia?<br /><br /><div align="justify"></div><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvZ3_ZN1Zb0&feature=user"><em>Do you suppose the South Ossentians are lying?</em></a> Do you suppose that Sarmat Laliyev, a 28-year old South Ossentian, fleeing toward Russia, was lying, when she said, "We lost our city ... The Georgians are like Nazis, they are killing civilians, women and children with heavy artillery and rockets"?<br /><br /><br /><div align="justify"></div><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5233249297286669922" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5VljofuI49mEDi-ucff3dn7TqgD__6nH3zjuyED0V6Ad9OYTX6LG1gU1pQNMQ0TXPcC0htUaq9xEkt3uk-_A_spyyMZjbi5yL7_6k23uQPjW8yrQnv-09mDqejtS4BJGXOKriWn00TSA/s400/Russian_convoy_.jpg" border="0" /><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:85%;">Russia sends Teams of Buses to Evacuate 15,000 South Ossetia Citizens Forced to Flee Their Homes</span> </strong></div><br /><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><br /><div align="justify">With the war in full swing, the U.S. propaganda machine is running at full-pitch. The U.S. pretends that Georgia is being victimized, as their pleas for a cease-fire go unheard by Russia. The U.S. accuses Russia of 'disproportionate' force against Georgia, while ignoring the fact that <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1DiAsec-kU&feature=user">a ceasefire is hardly possible, until Georgia withdraws from South Ossetia</a>, which they've so far failed to do, despite repeated demands by Russia. <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080810/south_ossetia_080810/20080810?hub=CTVNewsAt11">Cheney says </a>that, "Russia's military action against Georgia must not go unanswered." Bush is urging "peace." He is urging Russia to stop the violence. His lies about <a href="http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=12937276&PageNum=0">who started what </a>are delivered "in a serious and somber tone," as he claims the United States is "deeply concerned" about the fighting, and calls this a "dangerous escalation" that is “endangering regional peace.” Duh.<br /><br />No doubt, the majority of US citizens, in their perennial ignorance of world politics, in general (and of any issue, in particular, that doesn't involve Paris, Brittney, J-Lo, Angelina or Madonna) will start waving American flags and railing against the godless evil empire: Bush is the good guy, here. After all, he's calling for peace, right? And peace is good. Even George Bush's brand of peace, is good, right? I mean, sometimes peace means you gotta go to war, but that's okay, too, so long as it's not on American soil.... <p></p></div><div align="justify"></div><br /><div align="center">... so long as the war happens to someone else, not us.</div><br /><br /><div align="justify"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5232596047651864706" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIOu0Aq4sculRYedhLE1eC7lu6DfjE3EjqjJENTGM0Xk92ymWT1HjbdMq7Wk5sP4R0AF2_R3DzG_9CevQ_ge2YbN-FWeqghI-cicpJfB2p3CxbwxoXVn0tzt7tgRQoylcq5qT3D-1Nc3E/s400/face+of+war.jpg" border="0" /><br />One important difference between Georgia and, say, <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/mar2005/kla-m16.shtml">Kosovo</a>-<a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/may1999/stat-m24.shtml">Yugoslavia </a>is that, this time around, the US is staging its proxy war right on Russia's border. And Russia has made clear that they are not going to be so indifferent this time around. Bush-Cheney knew this, of course, before they equipped Georgia to attack South Ossetia, which begs the question: What are they thinking?<br /><p></p></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><br /><div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9rUEbkckvdOaGb_HxKa5IAJDnjMZqjxUOTBz-dPoVUB1L_FCKkHHcMEXD3HAe-hEeZ9u6gJAVKG7UmlWjhXFX17wBNiiCGSRlpMWwMlbTBFMPl-izlY8Vvf-nyByNoKJPWcIkGa9dkNk/s1600-h/soldiers.jpg"></a><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5232598993998746034" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnaFccASl28ZnOxgVBCSEDO5tkPzK0HpDlb0tdDZJFndRQjX1HPYFvT93za2t5BP1HhbAAoFi1BFL_w2TsvbUvMWeMwt2-2G-iTu_8k8RCf2up9zaUDKRXR48IRKo8FBxTU5Eul0XybqY/s400/soldiers.jpg" border="0" /> </div><div align="justify">The answer here, as in all modern U.S. conflicts -- from <a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.dunav.org.il/images/maps/map_yugoslavia.jpg&imgrefurl=http://1389blog.com/category/serbia/&h=1023&w=979&sz=138&hl=en&start=1&sig2=0IWXvPeeKIAnQNX3TIqX5A&um=1&tbnid=lPh9-BzSFy_j_M:&tbnh=150&tbnw=144&ei=p8udSOODOqHOiAHWn9HnBQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmap%2Byugoslavia%2Bkosovo%2Bserbia%2Brussia%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN">Kosovo</a>, to Iraq, to Colombia, to Afghanistan, to Somalia and the entire continent of Africa -- can be summed up <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqL0ovW_xuyLMnFefyUOKkT5vCve0RXNgxnPGPt0nebaTxkXN29sMpgW7oijCbMBPSrPndP_iu8LLVVnVaqNX9ycC0bHNCrUKClQAWM306yrQzHOqkaB4W-LICxQn2UOW5UEoLv-MTYgE/s1600-h/burning+building+in+Georgia.jpg"></a>in one word: oil.</div>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-4020384579288497612008-08-04T16:14:00.023-04:002008-08-08T09:39:11.154-04:00A Tragic Death: American Justice is Laid to Rest with Dr. Bruce Ivins<p></p><p><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5230772622818448466" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZNNglrlnWdg0tVbNARI9Cxwlt21Ijbo5aoxxjQplMeUOuK-s_gX5ob42BHdYpxS-d4QmM9pjDjTnfuDpbi2wZsw7jfoPo55berJa4xyyG4Up9YQUVXb7gqIdnWXDvdwm4t2405sRfSmE/s400/bruce-ivins.jpg" border="0" /></p><p align="center"><a href="http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008/08/02/anthrax-scientistâs-friends-and-colleagues-âdumbfoundedâ-by-accusations/"><span style="color:#660000;"><strong>For colleagues, a ‘quiet, giving kind of guy’</strong></span></a></p><p>Our condolences on the tragic death of Dr. Bruce Ivins, the lastest casualty in the war of terror. We are particularly saddened by the smear campaign and scapegoating that led to his death, as Dr. Ivins fell prey to a legalized form of witchhunting -- known as the <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Story?id=2120605&page=1">Dick Cheney One-Percent Doctrine </a>-- which, beginning in 2001, replaced over 200 years of justice. A strategy for determining criminal guilt, the One-Percent Doctrine disregards the need for factual evidence, so long as there is a <em>probability</em> that such evidence exists -- and a small probability, at that. According to the Cheney's One-Percent Doctrine, if a perceived threat seems 1% true, you should act as if it's 100% true. According to Cheney's One-Percent Doctrine, I may be a terrorist, and you may be, too. </p><p>This was the doctrine used to take our country to war in Iraq. This was the doctrine used to accuse Dr. Ivins of heinous crimes against humanity. This was the doctrine used to smear Dr. Ivins' good name, to subject him to a relentlessly invasive investigation for evidence that appears to be non-existent, and to then try him posthumously in the court of the media: guilty, case closed. </p><p>The problem with shoehorning an investigation toward pre-conceived evidence -- and, ultimately, a pre-conceived verdict -- is that, well, this only works in dictatorships, and only because the people are powerless to protest the injustice. America is not quite there. Not yet. Which means that I can still use my voice to protest this injustice -- to correct the story of Bruce Ivins -- because the official version is riddled with discrepancies. In re-telling his story, we can only aspire to a closer truth. In this, we hope to restore some of the justice robbed from Bruce Ivins in the course of the shoddily-constructed allegations and the investigation that have been waged against him. </p><p>The FBI and Department of Justice have announced that they may decide, as early as today, to pronounce Ivins guilty, case closed. We would like to assure the FBI and the Department of Justice that this in no way kills the truth. There are still many in this country who believe in the basic tenets of justice in a democratic society. It is in this shared spirit of justice and human kindness that we begin his story by offering the following truths about Dr. Ivins, as spoken by those who, perhaps, knew him best: </p><ul><li>Ivans' attorney, Paul F. Kemp, <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93194938">asserted Ivins' innocence </a>and stated that Ivans had been cooperating with the anthrax probe for more than six years, using his expertise as a scientist to help the government, and had also been cooperating for over a year, after the investigation was turned toward Ivins. In <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/07/27-week/">a statement </a>made after Ivins' death, Kemp said, "We are saddened by his death, and disappointed that we will not have the opportunity to defend his good name and reputation in a court of law." In <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-naw-anthraxreax2-2008aug02,0,2713583.story">another statement</a>, Kemp said, "We assert his innocence in these killings, and would have established that at trial. The relentless pressure of accusation and innuendo takes its toll in different ways on different people, as has already been seen in this investigation. In Dr. Ivins' case, it led to his untimely death."<br /></li><li>Dr. Russell Byrne -- Bruce Ivins' friend and colleague for 15 years -- believes that federal investigators were going after the wrong person, and that it was their pressure on Ivins that led to his suicide. In an <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26007186/">interview with MSNBC</a>, Dr. Byrne describes the effect the investigation had on Ivins, starting a year ago, as it incapicatated him to working. Dr. Byrnes scoffed at the "ridiculous motives" offered by federal investigators, and cited examples to disprove their claims against Ivins.<br /></li><li>Arthur O. Anderson, a medical doctor and scientist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease at Fort Detrick, and a co-worker for many years, <a href="http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=78365">said of Dr. Ivins</a>, "He was concerned with how the Institute was perceived and how he was perceived. That manifested itself in the care he took in conducting his research." Dr. Anderson futher described Ivins as "a hard-working individual with a high level of integrity and pride in both his workplace and his individual work." Dr. Anderson believe in Ivins' innocence and believes that Ivins has been used as a scapegoat in the anthrax case. </li><li>Retired Army Lt. Col. Jeffrey Adamovicz -- former director of the bacteriology division at USAMRIID -- told <a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/08/03/alg_anthrax.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/08/02/2008-08-02_fbi_expected_guilty_plea_in_anthrax_case.html&h=292&w=450&sz=44&hl=en&start=2&sig2=ZXjHvLtMYV-a4ZalLDmjYg&um=1&tbnid=Jqa6zwlCvbYpjM:&tbnh=82&tbnw=127&ei=56yZSM-5GYO0hALs3oEn&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbruce%2Bivins%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN">The News </a>that the FBI's probe into the 2001 anthrax killings had upended the work of the lab by turning scientists into suspects - and pushed his pal over the edge. "<em>I just cannot see that Bruce would in any way, shape or form be responsible for something like that,"</em> he said. "<em>I'd like to see these charges substantiated, because just like [with] Dr. Hatfill, there could be nothing to these allegations."</em> He said the FBI has created a psychologically toxic atmosphere for scientists at Fort Detrick. <em>"We were there processing information for agents and then one day they turned around and treated us all like suspects,"</em> he said. The agents' criteria for additional suspicion was <em>"who's working the most overtime,"</em> said Adamovicz, who also was questioned by the feds. "<em>The Bruce I knew,"</em> Adamovicz said, "<em>would not have anything to do with this." </em>In statement to the Washington Post, Adamovicz said, “<em>I really don’t think he’s the guy. I say to the FBI, ‘Show me your evidence’.</em>” He added, referring to the intense investigative pressure on Ivins, <em>“A lot of the tactics they used were designed to isolate him from his support. The FBI just continued to push his buttons.”</em><br /></li><li>Friends and neighbors said he was an avid gardener, an active walker and a volunteer with the Red Cross. Ivins and his wife of 33 years, Diane, had 24-year-old twins, whom they raised in a modest white house with red shutters across the street from Fort Detrick in Frederick, where Ivins worked at the U.S. Army’s institute for infectious diseases.<br /></li><li>“Anybody that knew Bruce through his church affiliation is just dumbfounded,” said Bill McCormick, who attended St. John the Evangelist Roman Catholic Church in Frederick with Ivins for 25 years. He said Ivins was a “quiet, giving kind of guy,” and the news that he was about to be charged in the attacks did not fit with the Ivins he knew. </li><li>David Danley, who worked with Ivins at Fort Detrick to develop a new anthrax vaccine for almost 10 years until 2003, says he has a hard time believing Ivins could be the anthrax killer. He remembers a cute gesture he would make to his daughter when they would see Ivins at their church. "My daughter was involved in a little theater in Frederick," Danley said. "And whenever she was in a musical, she would walk into church, and [Ivins] would be at the piano. And he would start playing a tune from the musical she was in ... just as a quiet sort of hello."<br /></li><li>Two military scientists who had worked closely with Ivins on projects for years, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said yesterday they were stunned and angry that he was being depicted as a suspect in the attacks without hard evidence being released by the FBI.<br /></li><li>“Nobody thinks Bruce did it,” said one scientist. He described Ivins as “socially awkward” but he “certainly wasn’t a recluse or a hermit.” He added, “He was kind of a geeky scientist.” </li><li>Dr. Kenneth Hedlund, who worked with Bruce Ivins at Fort Detrick, says he thinks the government needed a scapegoat. He says the FBI was under a lot of pressure after paying nearly $6 million to Steven Hatfill — another researcher who had been under suspicion in the anthrax attacks. "Unfortunately, Bruce Ivins was a good guy — he was probably more vulnerable, and with the pressure they applied to him, they forced him to this position," Hedlund remembers the scientist as an outgoing, friendly man who juggled at parties.<br />Hedlund says he feels sorry for Ivins' wife and children, and he is bothered by what he calls the government's rush to say the problem is solved. "It's a damn shame that they've chosen him as a fall guy, and I think they've chosen him as a fall guy because he was too human," Hedlund says.<br /></li><li>Another colleague said, “I’ve talked to several friends, and we’re all just really sad and shocked. I hate to see him painted as a person who could’ve done this.” </li><li>The official statement issued by USAMRIID said <em>"The agency mourns the loss of Dr. Bruce Ivins, who served the institute for more than 35 years as a civilian microbiologist.</em>” Time magazine commented: “That seems like an unusual thing to say if you believe one of your employees had something to do with an anthrax attack. It now remains incumbent on the FBI to reveal what information it had linking Ivins to the attacks. Given the federal government’s record on the anthrax investigation, and the national security interests involved, Ivins’ death should not be used as an excuse for the case to be closed without a full, public airing.”</li><li>Several of Ivins' neighbors said they believe the government had the wrong man — and suggest that perhaps the real killer is still out there.<br /></li><li>“I feel so badly for his family,” said Duggan, an adult-education worker who has lived next to the Ivinses since they bought the 1,500-square-foot house in 1990. It was just the opposite, she said. Whenever she saw him on the street, he would wave heartily and they would chat. She said he walked regularly, perhaps to help his bad back. When she needed a chain saw for some yard work, Ivins showed up and did the job. “Bruce was the kind of neighbor that anyone would want to have,” Duggan said.<br /></li><li>Ivins was the son of a Princeton-educated pharmacist, and one of his ancestors had opened a pharmacy in town in 1893, in Lebanon, Ohio. His family had deep roots in the small town near Cincinnati.</li></ul><p align="center">*********************</p><p>It is apparent to many who truly knew Dr. Ivins -- as well as many who didn't -- that the official story, as painted by the FBI and the Department of Justice, has so far failed to accomplish more than weaving a case built on innuendo and unsubtantitated allegations. Below, we offer a corrected and more comprehenisive version of the story than has been offered in the official version. The version you will read below begins with some background, then details a total of 11 counterpoints to the case against Dr. Ivins, following a somewhat surreptitious, but relevent, sequence of events that began after September 11, 2001, when all the world was reeling in a shell-shock of horror. All the world, that is, <em>except</em> for the henchmen in the Bush Administration. There was work to be done.... </p><p align="center"><strong>A Constitution to Dismantle </strong></p><p>...beginning with the September 13th passage of <a href="http://www.techlawjournal.com/cong107/terrorism/20010913.asp">Senate Amendment #1562</a>, -- the "Combatting Terrorism Act of 2001," which, in effect, gave our government license to brand me a terrorist and to wiretap my phone and computer, based solely on the above paragraph I just wrote. And it gave them license to do so, based solely on the say-so of, say, the local Barney Fife. </p><p>In the wake of 9-11, the pressure was understandably immense on Capitol Hill to create strong anti-terrorism legislation. But a different sort of pressure was felt by at least one lawmaker on the Hill -- to not trample the Constitution in the panic over 9-11. While Attorney General Ashcroft was urging speedy passage of wire-tapping legislation, Senator <a href="http://www.cdt.org/security/010913senatewiretap.shtml">Patrick Leahy </a>urged calm deliberation. "I worry that we may run into the situation," Leahy said, "where all of us have joined together in our horror at these despicable, murderous acts in New York and at the Pentagon--we do not want to change our laws so that it comes back to bite us later on." </p><p>Tensions flared between Ashcroft and Leahy, as Leahy argued against rushing the amendment through, in the absence of the customary hearings and discussion that would normally accompany such legislation. Equally concerning to Sen. Leahy, as seen in his statements, was the balancing act between civil liberties and constitutional law, against the vagueness and ambiguity of the bill's language on wiretapping and terrorism. </p><em><blockquote><p><em>"We are going to amend our wiretap laws so we can look into anybody's computers,"</em> Leahy said during the Amendment 1562 deliberations.<br /></p><p><em>"Maybe the senate wants to just go ahead and adopt new abilities to wiretap our citizens. Maybe they want to adopt new abilities to go into people's computers. Maybe that will make us feel safer. Maybe. And maybe what the terrorists have done made us a little bit less safe. Maybe they have increased big brother in this country.<br /></em></p><p><em>"If that is what the Senate wants, we can vote for it. But do we really show respect to the American people by slapping something together, something that nobody on the floor can explain, and say we are changing the duties of the Attorney General, the Director of the CIA, the U.S. Attorneys, we are going to change your rights as Americans, your rights to privacy? We are going to do it with no hearings, no debate. We are going to do it with numbers on a page that nobody can understand....<br /><br />If we are going to change habeas corpus, change our rights as Americans, if we are going to change search and seizure provisions, if we are going to give new rights for state investigators to come into federal court to seek remedies in the already overcrowded federal courts, fine, the Senate can do that. But what have we done to stop terrorism, and to help the people in New York and the survivors at the Pentagon?</em></p><p align="left"><em>"We do it to fight terrorism on computers.... but how is a terrorist defined? We know what terrorism was at the trade towers.... We do not (</em><span style="font-size:85%;">in this amendment</span><em>) define terrorism.... I guess some kid who is scaring you with his computer could be a terrorist and you could go through the kid's house, his parents' business or anything else under this language. It (</em><span style="font-size:85%;">the language in the amendment</span><em>) is that broad.<br /></em></em><br /></p></blockquote><p>Amendment 1562 nonetheless passed within hours of Leahy's statements. <a href="http://centerforinvestigativereporting.org/articles/sixweeksinautumn">Within one month</a>, Amendment 1562 and others were combined into the first version of the US PATRIOT ACT -- introduced on Oct. 2 and passed on October 12. Eleven days later, on October 23 *(and in the wake of the September 18th and October 9th anthrax mailings) the 'new and improved,' 300+ page version of the US PATRIOT ACT was introduced. And in the minds of civil libratarians, constitutional scholars and citizens across the country -- this new version of the US PATRIOT ACT also introduced a full-scale assault on the U.S. Constitution. But the mood was urgent. After all, the terrorists were mailing anthrax all over the country. <em>What next? Who next? Where next? </em>The rest is history. </p><p align="center"><strong>Tracking Terrorists. Or Not.</strong> </p><p>The pertinence of these events to the alleged suicide of Bruce E. Ivins is threefold. (1) These events reveal the fervor of our government to staunch terrorism -- even to the extent that U.S. laws were perplexingly changed, in the interest of tracking terrorists, to allow our government to surveil our cable television viewing habits. (2) Two of the most powerful voices on the Hill -- Senators Leahy and Daschle, the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Majority Leader, respectively -- waged strong dissent to passing the US PATRIOT ACT and were also the only two lawmakers targeted in the anthrax mailings. (3) <a href="http://www.techlawjournal.com/cong107/terrorism/20010913.asp"><strong>Senate Amendment #1562 </strong></a><strong>-- passed only two days after 9-11 -- issued a congressional directive to President Bush to ensure, within 60 days, proper safety standards for government labs that handle biological pathogens, as follows:</strong><br /></p><blockquote>"Commencing not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,<br />the President shall undertake appropriate actions to enhance the standards for<br />the<em> physical protection and security of the biological pathogens</em> described in<br />subsection (a) <em>at the research laboratories and other government and private<br />facilities</em> in the United States <em>that create, possess, handle, store, or transport such pathogens</em> in order to protect against the theft or other wrongful diversion of such pathogens."<br /></blockquote><p>That this congressional directive was <em>specifically applicable</em> to Fort Detrick, <em>and</em> to the manufacturing and handling of anthrax, <em>and</em> to an Army scientist named Bruce E. Ivins, makes all the more curious the events that then transpired, from September 13, 2001 to Dr. Ivin's death on July 29, 2008. It is in the spirit of due process that we offer the following counterpoints to the 'trial by media' now being conducted against a man who is still, under the existing laws of this country, innocent.<br /></p><p align="center"><strong>In the Spirit of Due Process</strong></p><p align="center">(ONE)</p><p align="left">Its ludicrous to think that our government would allow -- <em>either before or after the Amendment 1562 legislation</em> -- a lifelong homicidal sociopath (as Dr. Ivins has been painted since his death) to work for 18 years at Fort Detrick, a high-security Department of Defense laboratory, as a scientist entrusted with biological warfare agents, such as anthrax. Ask any <a href="http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/nsa-interview.pdf">one who has been through a background check </a>for a Q-Level <a href="http://usmilitary.about.com/od/theorderlyroom/l/blsecmenu.htm">security clearance </a>with the Department of Defense. It's ludicrous. </p><p align="center">(TWO)</p><p>Equally ludicrous are the recent media reports suggesting that the administration's "bungling" of the investigation was responsible for the fact that -- for the past 1-1/2 years since the FBI began investigating him -- Ivins continued to work at Fort Detrick until just a few weeks ago, when he was removed <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gH1fcT1QrjvwIaAZTO63_lxHs9EQD929LQBO0">"because of fears he had become a danger to himself or others.</a>" Just ask any person in this country, who has flown, post-9-11 (ask <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBWp4iMnHN0&feature=related">Maher Arar</a>, <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/14/050214fa_fact6">who can</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHWnZt66qBw&feature=related">attest</a>) -- this administration spares no stealth or effort to scrutinize potential terrorists, and will pursue the faintest molecule of a lead with the intensity of a corpse-sniffing dog. Were Dr. Ivins <em>truly</em> seen as a threat -- a "terrorist" by definition, if he were 1% guilty of the anthrax mailings -- he would not have been allowed to board a plane in this country, much less work with biological warfare agents in a DOD laboratory. </p><p align="center">(THREE)</p><p>The media's cherry-picking of quotes and their lack of factual context is reprehensible, unethical, and unbalanced. In some instances, the reports smack of propaganda. One such is example , is the reporting on the allegations of guilt, waged by Bruce Ivans' brother, Tom, who had not even spoken to Bruce since 1985 -- the reasons for this 23-year distance unknown to us. Lacking this context, the media nonetheless sees fit to repeat ad nauseam that Ivins' brother, Tom, believes Bruce to be guilty of the anthrax mailings. "He considered himself like a god," said Tom, and the media glommed onto this statement, as if to somehow bolster the FBI's case against Bruce Ivins. </p><p>This armchair verdict, delivered by Dr. Ivins' brother, would perhaps carry some weight, if not for the fact that brother Tom presents as a petty, embittered, puffed-up old man, jealous of Bruce's intellect and success. Tom paints both of his brothers (Bruce and Charles) as wooses, for their lack of athletic prowess in high school, a million years ago. Were the media responsible, rather than acting as complicitious flesh-eaters with the FBI, they would disregard entirely this guilty verdict, delivered by a brother whose heart is so filled with bile, that he can only speak ill of his dead brother and of his other brother, Charles, currently recovering from heart open-heart surgery. In the interest of balance, here is one exchange between the media (NPR) and brother Tom: </p><p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93250745">Tom Ivins, who lives in Middletown, Ohio, admits he hasn't spoken to his younger brother Bruce since 1985. He won't say why, except that there's no law that requires him to maintain contact.<br />"I don't owe him anything," Tom Ivins says.<br /></a></p><p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93250745">Tom says he used to give his little brother rides in his bicycle basket when they were kids, but "we didn't play together because I was very athletic myself."<br /></a></p><p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93250745">Their father was a pharmacist and their mother was a homemaker in Lebanon, Ohio. Tom played football in high school, while Bruce ran cross-country. But Tom says his brothers, Bruce and Charles, shared a disturbing family trait. "They grew up with that attitude — I didn't — that they were omnipotent," Tom Ivins says.</a></p><p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93250745">He says there were no signs that something was wrong with his brother when they were younger, but he thinks pressure from law enforcement probably led to Bruce's suicide.<br /></a></p><p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93250745">Tom says he is a much stronger man than Bruce was — proven by the way Tom says he handled questioning about the case by the FBI. "They asked me a few questions, like 'What were you like growing up,' like family history questions, and I didn't buckle like the walls of Jericho coming tumbling down under their questioning, but it seems my two brothers did," he says. "Charles was not as strong as I am, nor was Bruce."<br /></a></p><p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93250745">When asked if there's anything he liked about his brother, Tom replies, "No, I didn't."<br /></a></p><p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93250745">He says he isn't sorry his brother is dead.</a></p><p></p><p align="center">(FOUR)</p><p>Ivans allegedly mailed the anthrax letters as part of a "warped plan to test his vaccine for the deadly poison." For one thing (and we don't claim to be <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/anthrax.htm">experts on anthrax vaccines</a>) aren't vaccines given <em>before, </em>rather than <em>after</em> exposure to a pathogen? The antidote of choice for anthrax exposure is the antibiotic <a href="http://www.lycos.com/info/cipro.html">Cipro</a>, which Bush, Cheney and other White House staff <a href="http://www.judicialwatch.org/1967.shtml">began taking on September 11th</a>, one week before the first anthrax letters were mailed out. </p><p>Another thing, regarding Ivins' alleged diabolical plot to test his vaccine -- <em>how did this plan interface with mailing anthrax to Leahy and <a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www1.whdh.com/images/news_articles/389x205/080801_anthrax_attack.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/national/BO83985/&h=338&w=640&sz=72&hl=en&start=36&sig2=lUG4tTcWEc299hLEB9bWzA&um=1&tbnid=1VNAJ3vp6zQEuM:&tbnh=72&tbnw=137&ei=Ya6ZSIeyAZeIhQKT-pwl&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbruce%2Bivins%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN">Daschle</a>, two of the most outspoken voices against the PATRIOT ACT?</em> Were these targets mere coincidence? And was it mere coincidence that these letters were mailed 3 days before the first version of the US PATRIOT ACT was voted into law? Also, in the interest of "testing his vaccine," why would Ivins have chosen to scatter the other letters across the county? The impracticality of this plan defies common logic. And why were these letters sent to media outlets? What possible purpose would these targets serve, to a mad scientist, bent on testing his latest invention? <strong>You do not have to be a conspiracy theorist to notice <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18056504/truth_or_terrorism_the_real_story_behind_five_years_of_high_alerts">who stood to gain the most from scaring the hell out of the media and our lawmakers -- and, by extension all of America </a>-- at a time when our Constitution was being systematically dimantled. </strong></p><p>In this light, a little-known truth is that the most logical culprit -- the CIA -- was being investigated as early as December 2001, as reported in <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1216-03.htm">Washington Post</a>. The CIA was found to be involved in anthrax research and testing, and was named as possible suspects in the anthrax mailings. The CIA and their contractor, Battelle Memorial Institute were under fire <strong>before</strong> 9-11, as reported in a September 4, 2001 <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E02E1D71639F937A3575AC0A9679C8B63">New York Times </a>article, which described some of the CIA's work throughout 2001, conducting secret tests with biological weapons, specifically anthrax. According to teh article, the CIA's goal was to first "<em>engineer genetically a potentially more potent variant of the bacterium that causes anthr</em>ax," and then to "<em>assess whether the vaccine now being given to millions of American soldiers is effective against such a superbug</em>." Accused of testing "the limits of the global treaty banning such weapons," the CIA claimed their experiments were for 'defense' purposes only and, therefore, allowed under the treaty. </p><p>Regardless of their purposes, the fact is that the CIA experiments with myriad strains of anthrax and, in September 2001, the CIA actually held in their possession the identical strain (Ames) sent to Senators Leahy and Daschle. This fact, in itself, constitutes nothing. But the fact that the CIA initailly concealed this information from the FBI during their early investigation constitutes something. </p><p align="center">(FIVE)</p><p>Ivins' alleged diagnosis of 'sociopath, homicidal killer' was delivered secondhand, in the form of hearsay, by his therapist of 6-months -- a social worker, named Jean Duley -- who <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=5503274&page=2">said</a>: "He has been forensically diagnosed by several top psychiatrists as a sociopath, homicidal killer." Diagnosed by several top psychiatrists? Who? Who are these 'top psychiatrists' that diagnosed Ivins? And why were their names not given? Did Dr. Ivins, in death, lose the right to at least have the names of his accusers posted along with the accusations that have now been so freely and publicly waged in the media? Or are we to accept the hearsay of Jean Duley as fact? Does her position as a mental health counselor give her license to broadcast hearsay, as if it were sanctified fact? </p><p>Of course, the records clearly indicate that Dr. Ivins was increasingly distressed and depressed, possibly to the point of a breakdown, as evidenced by his recent behaviors and psychiatric hospitalization. Most people, it is safe to say, would experience at least some of this, were they subjected to an intense FBI investigation for 1-1/2 years -- particularly if being investigated for a crime that wasn't committed, as may have been the case with Dr. Ivins. We don't know. </p><p>We have not been made privy to Dr. Ivins' mental state <em>before</em> the FBI investigation began, nor to what medications he may have been on for depression, nor for the time frame of this prescription and how this may have factored into his recent behavior. There is ample medical precedence for anti-depressants causing uncharacteristic anger, rage and violent tendencies -- the very behaviors allegedly exhibited by Dr. Ivins in the weeks before his death, which prompted Jean Duley to place a restraining order against him. </p><p>What was his behavior before medications? How did this compare to his behavior after he started taking meds? Was he given additional medications while in the psychiatric hospital? Was he given the benefit of proper oversight for possible adverse effects from his prescription(s)? The questions are myriad, and are important enough that they should have been asked and properly answered by qualified, unbiased, caring professionals, before the media broadcast the Jean Duley allegations, as if they were fact. </p><p>Regarding 'facts,' we, in America, have been conditioned over the past 7 years to believe, without question, what we read and hear in the media, even as the sources for the news are rarely given. In recent, important news stories (e.g. as happened in the lead- up to, and the ongoing war in Iraq) the presented 'facts' are all-too-often quoted to us by 'anonymous' sources (e.g. "military officials said," or "White House sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity" or government sources said") The same has now happened with Dr. Ivins. In reporting Dr. Ivins death, the AP story reads, "Several U.S. officials, all of whom discussed the ongoing investigation on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media..." </p><p>These anonymous officials who were 'unauthorized to speak to the media' nonetheless spoke to the media, to annouce that "prosecutors were closing in on the 62-year-old Ivins for the 2001 anthrax attacks." That our own government has been <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1216-03.htm">implicated</a> in the anthrax letters of 2001 makes highly innappropriate their role in this posthumous trial-by-media, sans an independent investigation into both the anthrax allegations and the mental health allegations made against Dr. Ivins. The media abrogated their professional responsibility to substantiate the facts as delivered by Jean Duley and the agents of our government. The media abrogated the ethics of their profession --choosing, instead, complicity in the campaign to paint Dr. Ivins as a homicidal monster, a terrorist who -- but for the grace of suicide -- would have gone on 'another' murdurous, terrorist rampage. </p><p>To put this in a <a href="http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/article3.html">historical context</a>, it bears mentioning that in both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, "psychiatric" records of dissidents were kept and used to document the "illnesses" prior to sending the "patients" for "rehabilitation" in the concentration camps of Germany and the gulags of Siberia. Under the circumstances of Dr. Ivins' case, our government cannot be considered as either a valid or unbiased source for the accusations and diagnoses made against Dr. Ivins. Particularly so long as these quoted sources of these allegations remain anonymous in the media. The fact that these sources belong to the government body accused of the very crimes for which they were building a case against Dr. Ivins reeks of corruption. </p><p align="center">(SIX)</p><p>Bruce Ivins had no prior criminal record before the restraining order placed against him by Jean Duley -- a social worker/counselor, whose behavior can only be called outrageous -- as she is now waging more unsubstantiate allegations in the media, accusing Dr. Ivins of additional heinous crimes, such as plotting to poison and murder people as far back as 2000. "He attempted to murder several other people," she alleges. "He is a revenge killer." Unlike Bruce Ivins, whose criminal record was squeaky clean before his mental breakdown last month, Jean Duley is alleged to have a long <a href="http://laurencejarvikonline.blogspot.com/2008/08/glenn-greenwald-on-latest-anthrax-death.html">criminal record </a>dating back to the 1992, with charges ranging from criminal battery, to DUI, to reckless to driving, to possession of drug paraphenalia. The ethics of her professional betrayal of Ivins over the past month -- beginning with the hearsay she used to obtain the restraining order, and leading, now, to her current allegations being broadcast to the media -- have been <a href="http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=78365">called to task </a>by at least one health care professional. Arthur O. Anderson, a medical doctor and scientist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease at Fort Detrick, said Duley's description of Ivins doesn't match his impressions of a man with whom he worked for many years. Dr. Anderson believes Ivins is being used as a scapegoat in the anthrax case. Of Jean Duley, Dr. Anderson said: </p><p><em><em>The remaining allegations about murderous ideas and plans sound so foreign to me that in the absence of contemporaneously documented evidence I would have to consider them items of Ms. Duley's vivid imagination or information fed to her by the people she communicated with outside the therapeutic environment. It is not at all surprising to me that a patient whose therapist is serving as a double agent 'therapist' and 'accuser' would become very angry with the therapist and might make some rather dramatic expressions of that anger. </em></em></p><p>On this note, we do not know the nature of the information exchanged between the FBI investigators and Jean Duley, nor do we know how this information might have influenced Jean Duley's assessment and treatment of Dr. Ivins. What <a href="http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008/08/02/anthrax-scientistâs-friends-and-colleagues-âdumbfoundedâ-by-accusations/">we do know </a>is that the FBI investigators travelled to Dr. Ivans' hometown of Lebanon, Ohio and searched through Ivin's high school yearbooks. They investigated Ivins' family home to determine who built it, and who designed it. They spent 45 minutes to an hour in the basement of the family pharmacy. They scoured the background of Ivins' family. It stands to reason that they had at least one conversation with Jean Duley. </p><p align="center">(SEVEN)</p><p>Not all of the anthrax letters contained the Ames strain sent to the two senators -- an impracticality for a mad scientist bent on testing his new Ames strain vaccine. On a related note, not all of the anthrax letters even contained anthrax. Or did they? A mystery yet-to-be explained is the existence of the Nevada-Malaysia <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1600303.stm">anthrax letter.</a> This letter tested postive, then negative, then <a href="http://www.crn.com/it-channel/18816337">postive</a>, then negative for anthrax. It was postmarked Reno, Nevada (not from Ivans' home state of Maryland) and addressed to Malaysia, where it travelled, then received a Malaysian postmark, before returning back to Nevada. The letter was discovered, upon opening, to be filled with pornographic pictures and anthrax. How did Ivans get that letter all the way to a Nevada mailbox, then arrange for someone in Malaysia to fill it with pornography & anthrax and return it back to Nevada? Of course, the presence of anthrax in this letter was later dismissed as false. True or false, who can say? And what difference would it make? The fear had already done its duty and was permanenly fixed in our minds. All that most Americans can recall from those days is the general horror of terrorists mailing anthrax all over the country, and of the overwhelming fears: <em>Who next? What next?</em> </p><p>The media and this administration never bothered to set the facts straight on the Nevada-Malaysia letter, although, at this point, whose 'facts' could we even trust to believe? This type disinformation was to become a pattern, which still exists -- in which false news is reported to great fanfare, often generating much fear, but is never corrected once the true story emerges. The laws of probability negate the possibility that the level of disinformation disseminated by our government is anything but intentional. (And it bears mention, in relation to the Nevada-Malaysia anthrax letter, that Malaysia was a key player in the events leading up to 9-11, as the CIA had monitored a January 2000 meeting of the alleged 9-11 al Qaeda terrorists in Malaysia at the <a href="http://www.floppingaces.net/TerrorTortReform.pdf">"Kuala Lumpur summit of 2000," </a>where the CIA is accused of having "literally watched as the 9-11 scheme was hatched–and had photographs of the attack’s mastermind" and of then not using this intelligence to prevent the events of 9-11). </p><p><span style="font-size:85%;">EDITOR'S NOTE: WE WILL BE REFINING OUR RESEARCH ON THE NEVADA-MALAYSIA LETTER, AS WE BELIEVE THIS TO BE A SMOKING GUN IN THE CASE, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE CIA'S INVOLVEMENT.</span></p><p>This convoluted mish-mash of details no doubt factored into the repeated requests made by Congress for the Bush Administration to divulge their investigation into the anthrax letters, a request that was first stonewalled with silence then, finally, a flat denial. The Bush administration has refused all congressional requests for information on the investigation for nearly seven years. Even the two Democratic officials whose offices were targets of the anthrax mailings, Daschle and Leahy, have been denied any significant briefing on the progress of the case. In this light, it seems interesting that the FBI has now annonced plans to brief the families of the anthrax victims -- in the wake of Ivins' death, and in the absence of a full and complete intestigation into the facts of the case. </p><p align="center">(EIGHT)</p><p>According to recent media reports, the governments case against Ivans was based, in part, on "<em><strong>Unusual behavior</strong> by Ivins was noted at Fort Detrick in the six months<strong> following the anthrax mailings</strong>, when he conducted <strong>unauthorized testing</strong> for anthrax spores outside containment areas at the infectious disease research unit where he worked, according</em> to an internal report." Dating his alleged "unusual behavior" and "unauthorized testing" to the anthrax mailings is foul play -- an intentional ploy to weave guilt-by-association. <strong>Moreover, </strong>the allegations of "unauthorized testing" by Dr. Ivins are a lie. Dr. Ivins has never accused of this. The media's false allegation apparently stems from a December 2001 anthrax contamination incident at Fort Detrick. According to the <a href="http://www.cbwtransparency.org/archive/amridthrax.pdf">report from the internal investigation</a>, the contamination was caused by "<em>inadequate decontamination to the outside of shipping containers</em>" during transport inside the facility. Ivans is reported to have cleaned the contamination, but to have delayed reporting it until April 2002. <strong>There is zero mention in the 2002 investigation of "unauthorized testing" by Ivans. </strong></p><p>Ivans' statement to Army investigators during the investigation echoes this truth: <em>"In retrospect, although my concern for biosafety was honest and my desire to refrain from crying 'Wolf!' was sincere, I should have notified my supervisor ahead of time of my worries about a possible breach in biocontainment. I thought that quietly and diligently cleaning the dirty desk area would both eliminate any possible [anthrax] contamination as well as prevent unintended anxiety at the institute."</em> There were no charges, nor accusations waged against Ivans. In fact, the Army's high esteem for Ivans, and for the integrity of his work, was publicly lauded the following year, in 2003, when <strong>Ivans awarded the Pentagon's highest civilian award</strong> for resolving technical problems afflicting the Army's anthrax vaccine. </p><p align="center">(NINE)</p><p>Particularly odd, is that Congress has been virtually <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15401908/">blocked</a> from information on the anthrax investigation, despite repeated requests. On October 23, 2006 Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa sent a <a href="http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/061024_grassley_anthrax_letter.pdf">six-page letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales </a>requesting a briefing on the anthrax investigation. By December 2006, a total of 33 members of Congress demanded that the Attorney General update them on the investigation. By mutual agreement between the FBI and the Department of Justice, the request was denied. One year later, in a <a href="http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=729">September 2007 interview</a>, Sen. Patrick Leahy commented, midway throughthe interview, on the anthrax case: </p><p>***</p><p><strong>Interviewer</strong>: Yeah, I don’t think there’s any other way to look at it. And when you call it what it is, it was biological warfare conducted against the highest levels of the US government.<br /><strong>Leahy</strong>: <em>What I want to know — I have a theory. But what I want to know is why me, why Tom Daschle, why Tom Brokaw?<br /></em><strong>Interviewer</strong>: Right. That all fits into the profile of a kind of hard-core and obviously insane ideologue on the far Right, somebody who would fixate on especially Tom Daschle, who at that point was the target of daily, vitriolic attacks on Right-wing talk radio.<br /><strong>Leahy</strong>: [Slowly, with a little shake of the head] <em>I don’t think it’s somebody insane. I’d accept everything else you said. But I don’t think it’s somebody insane. And I think there are people within our government — certainly from the source of it — who know where it came from.</em> [Taps the table to let that settle in] <em>And these people may not have had anything to do with it, but they certainly know where it came from. </em></p><p><br /></p><p><em>***</em></p><p>Tom Daschle (the other senator who, along with Leahy received an anthrax letter) has <a href="http://wjz.com/national/bruce.ivins.anthrax.2.786111.html">said about the case</a>: <em>I think the FBI owes us a complete accounting of their investigation and ought to be able to tell us at some point, how we're going to bring this to closure. I think the American people deserve to know more than they do today.</em><br /></p><p align="center">(TEN)</p><p>There is so much disinformation, innuendo and unsubstantiated allegation being peddled in the media right now, that it's impossible to dismantle it all, short of 500,000 more words, plus a week's worth of hours to research to document the facts vs. lies. The fact is, we do not know the circumstances surrounding these allegations, not do we know the integrity or conflicts of interests that may exist in the sources who make these allegations. To the extent the media have allowed this "trial by media" in the absence of honest, journalistic reporting makes them complicitious in what can only be called a reprehensible smear campaign against Dr. Ivins. Perhaps he is, indeed, guilty of all the accusations. Or of only some of the accusations. Or of none at all. We may never know. But one thing is certain: Dr. Ivins deserves better than the trial by media he is now receiving. This travesty is but one example of how corrupt our democracy has become. </p><p align="center">(ELEVEN)</p><p>On that note, it's important to remember that Dr. Ivins was not the first bioweapons researcher to be named as "a person of interest" by the Department of Justice in the anthrax investigation. He was not the first to be surreptitiously accused of terrorism -- of murdering 5 people -- and to then be subjected to an intense investigation and a trial by media, with unsubstantiated allegations and innuendo waged against him and leaked to the media by anonymous government sources. Dr. Ivins was not the first to shed tears, as his life became destroyed by the harrassment of the investigation. Dr. Ivins' predecessor in this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/us/02hatfill.html">travesty of justice </a>was Steven Hatfield, who <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12838368">sued the U.S. government for leaking his name to the media </a><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12838368">http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12838368</a> and ruining his reputation -- and he won his case. On June 27th of this year, Hatfield was awarded $5.85 million in his settlement with the U.S. government. In the wake of his settlement, Hatfield's lawyers offered <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/29/america/hatfill.php">these statements </a>to the press: </p><p><br /></p><p><strong>"We can only hope that the individuals and institutions involved are sufficiently chastened by this episode to deter similar destruction of private citizens in the future - and that we will all read anonymously sourced news reports with a great deal more skepticism.... The good news is that we still live in a country where a guy who's been horribly abused can go to a judge and say, 'I need your help,' and maybe it takes a while, but he gets justice," </strong></p><p>The tragedy today is that Dr. Ivins will never realize this promise of justice. It is up to the rest of us to demand that his good name be cleared and his memory be given the justice that was robbed from him in life. </p><p align="center">***************************</p><div align="center"></div><div align="center"><br /><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong></div><div align="center"><strong>Inscription at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C.</strong></div><br /><div align="center"></div><br /><div align="center">First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out -<br />because I was not a Socialist.<br />Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out -<br />because I was not a Trade Unionist.<br />Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -<br />because I was not a Jew.</div><br /><div align="center">Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.</div><br /><p></p><p align="center">***************<br /></p><p align="left"><strong>For more reading, see</strong>:<br /><span style="font-size:85%;">These are the court documents on the "Amerithrax" case (a stupid name obviously intented to evoke a discordant mix of warm fuzzy patriotic feelings of horror over the anthrax letters ). Released by the Department of Justice on August 6, 2008, this dossier of weak, circumstantial evidence -- much of it based on suppositions, made by unnamed sources, with no tangible evidence to back them up -- documents the valiant efforts by the FBI and DOJ to substantiate the case that Bruce Ivins carries "sole responsibility" for the anthrax letters. </span><a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/amerithrax/">http://www.usdoj.gov/amerithrax/</a></p><p align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">This site contains an interesting chronology on the events surrounding the anthrax letters and other biowarfare-related topics surrounding 9-11, including the off number of deaths of many microbiologists connected to the U.S. government's biowarfare programs. Most of the links on this site are dead, but we've researched and found credible sources to verify the validity of many claims: </span><a href="http://911review.org/Wget/www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/AAanthrax.html">http://911review.org/Wget/www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/AAanthrax.html</a><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">A compilation fo Ivins' letters to the editor at the Frederick Newspost from 1997-forward: </span><a href="http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=78274">http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=78274</a><br /></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-39297041420897913262008-07-26T06:26:00.111-04:002008-08-15T14:33:24.055-04:00The U.S. War Machine Leaves an Ugly Slick of Oil & Blood<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpGm00w90FE&feature=related"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228784873890354642" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBi_nxG9OxYKJqLIw6vk0XdqmNg4x_A4Gh1PaOSGzoVmTyV2pNbqlw2ZRfA_qd8tbo-YXyk67-mDtx29xmyRYOM_l9xamRMeRsdGkm6qDhFliTy7lb6bo_Z-iFXexLBcR-OvjG1uftQYw/s320/iraq+war+for+oil.jpg" border="0" /></a> <span style="font-family:arial;font-size:100%;"><strong>An odd coincidence: Pick any oil-rich spot on the globe, and you will find the U.S. engaged in the war on terror. </strong></span><br /><br /><br /><br /><div><br /><br /></div><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></p><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">In this vein, why has there been such a preponderance of al Qaeda terrorists </span><span style="font-family:arial;">(or, rather, a <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1103">preponderance</a> of **<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bw7LEpbixdk">propaganda</a> about **<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOjVmCg3Fyg">al Qaeda</a>) </span><span style="font-family:arial;">surrounding the oil fields of the world over the <a href="http://www.hijackingcatastrophe.org/">past 7 years</a>? The current war in Iraq is not the first </span><a href="http://www.bloodandoilmovie.com/"><span style="font-family:arial;">U.S. war for oil</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">. Nor is it the first </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyqG6W-rm54&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;">war for oil,</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> which claimed massive </span><a href="http://www.hrw.org/reports/1991/gulfwar/"><span style="font-family:arial;">civilian casualties</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, which were then </span><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/feb2003/nf2003026_0167_db052.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">concealed by the U.S. media</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">. This <em>is </em>the first war for oil, however, fought on the grounds that a foreign country posed a direct threat to the U.S. -- </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYgI7NhDQ5A"><span style="font-family:arial;">false grounds </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">-- which our government intentionally deceived us into believing. This is also the first war for oil fought under the mantle of spreading freedom and democracy, even as the U.S. government funds and arms both sides in a civil war: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZBOj__fMxc">Shiites against Sunnis</a> and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bryan-young/us-arming-iraqi-insurge_b_52145.html">Sunnis against Shiites </a>-- who then terrorize, <a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/occupation/report/5torture.htm">torture</a>, <a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/occupation/report/7atrocities.htm">slaughter</a> and commit </span><a href="http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2008/879/focus.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">ethnic cleansing</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> of the very Iraqi populations we're supposedly fighting to "save" from the evil terrorists. There's a term for the type of warfare being waged by the U.S. in Iraq. It's called <a href="http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2005/11/18/our_monsters_in_iraq.php">war crimes</a>. </p></span><span style="font-family:arial;"><p></span></p><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family:arial;">** <span style="color:#000000;">(This PBS documentary can be seen in entirety at these links: Parts </span></span></span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVqVdc_DQFk&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">1</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0BkYxeNDBE&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">2</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TYe49t4L5k"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">3</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbpCd0it-yA&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">4</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bw7LEpbixdk"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">5</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOjVmCg3Fyg"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">6</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boS2ggLAqPU"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">7</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiiXZuJ_hfA&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">8</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWESJDC1wXI&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">9</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;"> and </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNIe3zKASXM&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#000099;">10</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#cc6600;"><span style="color:#000000;">)</span> </span><div align="left"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;color:#cc6600;"></span></div><div></div><br /><div><br /></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;color:#cc6600;"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228788073667006322" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipxEBT9T-tQ0418-mS5mzrI1Ec1LHOplM_5PjNINXgIjvsJAIx4U0IQiyljaOr5KUfoCBYBGeyQ9IFHPGfNeKnTR0hIN1yL6qtJ53z79wu3gbiRJjsPPkbqRU40Gp6VpBr5Tfjl7RlkpA/s320/iraq+war+victims.jpg" border="0" /><br /></span><span style="font-family:arial;">That the American people have not demanded accountability from Congress, and have largely remained silent about <a href="http://www.chris-floyd.com/war/">the atrocities of this war </a>-- whether through complacent ignorance or sheer disbelief that our government could actually commit such atrocities -- has only served to condone this war and the policies of this administration. Our collective silence has, in effect, given Bush-Cheney carte blanche to wage other wars on terrorism - wars now being fought in countires throughout the world, with scarcely a mention in the U.S. media.</span></div><div></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">Unknown to most Americans is that dozens of countries throughout the world have now been <em>accused</em> of harboring al Qaeda terrorists. Unknown to most Americans is that the Bush-Cheney Administraion is and has been waging <a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011105/corn">clandestine wars </a>in these countries, under the banner of "fighting terrorism," sometimes called "peacekeeping missions" and "nation-building." Unknown to most Americans is that we are currently spending millions of dollars in each of these countries, to fight mere handsful of alleged al Qaeda terrorists, whose existence -- in many instances -- is based on "intelligence" as leaky as the intelligence that sent us to war in Iraq. The potential and the reality (as seen in both Iraq and Afghanistan) is that these wars result in </span><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/chasing-needles-by-burnin_b_112728.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">"chasing needles by burning haystacks,"</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> as entire populations of innocent civilians are brutalized by the </span><a href="http://www.hijackingcatastrophe.org/"><span style="font-family:arial;">Bush-Cheney war machine </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, as it pursues small handsful of terrorists, who may or may not even exist.<br /><p></span></p></div><div><span style="font-family:arial;">In Iraq, alone, the Bush-Cheney war machine left in its wake over <a href="http://aishamusic.wordpress.com/2007/07/18/4000000-iraqis-displaced/">4 million "displaced" Iraqi citizens </a>-- driven from their homes through violence and ethnic cleansing. From this point forward, if there were any questions left regarding the true intention of the U.S. forces, one need look no further than the billions of U.S. dollars spent building the enormous network of <a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/occupation/report/10bases.htm#_ednref31">permanent U.S. bases </a>over the past 7 years. These mega-bases were built with every U.S. lifestyle amenity imaginable -- from Baskin Robbins to Burger King, from miniature golf to swimming pools, from Hertz Rent-a-Car to department stores, and from football stadiums to movie theatres -- not to mention air-conditioning, satellite internet access, cable television and international phone service. The average Iraqi citizen has not enjoyed some of these amenities -- <a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2008/0318fiveyears.htm">such as electricity, food, water, shelter, sanitation and health care </a>-- since the days of Saddam Hussein. Ironically, construction on the permanent U.S. bases in Iraq proceeded swiftly toward completion, while U.S. work on to restore the most rudimentary of services for Iraqis -- such as water purification, food, health care and electricity -- fell </span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">to the wayside. </span></div><span style="font-family:arial;"><div><br /></div><div align="center"><strong>A Crude Awakening</strong></div><div></span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">Despite what we, in America, hear on the evening news, the words 'victory' and 'success' do not belong in the same sentence with the word 'Iraq." The situation in Iraq is one of humanitarian crisis. Five years into the U.S. invasion of their country, Iraq is now deemed, <a href="http://www.thestar.com/columnists/article/277233">the worst humanitarian crisis in the Middle East since 1948</a>. Human rights and relief agencies throughout the world (International Red Cross, Amnesty International, Oxfam) have described the situation as "disasterous," as a "dire humanitarian crisis," calling Iraq, "one of the most dangerous countries in the world.... a place of carnage and despair." Our vice-president, Dick Cheney, recently described Iraq as a <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/03/17/cheney.iraq/index.html">"successful endeavor,"</a> a sentiment we hear echoed daily from our mainstream U.S. media. </span></div><div><br /></div><div align="left"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwAUjn6maQpM3dsWN6oraC6xP4pmTclDONVyAZdAkSyMAfj4I0FqOFjExb7mx1faqGv7h99aK4TthAPiK0TyABbj8W_KSsLAmBwKN3NWNmwakS1dWfOyXvGElEz2jOrSqtdfaKnB1bPlY/s1600-h/iraq+displaced.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228790611677393538" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwAUjn6maQpM3dsWN6oraC6xP4pmTclDONVyAZdAkSyMAfj4I0FqOFjExb7mx1faqGv7h99aK4TthAPiK0TyABbj8W_KSsLAmBwKN3NWNmwakS1dWfOyXvGElEz2jOrSqtdfaKnB1bPlY/s320/iraq+displaced.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUuiGaxaUH1nx8uz5yKhkwFhae1m2CrHJZZPSIBO-R4kcDS0MzUkrdNpFKDRj4Ub1m5poqayFXclX3oT1nqXFZA_H16U0swZzGfEKkVgf2igDk51UyekTIJvG0qjFd3874yR7nZcwF0SM/s1600-h/iraqi+war+child.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5228790889341165874" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUuiGaxaUH1nx8uz5yKhkwFhae1m2CrHJZZPSIBO-R4kcDS0MzUkrdNpFKDRj4Ub1m5poqayFXclX3oT1nqXFZA_H16U0swZzGfEKkVgf2igDk51UyekTIJvG0qjFd3874yR7nZcwF0SM/s320/iraqi+war+child.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /></div><div><br /><br /></div><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></p><div><br /><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /><br /></div><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></p><div><br /><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /><br /></div><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></p><div><span style="font-family:arial;">_______________________</span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial;">Would the American public be silent, if they knew that we are at war in dozens of countries? Not likely so.<strong> But when is a war, a war?</strong> Is it a war, if it's called a <a href="http://www.jochen-hippler.de/Aufsatze/low-intensity_conflict/low-intensity_conflict.html">'low-intensity conflict'</a>? Is it a war, if only a small number of U.S. military troops are sent in? And is it a war, if the soldiers are from <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14115">private mercenary armies</a> hired through U.S. corporations? And is it a war, if our military <a href="http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article21546">funds, trains and arms rogue armies </a>to fight these wars? Is it a war if the military's stated purpose is 'peacekeeping' or to lend humanitarian aid? And what if it's a little of each? Is it a war? The answers lie in the oil fields: <em>If U.S. military engagement and/or aid results in the U.S. gaining control of a country's oil/mineral profits -- at the expense of the native populations, who suffer impoverishment, torture, ethnic cleansing and/or genocide as a result of our actions -- then that military engagement is, indeed, a war.</em> <strong>It is a war for oil.</strong> <p></span></p></div><div></div><div><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial;">The question bears repeating: <strong>Would the American public be silent if they knew that the U.S. is currently at war in dozens of countries?</strong> <strong>More importantly, would these same Americans hold or break their silence, if they knew these wars were being fought for oil?</strong> We'd like to know the answer, so we decided to take a literal count of each and every country where the U.S. is fighting the war on terror. Our bet is that each and every one is also, ultimately, a war for oil. Whether the resulting silence from this truth is deafening, or not, is anyone's guess. </span></div><div align="center"><br /><a href="http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/index.cfm"><span style="font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:130%;">Pick a Continent, Any Continent...</span> </span><br /></div></a><div><br /><strong><span style="font-family:arial;">Say, </span><a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Region_af.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">Africa</span></a>.<span style="font-family:arial;"> </span></strong><span style="font-family:arial;">Although Africa is but one stop on Dick Cheney's proposed <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Unified_Command_map_s.jpg">world tour for oil</a>, it's a good place to start, since the entire continent stands to be devoured, beginning with its name. Renamed in February 2007 (for military purposes only, mind you) Africa is now called the U.S. African Command (USAFRICOM or AFRICOM). As shown on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:USAFRICOM_United_States_Africa_Command_Map_Draft_.jpg">this map</a>, USAFRICOM was created from the existing United States European Command (USEUCOM), United States Central Command (USCENTCOM) and United States Pacific Command (USPACOM). Whatever that means. It is with some haste, then, that we inventory the African countries involved in Bush-Cheney's global war on terror. </span><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5229326056846826322" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 528px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 318px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" height="298" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjT4F4wYY8Mm_04elRapNytiEmVqh30RHfW3lkzHAlirVTfOii7h4c0zmJW4URi_g0we3kvcQIl9tZJkMyP7t7iREycP4YoWrIu6Ozpf2kAG9HvMSetJsgmYmyAuuLoYeLESjyOBHIaKHg/s400/Unified_Command_map_lg.jpg" width="471" border="0" /><br /><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">Lost in all the flurry of Bush's February 2007 announcement of the surge in Iraq was his concurrent announcement of another surge -- this one on the continent of Africa. Having neatly accomplished 'Iraqi solutions for Iraqi problems' in their </span><a href="http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/04-12-05/discussion.cgi.46.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">war for oil distribution in Iraq</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, Bush-Cheney -- poised, now, to undertake another empire -- easily won congressional approval for </span><a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071119/glover_lee"><span style="font-family:arial;">"African solutions to African problems." </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">aka, </span><a href="http://www.africom.mil/africomFAQs.asp"><span style="font-family:arial;">U.S.AFRICOM</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">: the U.S. African Command and its military arm <a href="http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=1886">ACOTA</a>. A Department of Defense military operation, AFRICOM was created by Bush-Cheney to <em>enhance our efforts to bring </em></span><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-brooks21feb21,0,344142.column"><em><span style="font-family:arial;">peace and security </span></em></a><span style="font-family:arial;"><em>to the people of Africa. </em>Started in October 2007, and set to be fully operational by September 30, 2008, </span><a href="http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5301"><span style="font-family:arial;">AFRICOM</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> is installing <a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/USAFRICOM_United_States_Africa_Command_Map_Draft_.jpg/800px-USAFRICOM_United_States_Africa_Command_Map_Draft_.jpg&imgrefurl=http://justworldnews.org/archives/2007_07.html&h=600&w=800&sz=80&hl=en&start=12&um=1&tbnid=jM31O_ZzGI6WCM:&tbnh=107&tbnw=143&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dafrica%2Bmap%2B%2Boil%2Bcheney%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den">military commands in a total of 53 African countries </a>-- that's all of Africa, except Egypt. </span><br /></p><div align="left"><br /><p><span style="font-family:arial;">In an August 2007 </span><a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2007/08/mil-070801-voa03.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">congressional briefing</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, State and Defense Department officials emphasized to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that AFRICOM's aim is to <em>boost cooperation on anti-terrorism and peacekeeping activities, and programs that promote regional stability.</em> In this same briefing, </span><a href="http://fpc.state.gov/fpc/80454.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">Theresa Whelan</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, Deputy Assistant for African affairs, echoed this sentiment -- assuring Congress that AFRICOM is focused on <em>security, not combat.</em> On the heels of this assurance, however, she nonetheless cautioned: " I would anticipate that there would be an increase in the amount of exercises we conduct and other military-to-military cooperation activity." </span></p></div><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">Many in Africa are understandably suspicious. Believing, perhaps, that past is prologue -- the majority of countries are </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNB7nh23Etc"><span style="font-family:arial;">protesting </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">the presence of AFRICOM, as are </span><a href="http://www.africanloft.com/the-rising-mercenary-industry-and-africom/"><span style="font-family:arial;">many</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> </span><a href="http://www.garoweonline.com/artman2/publish/Opinion_20/Why_AFRICOM_Has_Not_Won_Over_Africans.shtml"><span style="font-family:arial;">individuals</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> around the world, including some high-profile activists, such as </span><a href="http://blip.tv/file/475448"><span style="font-family:arial;">Danny Glover </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, who consider the </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHtoO664ixk"><span style="font-family:arial;">ongoing U.S.-British militarization of Africa</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> to be little more than a </span><a href="http://alternatives-international.net/article1739.html?lang=en"><span style="font-family:arial;">strategy</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> toward gaining control of Africa's natural resources, most notably its oil. As one critic noted: <em>“Peace operations” and “nation building” are what the military and the mercenaries call their activities. But just like Bush’s “healthy forests” and “clear skies” initiatives, the names mean the opposite of what they do.</em></span></p><br /><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"><em><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5229320528524259570" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgB1QHdJ4ADrMCtOo13Z6ngW8C5rePqVQkEr81wuj-lRldwrG_Mqd1zOV72c6Zy91udP8YMdUFo-tgEDANYBzlK2xPTvZ54jFmaD9U5skUEnqB9v_F1WMbEQbeUTMl7Bl1bWbjidkfTPpE/s400/Map-7-Africa-reserves-3.png" border="0" /></em></span></p><br /><p align="center"><strong><span style="font-family:arial;"><span style="font-size:130%;">The Oil Fields of Africa: Black Gold, Texas Tea</span> </span><br /></strong></p><br /><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">The conundrum the Bush-Cheney Administration faces in Africa is the same all the world over: how to pry the mineral rights from the rightful owners -- the African people, in this case -- while convincing Congress and the American public that our presence is purely benevolent? The events of September 11th provided an easily path: wage war on terror. This path is all the easier in Africa, where so many countries are already under the control of corrupt, suppressive dictators, whose loyalties are easily purchased. </span><br /></p><p align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">The tactics used by Bush-Cheney are generally the same, however, no matter what the county. First, they make <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011000438.html">a case for terrorism </a>in the country - preferably al Qaeda. Then, and not necessarily in this order, they (<a href="http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=4080&from_page=../index.cfm">1</a>) provide U.S. military assistance to fight terrorism, (2) accuse any one who disagrees with the U.S. military presence of being a terrorist insurgent, (</span><a href="http://www.juancole.com/2008/04/sunni-shiite-divide-in-baghdad-worsens.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">3</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">) incite existing cultural tensions toward divisiveness or civil war, (4) fund and arm the "goods guys" and/or the "bad guys" (aka terrorists) to physically remove -- through either ethnic cleansing and sometimes genocide -- the native populations living on the lands around the oil fields and pipelines, (5) if these populations protest, label them as terrorist insurgents. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">Throughout each step of the process, U.S. oil interests are expanded and secured -- under the guise of "economic development" for the host country. When all is said and done, however, it is the U.S. who owns the controlling interests in their oil fields. Of course, by the time AFRICOM was created, Bush-Cheney had already done the legwork, having identified terrorist influences in most of the oil-rich African countries set to receive AFRICOM's military commands. And in a few countries -- such as Somalia and Sudan -- they'd already accomplished steps 1 through 5. </span><br /></p><p align="center"><span style="font-family:Arial;">_____________________________</span></p><br /><p align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">A</span></strong>fter the end of the Cold War, U.S. policy toward Africa was driven by President George H. W. Bush’s vision of a “New World Order.” .... President Bush announced in his 2006 State of the Union Address his intention to “to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025,” .... analysts estimate that Africa may supply as much as 25% of all U.S. oil imports by 2015. -- from the Report for Congress, <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34003.pdf">"Africa Command: U.S. Strategic Interests and the Role of the U.S. Military in Africa," </a>March 10, 2008. </p><p align="center"><br /><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dzhUK1CLP3dKFR9d1m2tyZbYqalPePVKUbPdfMbgniQCGs1vVZkxulgqsfUOSm43acqenfY-MZOdT74_pa3JQ' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe></p><p align="center"><strong>A NEW WORLD ORDER vs. THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE</strong><br />From President George H.W. Bush's speech, <a href="http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/war/bushsr.htm">"Toward a New World Order," </a>delivered before the nation and a joint session of Congress, September 11, 1990 </p><br /><p align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-size:180%;"><strong>A</strong></span></span>long with Latin America, West Africa is expected to be one of the fastest growing sources of oil and gas for the American market. African oil tends to be of high quality and low in sulfur, making it suitable for stringent refined product requirements, and giving it a growing market share for the refining Centers on the East Coast of the U.S.<br /><em><span style="font-size:85%;">-- Dick Cheney, May 16, 2001 </span></em></p><p align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">I</span></strong>n the aftermath in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, it is increasingly clear that the United States ignores Africa at its peril....The continent’s failed states and huge swaths of ungoverned territory offer sanctuary to terrorist groups.<br /><em><span style="font-size:85%;">-- </span></em><a href="http://www.aei.org/events/eventID.786,filter.,type.upcoming/event_detail.asp"><em><span style="font-size:85%;">American Enterprise Institute </span></em></a><em><span style="font-size:85%;">May 2004 conference bulletin: </span></em><em><span style="font-size:85%;">Leave No Continent Behind: U.S. National Security Interests in Africa</span></em></p><p align="center"><span style="font-size:180%;"><strong>O</strong></span>h, and one other dirty little secret from 5,000 years of history: Ethnic cleansing works. --<span style="font-size:85%;"><a href="http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899"><em>Armed Forces Journal</em></a><em>, June 2006. "Blood Borders: How a Better Middle East Would Look," by Ralph Peters</em></span></p><div align="center"><strong>_____________________________</strong></div><br /><p><span style="font-family:arial;">It is easy to understand, then, the fears of African citizens, who feel helpless to the incoming U.S. military presence in their countries. Some in America know this same helpnessess, as we've seen war protesters branded as terrorist sympathizers or "homegrown terrorists" in recent years. The difference between Americans and Africans is that we do not have a history (up to this point, anyway) of being forced from our homes by the U.S. military, or of witnessing the mass slaughtering of our families, neighbors, communities, of whole towns of people, who protested the policies of the U.S. government. The fear of these African countries is understandable, then, as America's war on terror turns i</span><span style="font-family:arial;">ts calculating eye toward the oil fields of Africa. </span><br /></p><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-family:arial;">U.S. Oil & Mineral Claims vs. Terrorist Claims in </span><a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Region_af.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">Africa</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">:</span></strong></div><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-family:arial;">An Alphabetical Compendium of Coincidences </span><br /></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></strong></div><div></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL0161813020080701?feedType=nl&feedName=ustopnewsearly"><span style="font-family:arial;">Algeria</span></a></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1336346/posts"><span style="font-family:arial;">Angola</span></a></div><div align="left">**<a href="http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-english/2008/February/20080216135249yerocwc0.3027002.html">Benin</a> <span style="font-size:85%;">(important for its proximity to Nigeria oil and its political-economic relationship w/ECOWAS)</span> </div><div align="left">**<a href="http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-english/2008/July/20080714164906idybeekcm0.4363062.html">Burkina Faso</a> <span style="font-size:85%;">(important for its proximity to Nigeria oil and its political-economic relationship w/ECOWAS)</span></div><div align="left">**<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050705.html">Cape Verde </a><span style="font-size:85%;">(important for its proximity to Nigeria oil and its political-economic relationship w/ECOWAS)</span></div><div align="left"><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3537714.stm"><span style="font-family:arial;">Chad</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> / </span><a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/POL34/012/2005/en/dom-POL340122005en.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">Chad-Cameroon</span></a></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.afrol.com/articles/14253"><span style="font-family:arial;">Congo-Brazzaville</span></a></div><div align="left"><a href="http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/country_energy_data.cfm?fips=IV"><span style="font-family:arial;">Côte d'Ivoire</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> (</span><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060208-3.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">peacekeeping</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">)</span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/diamond/2001/1230hezbol.htm">Democratic Republic of Congo</a> (formerly Zaire)</span></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.afrol.com/articles/10789"><span style="font-family:arial;">Djibouti</span></a></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?Itemid=37&id=102&option=com_content&task=view"><span style="font-family:arial;">Equatorial Guinea</span></a></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/26/opinion/edlone.php"><span style="font-family:arial;">Ethiopia (= Somalian war)</span></a></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1744634320070817"><span style="font-family:arial;">Eritrea</span></a></div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/10/politics/10lobby.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">Gabon</span></a></div><div align="left">**<a href="http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=111682">Ghana</a></div><div align="left">Guinea-Bissau</div><div align="left">**Lesotho</div><div align="left">Liberia</div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">Libya (</span><a href="http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/libya.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">pre-U.S. sanctions</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> and </span><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4773617.stm"><span style="font-family:arial;">post-U.S. sanctions</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">)</span></div><div align="left">**Madagascar</div><div align="left">**Malawi</div><div align="left">**Mali</div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2373570">Mauritania</a></div><div align="left">**<a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/06/02/europe/EU-GEN-NATO-Morocco.php">Morocco</a></div><div align="left">**Mozambique</div><div align="left">**Namibia</div><div align="left">Niger</div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR44/022/2005/en/dom-AFR440222005en.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">Nigeria</span></a></div><div align="left">Senegal</div><div align="left">Sierra Leone</div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2524"><span style="font-family:arial;">Somalia</span></a></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">South Africa (</span><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS31732+28-Nov-2007+BW20071128"><span style="font-family:arial;">Halliburton/KBR </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">+ </span><a href="http://www.sagoodnews.co.za/infrastructure/petrosa_to_invest_us_11_billion_in_mega_oil_refinery.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">oil refinery</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> = </span><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/07/01/mandela.watch/"><span style="font-family:arial;">Mandela off U.S. terrorism watch list</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">)</span></div><div align="left">Swaziland</div><div align="left">**Tanzania</div><div align="left">Togo</div><div align="left"><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040218-2.html">Tunisia</a></div><div align="left">Zambia</div><div align="left">Zimbabwe</div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><br /><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><div align="center"><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><span style="font-family:arial;">** <span style="font-size:85%;">these countries receive aid through compacts with the </span><a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/9448194/bushs_fake_aid"><span style="font-size:85%;">Millennium Challenge Corporation</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;"> (MCC), a U.S. government corporation, created by Bush in 2002, to "undercut terrorism by attacking poverty overseas." </span></span><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:85%;">While most of these countries lack significant oil reserves, their geographical & political relationships with oil-rich countries lends a strategic importance to U.S. interests in Africa.</span></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"><em><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></em></div><div align="left"><em><span style="font-family:arial;">to be continued....</span></em></div><br /><div align="left"><strong><span style="font-family:arial;">EDITOR'S NOTE: This post is part of an ongoing effort to document the total countries in which the U.S. is waging wars on terror. Totals will be updated (completed?) during the 3rd week of August as we complete our research. (We have been delayed by the most recent U.S. war-by-proxy for oil, being staged in South Ossetia with U.S.-Georgia forces).</span></strong></div>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-8382641824219723872008-07-24T04:07:00.016-04:002008-07-25T16:00:12.571-04:00The Surge in Iraq: Ethnic Cleansing, with Perks<p></p><p>To hear the mainstream media, the most pressing issue in Iraq right now is the surge. Not <a href="http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2005/11/18/our_monsters_in_iraq.php">U.S. war crimes in Iraq</a>; not <a href="http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2008/879/focus.htm">ethnic cleansing</a>; not <a href="http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE14/001/2006">torture</a>; not <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/iraq-j01.shtml">the U.S. no-bid contracts for Iraqi oil</a>. Just the surge: <em>Did it work?</em> <em>Did it reduce U.S. deaths?</em> <em>Was it a success? Did it help? Did it curb violence?</em> <em>Did it improve security in Iraq?</em> There are as many ways of asking the question as there are <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dq7m450ANoE">ways of answering it</a>, and the sheer volume of questions exaggerates the urgency of the topic, much like the flag-pin flak that dominated headlines for several months this spring. This would be good news -- the media's current obsession with the surge -- were it seeking to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQwGtjlt9G4">correct history</a>, or even to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWr5Wl-mev0">correctly record history</a>. Instead, the media seems to be working <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCwV4yvjE_s">in concert with the Bush Administration</a> to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFclFVnq2LU">re-write history</a>. To the extent this <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgZ-YELzu8I">revised history </a>is now being used to *again* question Barack Obama's patriotism, it's all gravy to the Bush-Cheney-McCain agenda of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sulDYYAiCU&feature=related">staying the course </a>in Iraq. As is the case with most aspects of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, it will likely be 30 years or more before the history books catch up with the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73KIpzrUXI8&feature=user">truth</a>. For now, the best the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTb3SLa_2VE">truthsayers</a> can hope for is that, against formidable odds, the issues of <em>true</em> urgency in Iraq and the rest of the world will sooner be given the attention -- and ultimately the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/world/middleeast/17justice.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&th&emc=th">justice</a> -- that they deserve. </p><p align="center"><strong>Enter Democracy, American Style</strong></p><p>On July 14th, the New York Times published Obama's forward-looking op-ed, titled, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/opinion/14obama.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin">My Plan for Iraq</a>, which focused on ending the war in Iraq. The next day, Obama <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gWn0FLg5lZodQ-43W9RZdRtMvwhQD91UH42O0">purged his website </a>of criticism toward the surge. This was likely in response to the growing <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpYxD7heR08">media circus </a>over Obama's criticism of the surge, as the media doggedly ignores the dull nuances of actually ending the war in Iraq, in favor of <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/07/the-success-of.html">muckraking</a> new <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/07/mccain-touts-su.html">controversy</a> over last year's news. To this end, the media has been barraging both candidates with the same bald-faced question: <em>Was the surge a success? </em></p><p>Here again, we're seeing the fruit of the U.S. media, which operates under a perverse <em>field-of-dreamsesque</em> tactic to the delivering the news: if you can't build a media circus with substance or facts, just start throwing shit -- elephants, tent posts, camel dung, flag pins, rumors, rotton apples, innuendo and lies -- and keep pitching it. The viewers will throng to see your discordant pile of bullshit and will be every bit as outraged as you want them to be. </p><p>Just yesterday, CBS aired a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B7cbm68wPU&NR=1">Katie Couric interview with Obama</a>, in which Couric (who could have asked the likely next-president anything under the sun) instead pitched him a rotten apple: Was the surge a success? <em>Did the surge -- the addition of 30,000 additional troops -- help the situation in Iraq? </em>To this, Obama offered a detailed answer, with many nuances, which included his perspective that the surge in Iraq has spent resources that could have been spent in Afghanistan, where bin Laden is supposedly located. Couric -- apparently not satisfied with the lack of fodder in Obama's answer -- re-phrased her question: <em>Do you think the level of security in Iraq would exist today without the surge? </em>(Read that: Are you patriotic? Do you love America as much as John McCain?) </p><p>Instantaneously, on the heels of this interview, the network broadcast <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDIAsS9VXiM">Couric's interview with John McCain </a>-- not to get his perspective on the surge, but to get his perspective on <em>Obama's</em> perspective of the surge. To this end -- while McCain's name was utterly absent in Couric's interview with Obama -- 100% of the questions she posed to McCain were specifically about Obama -- including her one comment in the interview, when she observed, <span style="font-family:arial;">"You sound very frustrated with Senator Obama's perspective."</span></p><p>If the grin on McCain's face was any indication, he was more than happy to partake in Katie's interview style. He began by parading his latest talking point: <em>Obama would "rather lose the war than lose the campaign.</em>" From here, he found a dozen different ways to chide Obama's naivetee and to accuse him of denying "the sacrifice of brave young Americans." At the end of the interview, Katie asked McCain about Barack Obama's assertion that the war on terror is centered in <em>Afghanistan</em>, where 9-11 was planned. McCain argued that <em>Iraq</em> is the center in the war on terror. And to back this up, he recited a quote, which he attibuted to bin Laden: <strong>Go to the country of the two rivers.</strong> </p><p>If those words sound like lofty, Big Chief-to-Kimosabe dialogue, straight out of a B-grade western, you'll have to consider their<a href="http://canarypapers.blogspot.com/2008_07_13_archive.html"> <em>true</em> source</a>: a convoluted trail of sources, actually, that winds through <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1">Washington</a>, intersecting with <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FD7BDP3XMG0&NR=1">a cowboy </a>from Crawford, Texas and <a href="http://vodpod.com/watch/419656-dick-cheney-the-unauthorized-biography-cbc">another</a> from Wyoming, before resuming its torturous route through the Middle East, into Iraq, then back again. </p><br /><p align="center"><strong>The Land of the Two Rivers.</strong> </p><br /><p>Even tho it's faster to just say <em>Iraq,</em> there are some people -- and McCain's apparently one of them -- who find it faster to say <em>the land of the two rivers. </em>This is because the phrase has become code, in military circles, an efficient form of verbal shorthand for drawing a political-geographical-historical connection between Al Qaeda terrorists, Iraq, September 11th and Osama bin Laden. </p><p>For the uninitiated, 'the land of the two rivers' refers not to Iraq, per se, but to al Qaeda in Iraq, which goes by the name, <em>Tandhim Qa'idat Al-Jihad fi bilad Al-Rafidain</em>, which translates roughly to <em>The Al Qeada Jihad Organization in the Land of the Two Rivers.</em><strong> </strong>This was the official name assigned to Al Qaeda in Iraq when it formed in 2004. Since then, this phrase has been oft repeated in the many purported Al Qaeda missives and messages purportedly sent by Osama bin Laden and Al-Zarqawi, and purportedly posted on various jihadist websites. The 'two rivers' phrase has also become a staple item on some U.S. websites -- from McCain's campaign website, to the <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060905-7.html">White House website</a>, to various right-wing havens. While I've yet to discover any of the purported jihadist websites, nor even the <em>names</em> of these purported jihadist websites that purportedly, originally posted these purported terrorist messages, I'm sure they must exist, because the White House tells us so. </p><p>There are some who believe that most, if not all, of these terrorist messages are counterfeit -- sourced out of thin air, or from <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26402-2005Apr4.html">"intelligence" gathered from torture sessions</a>, then manufactured and released by the propaganda machines of our own government and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MK-IEkDo3U">AIPAC</a> . Regardless, this has nothing and everything to do with Barack Obama.<br /></p><br /><p align="center"><strong>The Circus Comes to Town</strong></p><p>As Obama and his predecessor John Kerry well know -- when it comes to matters of flag, country and war -- it takes only the slightest perversion of the facts to twist public perception. And the Republicans are masters of the smear, which is why McCain repeatedly seeds the media with statements such as, "Obama was wrong about the surge and refuses to acknowledge that fact." McCain's hope, here, is that one of these seeds will take root and grow into a full-fledged smear: Obama is a terrorist appeaser; he's weak on war; he's unpatriotic; he's unAmerican. And the U.S. media scans every inflection of every word -- ever-ready to pitch the next circus.<br /><br />Fact is, Obama was right: <em>the surge was wrong</em>. Fact is, McCain was also right: <em>the surge was a success. </em><strong>But not for the reasons you've heard<em>.</em></strong> The surge was a success because, in 2007, we began paying our enemy to stop killing us. The surge was a success because we hired and armed tens of thousands of these enemies -- <a href="http://rawstory.com/news/2007/US_confirms_it_arming_Sunni_insurgents_0610.html">Sunni insurgents </a>-- to work side-by-side with U.S. soldiers, despite that only weeks earlier, these same Sunnis had been ambushing and killing Americans. The surge was a success because, at the moment we began paying and arming these Sunnis, we officially began <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18722376/the_myth_of_the_surge">funding and arming <em>both</em> sides in the civil war</a>. The surge was a success because the 30,000+ U.S. troops sent to Iraq provided the necessary manpower to implement the concurrent surge of 90,000 Sunni insurgent troops we were hiring. The surge is working because these 90,000 Sunnis -- along with the 450,000 Shiites security forces already in the U.S. employ -- are doing just as the U.S. directs: carrying out the ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing -- Sunnis against Shiites, and Shiites against Sunnis -- called <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/24/world/middleeast/24displaced.html?ex=1345608000&en=898fc6ac9a1c2f85&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss">"the worst human displacement in Iraq’s modern history"</a> . By intensifying the divisions (and, in some cases, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvOPJ0BBTJo">creating division where none existed before</a>) the U.S. undermines the goal of reconciliation and compromise between <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0109-21.htm">Shiites</a> and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bryan-young/us-arming-iraqi-insurge_b_52145.html">Sunnis</a> . </p><p>The media, working under the auspices of our government, reports this dynamic as a "refusal" of the Iraqi government to take control. This myth (which seems to suggest that Iraqis are too lazy or corrupt to take control of their own country) will continue to be reported and will continue to be swallowed by the American public, so long as the U.S. can fuel rage between the Sunnis and Shiites. But <strong>only</strong> so long as the U.S. keeps funding this civil war -- paying Sunnis to brutalize Shiites, and paying Shiites to brutalize Sunnis. </p><p>Lest we forget, this is a war for oil. A <a href="http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/64075/">unified Iraq serves no good purpose </a>in this war. The surge is working because the U.S. has made great strides in <a href="http://www.juancole.com/2008/04/sunni-shiite-divide-in-baghdad-worsens.html">dividing Iraq </a>into a more conquerable state. </p><p align="left">If this sounds foreign to you, it's not because I'm a raving conspiracy theorist, but because most of what we've been told about the surge is a lie. Fact is, however, most Americans -- whether by naivetee or choice -- prefer to believe the propaganda, to the extent that, when they do hear a morsel of truth, they turn away in disbelief, either because it is too horrible to contemplate, or because it seems too incredible to be true. Our administration and our media have conditioned us to do this -- to relegate all anti-Bush news into the realm of the tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists. And this would be just fine with me, if not for the fact that these disbelieving Americans, who enjoy such a complacent ignorance of the facts, are the same Americans who will be electing our next president, not to mention our representatives on Capitol Hill.<br /><br />The fact is, were the voting American public more informed about the facts, our politicians wouldn't be compelled to campaign from both sides of the fence: addressing the real truth, while also pandering to the Bush Administration's version of the truth, as perpetuated by the media and swallowed -- hook, line and sinker -- by the American public. If Americans were truly paying attention -- which would require considering the validity of uncomfortable and often outrageous truths -- our elected officials could not *get away* with doing this, with capitulating on their party's policies -- based not on facts, but on the public's <em>perception</em> of the facts, as woven by a propaganda-driven media that is bereft of the facts. <em>This is part and parcel of how we got into this war in the first place.<br /></em><strong></strong></p><br /><p align="center"><strong>Pleasant Truths vs. Dry Statistics</strong></p><p>When was the last time the evening news mentioned the 100,000 Iraqis who have been killed during this war? Or ethnic cleansing? Or the millions of Iraqis violently displaced from their homes? When you hear on the evening news that the surge is a success, you can believe it, so long as you understand, "For whom?" </p><p>The death toll of 4000, reached by American soldiers over a period of 5 years has been reached more than 25 times by Iraqi citizens. During the first 7 months of the surge, alone (February-August 2007), a total of 4000 Iraqi men, women and children were killed every 7 weeks. Using the most conservative of <a href="http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2007/">estimates</a>, a total of 17,117 Iraqi men, women and children were killed during the first 7 months of the surge. That's an average of 81 people killed each day. That's 2445 people killed each month -- more deaths, even, than <em>before</em> the surge, when the average daily death was a staggering 79 per day. In May 2007, alone, the Iraqi death toll was only 20 fewer people than were killed on September 11th on U.S. soil.<br /><br />Before your eyes completely glaze over from math fatigue, consider this: <strong>The monthly death toll was instantly cut in half after August 2007. </strong>And the trend continued, so that -- to date -- Iraqi deaths averaged 36 per day, instead of 81.<br /><br />What happened? What happened during August 2007 to cause such a sudden, dramatic decline in Iraqi deaths?</p><p align="left">Bush-Cheney-Petraeus would like us to believe it was the success of the surge -- despite that the level of violence only grew during the first 7 months of the surge. A more logical explanation would be the ceasefire declared in August 2007 by one of our 'enemies -- Maqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Shiite Mahdi Army, <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0804/p01s01-woiq.html">who opposes the U.S. occupation as strongly as he opposed the Saddam Hussein regime</a>. Many of the Mahdi Army leaders are, in fact, former political prisoners who suffered torture under Saddam Hussein. Maqtada al-Sadr's <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/sadr-calls-sixmonth-ceasefire-to-prevent-civil-war-463540.html">unilateral ceasefire in August 2007</a> was said to be in response -- not to the surge -- but in effort to weaken the rogue elements that had infiltrated his army and committed violence in their name, which ran contrary to their cause. Whatever the reasons for the ceasefire, it instantly cut the Iraqi death toll in half. Just like that.<br /><br />Well, sort of.... </p><p align="center"><strong>There's the Surge, and then there's the Surge</strong></p><p align="left">When Bush announced the surge in his January 2007 address to Americans, most of us heard the part about sending 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. What we missed was the *other* surge he annonced: <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070110-7.html">"We will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance," </a>In plainspeak, Bush was announcing the addition of 90,000 Sunni insurgents to the U.S. military, being armed and paid -- on the U.S. taxpayers' dime -- to work as security forces. Bush failed to mention, however, that our new "Iraqi forces" were actually Saddam Hussein's former henchmen, who had been working side-by-side with al Qaeda for the previous several years -- ambushing and killing American soldiers. </p><p>On the heels of Bush's speech, it became necessary to re-define the enemy, to un-demonize the Sunni insurgents: No longer were Sunnis the enemy; only 'extremist' Sunnis were enemies. This was necessary, if for no other reason than to gain Congressional approval for the $150 million budget (received) to hire, train, arm and sometimes bribe these Sunni insurgents. And, because this plan looked as bad on the surface as it truly was, military commanders in charge of recruiting these Sunni security forces were officially, for the record, ordered to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080302322_pf.html">"not deal with those who have American blood on their hands." </a>As if this blood could literally be seen on their hands, or as if the "bad" insurgents would have, tattooed on their foreheads, "I killed Americans." </p><p>Equally important to un-demonizing our Sunni enemies, was the need to un-demonize our own history with these Sunnis, so that the U.S. military could make the transition from hunting down, torturing and executing Sunnis, to hiring them to work side-by-side with our own military. This strategy must surely have seemed odd to those 450,000 Shiites -- still in the employ of the U.S. military -- who had spent the past several years torturing and killing innocent Sunni citizens and insurgents alike, while displacing them from their homes in a massive campaign of ethnic cleansing. </p><p>Yes, the U.S. strategy of hiring Sunnis to work with our security forces must have seemed awfully odd to the thousands of Shiites in U.S. employ, working with the U.S.-backed Badr Brigade (not to be confused with the<em> Sadr Army</em>) in Iraqi interior ministry, who'd spent the past 3 years working in the infamous <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZBOj__fMxc">U.S.-backed <em>Wolf Brigade</em> Death Squads</a>**, <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=1230">terrorizing, torturing and ultimately executing Sunnis </a>-- many of whom were <a href="http://www.infowars.com/articles/iraq/iraqis_say_security_forces_use_torture.htm">forced to make public confessions </a>before being <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/jul2005/iraq-j06.shtml">executed</a>, with their confessions broadcast on the show titled, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKRjrC_d0iA">"Terrorism in the Grip of Justice," </a>aired six nights per week during the spring of 2005 on the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/magazine/01ARMY.html?pagewanted=all&position=">U.S.-funded Al-Iraqiya television network</a>. <em><br /></em><span style="font-size:130%;color:#cc6600;"></span></p><br /><p><span style="color:#000000;"><em>** (note: if Wolf Brigade link, above, does not work, see the video, below, near the bottom of this webpage, titled "U.S.-Backed Wolf Brigade Death Squads in Iraq"). </em></span></p><p><span style="font-size:130%;color:#cc6600;">"</span><a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18722376/the_myth_of_the_surge"><span style="font-size:130%;color:#cc6600;">To engineer a fragile peace, the U.S. military created and backed dozens of new Sunni militias, which now operate beyond the control of Iraq's central government. </span></a><span style="font-size:130%;color:#cc6600;">" </span><br /><span style="color:#cc6600;"></span><br />To make this transition more palatable, our government began calling these former Sunni insurgents, "volunteers." To date, the U.S. military employs approx. 90,000 of these volunteers at the rate of $360 per month, plus weapons and ammunition. The Sunni shieks who oversee these 'volunteers' receive an average of $8000 per month. These salaries are but a tiny fraction of that $150 million total allocation in the 2008 U.S. budget to pay off these Sunni insurgents and their shieks. These soldiers go by various euphemisms, such as Iraqi Security Volunteers, or ISVs; neighborhood watch groups; Concerned Local Citizens; Critical Infrastructure Security; Sahwa; or, most famously, the Sunni Awakening. The U.S. military's use of the term <a href="http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=47965">"volunteer"</a> with these soldiers is particularly misleading, as is implies these Sunnis are somehow volunteering their time in the name of Iraqi security. Or, perhaps our government merely views these Sunnis as being like our own military -- serving in a volunteer, rather than a compulsory capacity. </p><p align="center"><span style="color:#000000;"><strong>What's Next?</strong></span></p><p><span style="color:#000000;">In his <a href="http://foreign.senate.gov/testimony/2008/RosenTestimony080402p.pdf">prepared testimony </a>before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in April 2008, Nir Rosen commented on the U.S. military's stance in arming both sides in a civil war:<br /><br /></span><span style="color:#cc6600;">"David Kilcullen, the influential Australian counter insurgency advisor (to Petreaus), defined it as 'balancing competing armed interest groups.' Though supporters of the war touted the surge as a success, they forgot that tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Iraqis who have been killed, the millions displaced, and the thousands of dead and wounded Americans just so that violence could go back to the still horrifying levels of just a couple of years ago."</span><br /><br />Recognized at its inception as a tricky ploy (paying off and arming America's enemies to act like America's friends) this strategy at least -- along with Sadr's ceasefire --worked to lower the death toll of both Iraqis and Americans. Hence, the success of the surge. Problem is, while arming both sides in a civil war to work as "security forces," the U.S. has not undermined the supposed goal of forging Iraqi unity, but we have created a deadly house of cards. </p><p>As Nir Rosen earlier observed in his March 2008 Rolling Stone article, titled, <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18722376/the_myth_of_the_surge/1">The Myth of the Surge,</a> "Loyalty that can be purchased is, by its very nature, fickle." </p><p>With only the slightest provacation, either side in this civil war -- both now armed to the teeth with U.S. weaponry -- could turn their weapons against U.S. soldiers. It's no wonder, then, that Petraeus has repeatedly urged caution over the current lull in violence, terming it a <a href="http://www.mnf-iraq.com/images/stories/Press_briefings/2008/april/080408_petraeus_testimony.pdf">"fragile and reversible" </a>peace, while simultaneously pushing for a <a href="http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/petraeus_pause_troop_pullout.html">"pause"</a> in any planned troop withdrawals after July 2008. </p><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left">And it has been accomplished by the U.S. strategy of funding two sides in a civil war and empowering both to kill and displace one another, resulting in what's been called, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/24/world/middleeast/24displaced.html?ex=1345608000&en=898fc6ac9a1c2f85&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss">"the worst human displacement in Iraq’s modern history"</a> . By intensifying the divisions between the Kurds, <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0109-21.htm">Shiites</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvOPJ0BBTJo">Sunnis</a> -- and making impossible any sort of unity in Iraq -- the U.S. can continue to tout <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf8xbT7GHxY">the myth of the Iraqi government's "refusal" to take control of their government</a>. That is, so long as we continue to fund their civil war and to back ethnic cleansing -- paying Sunnis to displace Shiites and paying Shiites to displace Sunnis. </div><br /><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left">Former Sen. Mike Gravel, not one to mince words, hit the nail on the head when he observed:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_chris_ge_080412_iraq_3a_situation_norm.htm">“Obviously the tactic of bribing the Sunni warlords will fail the minute we stop bribing them. And then of course the cowardly act of blaming Iraqi President Nuri al-Maliki for the failure in Basra, of saying it was all his initiative, when we were totally complicit.” </a><br /></div><br /><p>In a perfect world, every politician of good conscience would be railing against 7 years of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvN4AbQwqns&feature=related">lies</a>, and would be unafraid to stand side-by-side with <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqACPLkFmU0&feature=user">Wexler</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybal5wuZHw8">Kucinich</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFNmanXtZ9o&feature=user">Baldwin</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CHKV-7vvYk&feature=user">Hinchey </a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkvgTZNLasE">Holtzman & Barr </a>and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXyDK2-p4fU">others</a> who are daring to <a href="http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/35029">speak the truth </a>on Capitol Hill. Instead, we live in a world where those rare truthsayers on Capitol Hill -- such as Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney -- are belittled, ridiculed, ignored, painted as nuts, hacks, conspiracy theorists and terrorist appeasers, and ultimately driven out of town on a rail. </p><p>For this reason, and this reason alone, I am willing to temporarily suspend my disgust at Obama for deleting his criticism of the surge, not to mention his equally reprehensible backslide on the FISA bill. I do this in the hope that his eye is ultimately on the bigger picture, that he is merely being pragmatic, trying to avoid the sort of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFclFVnq2LU">dog and pony show</a> that could potentially -- and against all that is sane and rational in this world -- swiftboat his candidacy. My hope is that Obama hasn't truly lost his bearings, but that he indeed *gets it* as I've clearly heard him articulate in many of his speeches and statements. My hope is that he indeed intend to do the right thing by this country and this planet -- not the least of which is to purge from our national dialogue the lies we've been conditioned to believing for the past 7 years.<br /></p><br /><br /><p></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-70653055919445266992008-07-13T07:06:00.049-04:002008-07-15T10:31:40.513-04:00The White House Propaganda Machine: When the Truth Just Won't Do<span style="font-family:arial;font-size:130%;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:130%;">A well-oiled contrivance, the White House <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">propaganda</span> machine is running at <a href="http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/5066/29/">full pitch </a>these days. And, although the evidence is right under our noses, much like a gas leak, most of us don't smell it. Here, we will describe the key notes to that smell, so that you will learn to detect -- from a 10-foot pace -- the distinct odor of fat, stinking elephants in the middle of the room. </span><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;">In Jeff Huber's excellent April 2008 post, titled, <a href="http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/node/1448">"When Did Iran Start Beating Its Wife Again?"</a> he describes the White House propaganda machine's ongoing work to prime the U.S. and the international community for war in Iran. As evidence, he cites an April 2008 article in the New York Times, titled, <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E1DD113DF935A15757C0A96E9C8B63">"Questions Linger Over Scope Of Iran's Role in Iraq Fighting,"</a> which turns out to be a virtual schoolroom for those interested in seeing how the propaganda machine works. </span><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;">As any good propagandist could tell you, there are three steps to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">effective</span> propaganda. The 1st step is the easiest: make the stuff up. The 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">nd</span> step is to officiate the lies, which goes hand-in-hand with the 3rd step: disseminating the lies. In Huber's post, he shows us how the above-mentioned <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">NYT</span> article neatly accomplished the 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">nd</span> and 3rd steps, as Huber counts no less than 30 references to phantom "official" sources, whose quotes serve to officiate the Bush-Cheney propaganda line on Iran. </span><span style="font-family:Arial;">Most readers of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">NYT</span> article would simply skim past the following words, unawares that they'd just been fed a <strong>cookie</strong>: </span><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;"></span><br /><a href="http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/node/1448">Officials say…intelligence and administration officials said…American officials have publicly portrayed…military, intelligence and administration officials showed…officials said…some officials said…a senior official familiar with the intelligence about Iran said in an interview…officials said…top American officials in Iraq have portrayed…none of the officials interviewed disputed…officials said…the officials offered an assessment…statements by Mr. Bush and other officials…officials declined to detail publicly…one of the officials said…according to two senior administration officials…those and other officials said…A senior administration official described…the officials said…the officials said…the officials said…a senior official said…the officials said…the official said…the officials said…a senior official familiar with the intelligence reports on Iran said in an interview…according to other officials…the officials said…officials said…according to a senior American official…<br /><span style="font-family:Arial;"></span></a><span style="font-family:Arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;">As you read the "facts," as quoted by these phantom, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">un</span>-named sources, you may notice that these "facts" bear an eerily resemblance to the "facts" reported by the media during the 2001-2003 lead-up to the war in Iraq. As we learned with Iraq, swaying world opinion is an easy job: just take a handful of lies and repeatedly throw them into the news until the lies become accepted fact. <a href="http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/5023/29/">With respect to Iran, just as in Iraq</a>, our government wants us to perceive Iran as an evil, freedom-hating, terrorist empire, actively manufacturing <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">WMDs</span>, specifically nuclear bombs to kill Americans and Israelis, and also working hand-in-hand with Al <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">Queda</span> terrorist cells, crossing the border into Iraq to train and arm Iraqis to kill Americans.<br /><br /></span><span style="font-family:Arial;">Ideally, by the time <a href="http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/5088/29/">the U.S. bombs Iran </a>(in case you haven't been paying attention, the U.S. is already perched to go to war with Iran -- another war for oil, being waged under the false flags of WMDs/terrorism) Bush-Cheney would like the world community -- the U.S. citizenry and Congress in particular -- to resemble, in spirit, the angry, rampaging villagers in Frankenstein, wielding torches and pitchforks, demanding death to the monster. To that end, our government hires professionals to disseminate propaganda to the American citizens. Your tax dollars pay for our government to, "</span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><strong>manufacture and disseminate intelligence leaks to influence the media and the public to support the administration's policies."</strong></span><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;"><strong></strong></span><br /><p><span style="font-family:Arial;">This is nothing new. What is new, however, is the extent to which the U.S. corporate media uses government propaganda as their primary news source. This has been a growing influence over the past 25 years, as one corporate arm has grown to encompass another and another -- the lines becoming increasingly blurred as the media is owned by corporate conglomerates -- most of them with ties to military and defense -- who almost entirely fund the campaigns of our lawmakers, and whose lobbyists are appointed to government positions and vice-<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">versa</span> -- bringing us to our current state, where the distinctions between the independent media, corporate PR and government propaganda no longer exists. </span><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">Few in the U.S. realize just how well-organized the White House/Pentagon propaganda machine has become. Here, we offer a quick-sketch chronology of the propaganda agencies utilized by our government over the past 25 years: </span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"><strong></strong></span></p><ul><li><span style="font-family:arial;"><strong><a href="http://www.bookrags.com/wiki/Office_of_Public_Diplomacy"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">OPD</span></a> (National Security Council's Office of Public Diplomacy) 1983-1986 </strong>Started under Ronald Reagan in 1983 and headed by <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2446">Otto Reich </a>,whose job was to covertly disseminate intelligence leaks to journalists, to trump up a Nicaraguan "threat," and to sanctify the U.S.-backed Contra guerrillas fighting Nicaragua's government as "freedom fighters." The propaganda was aimed at influencing Congress to continue to fund the Contras. A few of Otto Reich's planted "leaks" that were later revealed as lies: (1) <em>Nicaragua had acquired chemical weapons from the Soviets</em>, (2) <em>high-level <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">Sandinistas</span> were involved in drug trafficking</em>, (3) the leak that served to discredit and intimidate those in the U.S. media who weren't following the Reagan war script, that <em>U.S. reporters were receiving sexual favors from Sandinista-provided prostitutes in return for favorable coverage</em>, and (4) the timely leak, on the eve of Reagan's re-election, that <em>Soviet MiG fighter jets were arriving in Nicaragua.</em> The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">OPD</span> was declared illegal on September 30, 1987, after an <a href="http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB40/04287.pdf">investigation by the Comptroller General</a>, who found that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">OPD</span> engaged in "prohibited, covert propaganda activities, beyond the range of acceptable agency public information activities," and that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">OPD</span> also violated “a restriction on the State Department’s annual appropriations prohibiting the use of federal funds for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by Congress.” The declassified records of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">OPD</span> and Otto Reich are available <a href="http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB40/">here</a>, at the National Security Archives website. </span></li><li><span style="font-family:Arial;"><strong>U.S. Army's 4<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">th</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">PSYOPS</span> Group at CNN (The U.S. Army's 4<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">th</span> Psychological Operations Group at Fort Bragg)</strong> <strong>1999. </strong>Ordinarily, our government only conducts psychological operations in foreign countries, and not in the U.S., where -- in theory, anyway -- we turn to the media for an independent voice of truth. So you can imagine the <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">surprise</span> of some when, beginning during the last days of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">Kosovo</span> War in 1999, the Army's 4<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21">th</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22">PSYOPS</span> began working within the news division at <a href="http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/devries/psyops.htm">CNN</a>, as part of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23">CNN's</span> 'Training With Industry' program. The details on this are sketchy, but it appears that public scrutiny and controversy put <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1748">an end </a>to the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24">PSYOPS</span> work at CNN several weeks after it started. (As an aside: <em>The 1300-member </em><a href="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/4psyopgp.htm"><em>4<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25">th</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26">PSYOPS</span> Group </em></a><em>is one of many government <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">PSYOPS</span> groups that works to disseminate U.S. government propaganda. Integral to the U.S. war machine, their work is ongoing. Composed of soldiers and officers, the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28">PSYOPS</span>' duties include disseminating "selected information" to "influence media and public opinion in armed conflicts in which American state interests are said to be at stake." The 4<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29">th</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_30">PSYOPS</span> served various purposes in the 1980s-90s. In the 1980s, they broadcast radio and television programs into Nicaragua, which were intended to undermine the Sandinista government. They were also variously used in the 1980s-90s in the first Gulf War, the Bosnian War and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_31">Kosovo</span> War and in efforts to encourage public support for American "peacekeeping missions in the Balkans.) </em></span></li><li><span style="font-family:arial;"><strong><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_32">OSI</span> (Office of Strategic Influence)</strong> <strong>2001-2002. </strong>Started after September 11<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_33">th</span>, 2001 and headed by Air Force Brig. Gen Robert Worden to "to provide news items, possibly even false ones, to foreign media organizations as part of a new effort to influence public sentiment and policy makers in both friendly and unfriendly countries." Due to <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0219-01.htm">public criticism</a>, the Pentagon was forced to officially <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1103">"close"</a> the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_34">OSI</span> in February 2002, although the closing was in name only. The program, itself, lived on, as Donald <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_35">Rumsfeld</span> <a href="http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1859">announced</a> in a November 2002 media briefing: <strong>"And then there was the Office of Strategic Influence. You may recall that. And 'oh my goodness gracious isn't that terrible, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_36">Henny</span> Penny the sky is going to fall.' I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing fine I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have."</strong></span></li><li><span style="font-family:arial;"><strong><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_37">IAO</span> (Information Awareness Office)</strong>. <strong>Started in 2002 and assumed to be ongoing.</strong> Working under the auspices of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_38">DARPA (</span>and perhaps as an umbrella to the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=White_House_Iraq_Group">White House Iraq Group, AKA the White House Information Group or WHIG </a>and the <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Pentagon_confirms_Iranian_directorate_as_intelligence_0615.html">Iranian Directorate, AKA the Directorate for Iran </a><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_39">and <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2003/05/12/030512fa_fact">the Office of Special Plans </a>-- and gawdknowswhatotheroffices of propaganda) the IAO</span> may or may not be the successor to the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_40">OSI</span>. The Information <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_41">Awareness</span> Office works to: "imagine, develop, apply, integrate, demonstrate, and transition information technologies, components, and prototype closed-loop information systems that will counter asymmetric threats by achieving total information awareness that is useful for preemption, national security warning, and national security decision making." Reading this job description, it's difficult to comprehend just what they do. I don't imagine they'd have it any other way. </span></li><li><span style="font-family:Arial;"><strong>The Man Behind the Curtain in Emerald City (Dick Cheney) </strong>Somewhere along the way, our administration figured out a more </span><span style="font-family:arial;">efficient way to disseminate propaganda: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin">straight from the elephant's mouth.</a> </span><span style="font-family:arial;">Here's how it works: Cheney delivers his talking points to an assembly of Pentagon allegiates and corporate heads, who are given officious-sounding titles for the occasion, such as "military expert," and "military analyst" and "White House Official." These corporate heads are primarily defense & military contractors, lobbyists, senior corporate executives and board members -- many of whom are former military officers, all of whom are already being paid obscene salaries by our government to staff our mercenary armies throughout the world. Once Cheney has delivered his talking points, these "experts," "analysts" and "officials" they then either report straight to the media, or they conduct whatever "investigations" are necessary to support the talking points. Then they commence to disseminating. </span></li></ul><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">With all of the above in mind, here are a few rules of thumb to follow when trying to discern propaganda from fact: </span><br /><br /><br /><ol><li><span style="font-family:arial;"><strong>Credibility.</strong> As a rule, when our government wages serious accusations against other countries and individuals (e.g. "They're making weapons of mass destruction to kill Americans" or "They are freedom-hating terrorists" or "They are a safe-haven for al Queda") the sources for these quotes should be accountable for what they're accusing. It is realistic for American citizens to expect legitimate sources for these accusations. It's called transparency, and allows the rest of us in the world to decide whether the quoted military and White House officials are speaking from a true place of authority, or if we are simply being fed <strong>cookies</strong> by phantom corporate heads, with conflicts of interest, who are merely echoing our government's talking points. By the same token, when you hear that evidence exists to support these accusations, you should expect tangible proof of this evidence. While there are exceptions to this rule, these should be rare and only rarely accepted and, even then, only from governments who have proven they own the integrity to be entrusted with such a rare exception.</span></li><li><span style="font-family:Arial;"><strong>Gag Orders. </strong>Anytime you see a government silencing its citizens, whether through censorship or intimidation, it's a red flag. This administration has not been favorable to those who dissent their policies, or <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2QoQml27NI&feature=related">ask questions</a>, or speak outside of the Bush-Cheney script. To this end, they paint those who protest their policies with the same paint brush they use on rogue terrorists (AKA: peace activist = terrorist appeaser; skeptic citizen who doesn't believe the Bush-Cheney talking points = conspiracy theorist; Congressman voting against Bush-Cheney agenda = weak on terrorism). When you see this happening, take a whiff. Somewhere in the room is a big, fat stinking elephant. </span></li><li><span style="font-family:Arial;"><strong>History.</strong> With specific regard to the Bush-Cheney Administration, whenever you hear them accusing citizens or politicians in any country (including our own country) as being terrorists, terrorists-appeasers, or safe-havens for terrorist, check the facts. You are guaranteed to find oil in the equation. The country in question will either have vast oil reserves, or will be strategic to transporting the oil. Anyone who impedes the Bush-Cheney mandate for controlling the oil in that region -- be that obstacle a member of the U.S. Congress, or one of our allies, or an international humanitarian group, or the media, or an ordinary citizen -- that obstacle will be painted, alike, with the same terrorist paint brush. Check your facts. Look for oil. Don't believe everything you read.</span></li></ol><p><span style="font-family:Arial;">Bush-Cheney would like us to believe that all versions of the news, except theirs, are the ramblings of left-wing conspiracy nuts. While it's true that some of the alternative news sites propose far-out theories, none are so outrageous or dangerous as the lies being fed to us by the Bush-Cheney Administration. And I can hardly fault those individuals who have wandered too far, when exploring the myriad webs of deceit spun by Bush-Cheney. These instances are the exception. Most versions of the news that are painted as "conspiracy theories" by Bush-Cheney are actually factual. </span></p><p><span style="font-family:Arial;">Here at the Canary Papers, we are careful to research all of our facts, and aspire to offer credible references, via links within our posts, for nearly everything we write. This site also offers a variety of links to international, alternative and independent media sources, where you can often find more factual accounts of the news. Feel free to send us other links. We'll post them. And if you have a question, feel free to ask. We promise not to call you a terrorist and will do our level best to point you toward some answers. </span></p><p><span style="color:#cc6600;">p.s. Be sure to check out the 2 videos at the bottom of this page, from the 2006 film, "American Blackout." The first video, below, is a 6-minute clip. The second video is the full-length, 89-minute version. An artfully produced film, "American Blackout" is primarily a challenge to Americans to refuse allowing the 2008 election be a repeat of the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. The star in this effort is former U.S. Rep., Cynthia McKinney -- a rare politician who doesn't follow the standard script for Washington politicians. An outspoken, straightforward and passionate leader, McKinney is devoted to fighting the corruption and propaganda that both influence and define American politics today. The film documents some of her work to restore truth to the American political process -- from her demands for an independent investigation of 9-11, through her battles against voter fraud and voter disenfranchisement in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. She has paid dearly for her efforts. Yet, like David to Goliath, she fights on. America could use more politicians like Cynthia McKinney. In this same vein, the Canary Papers will soon be publishing our list of "righteous" politicians -- those rare representives on Capitol Hill whose votes reflect a genuine allegiance to this country and to their sworn duty to uphold and protect our Constitution. </span></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-55028485691440866032008-07-08T08:10:00.083-04:002008-07-14T09:28:58.235-04:00ON DICK CHENEY'S STAGE, ALL THE WORLD'S A PUPPET<span style="font-size:130%;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:130%;">And the puppet master, holding all the strings, decides when to effect a nod, a stoop, a crook, the twisting of the arm that will compel entire governments to dance.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family:arial;color:#cc6600;"><span style="font-size:130%;">The recent hostage release of Ingrid Betancourt and 14 others from Colombia's FARC rebels is not necessarily what it seems. To better understand the facts surrounding her kidnapping, her captors, and those behind the scenes who fought (or didn't) to free her, you first have to understand that what happened to Ingrid Betancourt is not an isolated incident. Her experience is part of a global epidemic of corruption, victimizing <a href="http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article21546"><span style="color:#ff9900;">whole populations</span> </a>and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OHdRvfpSIU"><span style="color:#ff9900;">individuals</span></a>, alike. Second, you have to understand that much of what our mainstream U.S. media reports on these tragedies is <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html"><span style="color:#ff9900;">propaganda</span></a> -- a motley mix of <a href="http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1682877,00.html"><span style="color:#ff9900;">partial truths</span></a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVPmGyFv9Ss&feature=related"><span style="color:#ff9900;">sins of omission</span></a>, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/10/AR2008071001486.html"><span style="color:#ff9900;">inexcusable ignorance</span></a>, and <a href="http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iran-resumes-work-on-nuclear-equipment/81260/"><span style="color:#ff9900;">outright lies</span> </a>-- all intended to deceive us into believing that the Bush-Cheney Administration and their puppets are the good guys in the "war on terror."<br /></span><br /><br /></span><span style="font-family:arial;color:#cc6600;"></span><span style="font-family:arial;color:#cc6600;"></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Whenever I read an <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/africaCrisis/idUSL26610364">international headline </a>about whole populations being systematically oppressed, robbed, raped, kidnapped, tortured or murdered, I know that, somewhere in the equation, I’ll nearly always find the United States of America. If I consult the mainstream U.S. media for information, I’ll find that we are heroes, the good guys, working in some capacity to aid the oppressed. If I consult <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/may2008/soma-m08.shtml">alternative</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp8euKCi3w4">international</a> media I’ll invariably find that we are, in fact, the bad guys, paying off other bad guys to do bad things to people. From here, I never have to scratch too far below the surface to find <a href="http://www.alternet.org/story/46424/">oil</a>.<br /></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Most <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO9WXEqz03o&feature=related">Americans are clueless </a>to what the U.S. is doing inside their own country, much less inside <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/26/opinion/edlone.php">other countries</a>. <span style="font-size:85%;">(Editor's note: </span><em><span style="font-size:85%;">I admit that I am often equally clueless, as I am continually surpised to discover. For example, just this week, I discovered that, since December 2006, the U.S. has been at war in Somalia, having armed the the Ethopians in yet another "war on terror" for oil, which has resulted in genocide on the scale of Darfur. I guess our media overlooked this in their discussions of Cindy's credit card spending, Michelle's proud-of-America gaffe, Madonna's latest publicity stunt, and who's got the bigger flag pin, Obama or McCain.) </span></em>In a nutshell, we are <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXS3vW47mOE&feature=related">warmongering</a>, both <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=10635">openly</a> and covertly, to gain control of the world's oil supply. To this end, we buy, </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_2rkCCBp7Y&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;">overthrow</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> and blackmail other governments -- from rogue regimes to even our closest, best allies -- to comply with us. Using both oil and the international banking system as commodities of coercion -- combined with the threat of labeling dissenters as terrorist appeasers -- Bush-Cheney have so far been successful in staunching all credible opposition to our illegal wars.<br /></span><p><a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/oil/2004/0820bloodollars.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">Colombia</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> is but one such place. The evils we've committed there did not begin with Bush-Cheney, or even the Clinton Administration. It’s that our global war for oil has grown more sophisticated over the past two decades. We now hire </span><a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/peacekpg/training/mercenaries.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">corporations</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> to fight our wars.<br /></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Side-stepping legal, constitutional channels to war, the Bush-Cheney Administration evades scrutiny from the U.S. Congress, the U.S. citizenry and much of the international community by hiring its own <a href="http://www.indypendent.org/2007/08/10/the-mercenary-revolution-flush-with-profits-from-the-iraq-war-military-contractors-see-a-world-of-business-opportunities/">private militaries </a>from U.S. corporations who specialize in the war machine --mercenaries, as they were called in the old days -- to staff their covert wars. Knowing that these wars are illegal under our U.S. Constitution; knowing that they violate the Nuremberg Principles; knowing that they are illegal under U.N. treaties and conventions; knowing that, as such, these wars would never gain congressional approval, outright, our government hires, on the taxpayer's dime, mercenaries to conduct dirty wars in dark places.<br /></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">These wars, not really so different from the war in Iraq, are always conducted under false flags: stopping drug trafficking, peacekeeping missions, or fighting terrorism/rogue regimes. This is how Bush-Cheney get official Congressional approval for funding their private militia, although it would be a lie to say that our lawmakers were doing anything but turning their own blind eyes to reality, whether from political pressure or for financial gain, as the corporations that staff our wars are also among the most powerful lobbyists in Washington. <strong>Whenever you hear of our government doing business with private contractors such as</strong> <a href="http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/">Halliburton</a>, <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2006/010106sexslavescandal.htm">DynCorp</a>, <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7052">MPRI</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/23/world/middleeast/23blackwater.html">Blackwater</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=14">United Technologies</a>, <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article1132056.ece">Vinnell</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=17">SAIC</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=16">General Electric</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=11">Logicon/Northrup Grumman</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=13">Raytheon</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=9">Lockheed-Martin</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=12">General Dynamics</a>, and <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/05/contractor-fraud-and-theft-in-iraq.html">Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR) </a><strong>think: "mercenary."</strong> (That is, if you can get past some of these corporations' putrid dealings in the <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0512270176dec27,1,2117782.story?page=1&coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true">human sex trade of women and children</a>).<br /></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">By the same token, when you read about genocide in <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0819-26.htm">Darfur</a>, think “oil.” When you hear of any U.S. government involvement in <a href="http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=460">Africa</a> -- be it <a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040112/ireland">Nigeria</a>, <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2005/08/war_of_the_future.html">Sudan</a>, <a href="http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=2576">Angola</a>, <a href="http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=593_0_2_0_C">Algeria</a>, <a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020422/silverstein/4">Equatorial Guinea</a>, <a href="http://www.infowars.net/articles/january2007/100107Somalia_Bombing.htm">Somalia</a> -- think "oil." As a matter-of-fact, think "oil" anytime you read of a U.S. government involvement anywhere in the world: <a href="http://www.meed.com/contractawarded/2008/05/halliburton_wins_three_year_abu_dhabi_oil_deal.html">Abu Dhabi </a>, <a href="http://www.thedubyareport.com/oilwar.html">Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrghistan</a>, Think "oil" when you recall the role of Clinton (and <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7996">now</a> Bush-Cheney) in <a href="http://serbblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/balkan-oil-and-energy-politics.html">Bosnia</a>, <a href="http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/elich/krajina.html">Serbia</a>, <a href="http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws001/michaelsavage01.htm">Kosovo</a>, <a href="http://www.truthinmedia.org/TruthinMedia/Bulletins2001/tim2001-8-1.html">Macedonia</a> and the <a href="http://marjoriecohn.com/2001/08/balkans-pacification-and-protecting-oil.html">Balkans</a>. Think “oil” when you consider the Bush-Cheney "wars on terror" in <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=181">Afghanistan</a> and <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7008">Iraq</a>. Think “oil” when you hear of the Clinton/Bush efforts to stop drug trafficking in Colombia (a rip-roaring success, costing U.S. tax payers billions, while -- to this day -- Colombia supplies about 90% of the cocaine consumed in the U.S.) Think "oil" when you hear Bush-Cheney's saber-rattling to go to war in Iran. And when you read about the kidnapping of Ingrid Betancourt, and countless others in Colombia, think "oil." Think this sounds too far-fetched to be true? Think again.<br /></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Or, better yet, read and become an informed citizen, instead of one of the button-eyed puppets our government relies upon to swallow their fiction about their wars. Ask questions, even as you know that the important questions will go unanswered. Know that Bush-Cheney will summarily excuse and dismiss any inquiry or investigation into their illegal activities by pleading "national security" or "state secrets" or "executive privilege." Read alternative and international news to see what our government is up to, then protest this administration with everything you own, because what happened to Ingrid Betancourt could happen to you, or to someone you love. </span></p><p><span style="font-family:arial;">And if this sounds too outrageous to be true, I suggest you listen to Sen. Chris Dodd's Oct. 2007 <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO9WXEqz03o&feature=related">speech</a> on the state of the Constitution and law in our country. Then read up on Bush-Cheney's updated 2007 contingencies to enact Martial Law in our country, plan </span><a href="http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/martial_law_bush_plan_so_shocking_congress_cant_see_it.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">PDD 51 </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">. This bill, interfaced with <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1955">H.R. 1955</a>, also passed in 2007, gives our government the <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/04/ED5OUPQJ7.DTL">unprecedented authority to arrest and detain, en masse, U.S. citizens </a>who it deems "homegrown terrorists." The definition of homegrown terrorists in H.R. 1955 is so ambiguous, as to encompass arresting and incarcerating any individual or group of U.S. citizens speaking out against our government. And the contingency of housing these populations, per the orders within PDD 51, has already been resolved, as Bush-Cheney contracted in 2001 and 2006, with <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/04/national/04halliburton.html">Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown and Root</a>, to build <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20040202213118/http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/3-19.40/toc.htm">"resettlement" camps </a>throughout the United States, enough to house millions, in the event of <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,198456,00.html">"humanitarian interventions, mass migrations, populations rapidly arriving in the United States, and other unforeseen situations." </a>"Unforeseen" being the sort of ambiguous term that would make any constitutional scholar squirm. To this end, some on Capitol Hill at least questioned the funding for these these camps, but to no avail, as their <a href="http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1062">existence</a> -- believed to number between 600-800, each with a capacity to hold up to 5,000 -- is now a reality. (<em>see footage of alleged camps in </em><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4"><em>Indiana</em></a><em> and </em><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxYxTly-yo8&feature=related"><em>Texas</em></a>). Some in this country suggest that Martial Law plans are already being </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCaAZovyJ7w"><span style="font-family:arial;">rehearsed</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> in </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOU934hhuEQ"><span style="font-family:arial;">some states</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, under names such as <a href="http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2008/04/15/operation-sudden-impact-leads-to-several-arrests/">Operation Sudden Impact</a>, all under various guises of practicing or of actually </span><a href="http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=8161567"><span style="font-family:arial;">routing out the terrorists </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">among us. The many comparisons in recent years of Bush-Cheney to the Hitler regime have only served to trivialize the impact of this comparison, casting such thoughts to the realm of the conspiracy theorists. As Dodd alluded to in his speech, the comparisons are, nonetheless, legitimate. </span></p><p><span style="font-family:Arial;"></span><br /><strong><span style="font-family:arial;">Wherever you find vulnerable populations of people being systematically oppressed, robbed, raped, kidnapped, tortured or murdered, either the <a href="http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1503/135/">U.S. is funding the effort</a>, or <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200109/power-genocide">we simply don't care. </a></span></p></strong><strong><p><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></strong></p><span style="font-family:arial;">Recent U.S. history stands as evidence: Unless oil interests are involved, our government turns a blind eye to the politics of a region, no matter how great the human suffering. If oil is involved, however, we will either <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8364-2004Sep9.html">allow the brutalization to continue </a>(covertly aiding those who brutalize their citizens, fortifying our ties, while weakening the country) or will spare no effort and no cost to "save" a country with good old U.S. democracy, which always necessitates U.S. occupation of their country (read that: puppet regime). Is it a fledgling democracy or rogue regime? Only our government can say, and their interpretation can <a href="http://www.angelfire.com/co/COMMONSENSE/cheney.html">change overnight</a>, depending on how well a country follows the Bush-Cheney script for oil. This same arbitrary allegiance applies to those individuals caught in the crossfire-- be they prisoners of war, or mercenaries working for the U.S. government in Colombia, who have been kidnapped, held hostage, tortured and/or murdered: these individuals are of no interest to our government. This is why Bush-Cheney have paid, at best, only a token interest in their release. Like the British Empire, once described by Prime Minister Palmerston:<br /><br /></span><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><p><strong><span style="font-family:arial;">The U.S. has "neither permanent friends, nor permanent enemies, only permanent interests." </span></p></strong><strong><p><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></strong></p><span style="font-family:arial;">History has recorded these "permanent interests" playing out all over the world, notably Iraq over the past 20 years, as U.S. allegiance flip-flopped according to Saddam Hussein's role in our oil strategy. The same is true in Colombia, a country already divided by 40 years of civil war. Having installed a puppet-regime base in Colombia, the U.S. focus is now -- as it is in the <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Region_me.html">Middle East </a>and the <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Caspian/Background.html">Caspian Sea </a>region -- toward </span><a href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/intervention/2005/1121bolivianstability.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">expansionism in Latin America</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, to weakening and overthrowing bordering countries of strategic oil field or pipeline interest.<br /></span><br /><br /><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Our Latin American focus is now on Venezuela and Ecuador -- which Bush accuses of having terrorist influences -- with both countries bordering Colombia and, coincidentally, of strategic, vital interest to the U.S. oil mandate. To you will always find before a war in any country (e.g. Iraq & Iran) Bush-Cheney are working to demonize the government with a flimsy </span><a href="http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3291"><span style="font-family:arial;">smear campaign </span></a>, <span style="font-family:arial;">alternately calling them terrorists or terrorist appeasers, who offer aid to the FARC guerrillas in Colombia -- an accusation denied by both countries. Demonizing rulers and countries is necessary, of course, to justify our attacks on them -- such as the </span><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/apr/21/usa.venezuela"><span style="font-family:arial;">April 2002</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, U.S.-backed military coup against democratically-elected Venezuelan president, Hugh Chavez. While the coup was short-lived, Chavez being restored to power within 48 hours, it sent a clear warning to other Latin American countries of what is to come. More recently, in </span><a href="http://www.aztlan.net/ecuador_invaded.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">March 2008</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, the U.S. sent armed forces into Ecuador --to the condemnation of Ecuador, Venezuela, Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil, Peru, Bolivia, Uruguay, Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Guatemala.<br /></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Meanwhile, Venezuelan president, Chavez, continues to be demonized by Bush-Cheney as a rogue leader and a terrorist appeaser who, according to Bush, </span><a href="http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3291"><span style="font-family:arial;">"squanders"</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> their oil wealth, leaving his people to "face food shortages." Quite an irony, when you look at the conditions in the U.S. today, and compare them to Venezuela where -- since coming to power in 1998 -- the Chavez government has increased public spending dramatically, directing billions of dollars of oil revenue towards social programs that provide free education and health care to the poor, as well as providing low cost oil and unconditional aid to Latin American and Caribbean countries. </span></p><p><span style="font-family:Arial;"></span><br /><strong><span style="font-family:arial;">When Bush accuses Venezuela of squandering their oil, what he really means is that Venezuela is not following the Bush-Cheney script for compliance with U.S. oil interests... </span></p></strong><strong><p><span style="font-family:arial;"></span></strong></p><span style="font-family:arial;">...Unlike the Uribe regime in Colombia, which does follow the script; unlike Colombia, where all sides have been corrupted, due in great part to the U.S., which plays all sides, including the drug traffickers, from whom our government extracts both money and drugs. We fund whichever sides suit our purposes of the moment, be they the Colombian government, the military our own mercenaries, <em>or</em> our "enemies" -- the paramilitary death squads, the guerrillas, the drug lords. The only "good guys" left in Colombia are the powerless citizens, whose daily lives are terrorized by the lawlessness and greed of the powers-that-be, in their warring for oil and drugs, with the U.S. pulling all the strings. This was the corruption that Ingrid Betancourt fought for 8 years before her run for the presidency and her subsequent kidnapping. This is the sort of corruption that many in the U.S. are fighting, within our own government. As she, herself, said shortly before her kidnapping in 2002: </span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"><strong>"All our big leaders have been killed in Colombia, all of them, they have been assassinated - so the challenge is to be alive till the end of the elections."<br /></strong></span><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">Sadly, there are many of us in America who increasingly feel the same way about our own country. The <a href="http://doctorc.blogspot.com/2008/07/final-nail-in-coffin.html">dismantling of our U.S. Constitution </a>over the past 7 years has been aided and abetted by our own Congress, as our laws have been re-written by the very corporations that serve as foot-soldiers in the Bush-Cheney wars for oil. The majority of our representatives and lawmakers on Capitol Hill have either been bought and paid for by these corporations, or they're just <a href="http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/15902-ralph-nader-things-are-a-lot-worse-than-we-thought">too damned afraid to speak out</a>. To those <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iR_WDbwmh4">rare dissenters </a>-- the <a href="http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/092906b.html">courageous representatives </a>on Capitol Hill who have maintained the patriotic integrity of their sworn dutes -- the costs can be enormous to their careers, their campaigns and their reputations. Adding insult to injury, any one on Capitol Hill who votes against the Bush-Cheney agenda will find their integrity smeared with the same brush as any rogue leader: <em>terrorist appeaser.<br /></em></span><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">Is it any wonder then that, lacking the protection of our Constitution or our lawmakers, some in this country feel as powerless as any citizen in the jungles of Colombia, when we read our own government's <a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/022106a.html">"contingency plans"</a> for <a href="http://www.infowars.net/articles/february2008/210208Camps.htm">martial law </a>in the U.S., via the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-durang/vote-out-rubberstamping-_b_32975.html">Defense Authorization Act of 2007</a>, the </span><a href="http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/FEMA-Concentration-Camps3sep04.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">REX 84</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> plan, </span><a href="http://www.uhuh.com/control/garden.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">Operation Garden Plot </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">, the <a href="http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf">Civilian Inmate Labor Program</a>, </span><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">PDD 51 </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">H.R. 1955 and the myriad Executive Orders associated with these plans? Is it any wonder that <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/022703camps.html">some </a>of us in America fear our own government? Is it any wonder that some of our own <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clMloSZizhk">politicians</a> fear our government's martial law plans -- even as our own representatives, in the course of their sworn duties, are </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_gD25lwjAk&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;">denied access </span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">to these plans? The Bush-Cheney Administration spent the past 7 years polishing their contingency plans to deal with "dissidents" and other national emergencies by possibly suspending the Constitution, imposing martial law, suspending the 2008 election, and excusing Congress from duty, while rounding up the "disorderly" elements in our society -- from immigrants, to dissidents, to victims of a national "emergency" -- into </span><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20040202213118/http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/3-19.40/toc.htm"><span style="font-family:arial;">internment camps</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">. Those who ask questions are either </span><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_gD25lwjAk&feature=related"><span style="font-family:arial;">silenced</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> or ridiculed as part of the lunatic fringe.<br /><br /></span><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Should Bush-Cheney's PDD 51 come to fruition this fall, our country would not be so different from the Colombia described by Ingrid Betancourt. Only, in the U.S., our corrupt executive branch would be the pathogens to the infection, as described by Betancourt's husband, Juan Carlos LeCompte: "The guerrillas, the paramilitary, the violence in Colombia... are like the fever a person gets because of an infection. The infection is what causes the fever. The real infection Colombia has that must be cut out of the country is corruption. Corruption is the infection. If you get rid of the corruption, you get rid of the fever. You get rid of the violence."<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family:arial;">Of course, our Congress had a golden opportunity to clean our country of these pathogens that have delivered an epidemic of terror around the globe, but Congress turned away from it. Was it greed or fear that prompted our Congress to table impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney for war crimes and treason? Perhaps one day the history books will make these truths known. For now, most of the facts -- past, present and future -- can only be gathered piecemeal, drawn together by a willingness of the human mind to suspend incredulity that our government, that any government, could be guilty of the atrocities ours commits in the name of oil.</span></p><p><span style="font-family:Arial;color:#cc6600;"><em>Note: This piece is being edited on an ongoing basis, with word-links being added for reference, over the next week or so. Please feel free to ask questions or request sources. </em></span></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-59576635609497301002008-07-02T09:46:00.024-04:002008-07-03T09:54:30.611-04:00Friday, July 4th, is "National Dennis Kucinich Day." How Will You Celebrate?<span style="font-size:130%;"></span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">It's seems only appropriate that The Canary Papers -- a small blog that largely goes unread -- should be the ones to unveil a day honoring Dennis Kucinich, a man of small build, who largely goes unheard. </span><br /><br />Small of build, yes, but a giant among men, Dennis Kucinich may very well be the greatest American patriot alive today. Yet, he is all but ignored by the media. He is ignored, not despite, but because he works tirelessly on issues of actual importance to Americans. Issues that involve real change -- the kind that will actually improve and protect the lives of living, breathing Americans; Issues that are nearly all shelved because the change they call for involves stepping on the toes of big corporations, and the toes of the politicians funded by big corporations, not to mention the toes of two of the world's most dangerous men: Bush & Cheney.<br /><br /><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="color:#990000;">If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?</span></strong></div><br />Our media, under the heavy influence of our corporate-funded politicians, turns a deaf ear on Dennis Kucinich. And on those rare occasions when the media are not ignoring him, it is only to discredit him or dismiss the importance of his work, usually by painting him as tiny, insubstantial piece of fringe from the tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist gang. Or to insult his height. Or, by comparison, his wife's height. Only by looking at the <a href="http://kucinich.house.gov/Issues/">body of his <em>work</em></a> (a tiny portion of which is outlined below) will you get a true sense of his largeness.<br /><br /><span style="color:#990000;">THE WAR IN IRAN</span>: Offering little more than a cursory glance at the facts, our media has been a willing mouthpiece for the Bush-Cheney propaganda campaign over the past several years, waged to gain approval for war in Iran. Of particular note in this potential war: Bush has stated that he's not ruled out bombing Iran's nuclear power & research facilities. This could release nuclear fallout of catastrophic proportions, killing millions of people, possibly affecting worldwide populations. Those who know the <a href="http://canarypapers.blogspot.com/2008/06/think-war-in-iraq-is-bad-wait-til-you.html">facts</a> know that this war is not only avoidable and unnecessary, it carries the real potential of becoming World War III. Kucinich has been very <a href="http://vodpod.com/watch/842099-kucinich-iran?pod=canarypapers">vocal</a> on this and active in <a href="http://kucinich.house.gov/SpotlightIssues/spotlight1.htm">efforts</a> to stop the war in Iran before it starts, including work to educate the public on the facts, and to pass legislation urging diplomacy, not war. In January 2008, he cosponsored <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?tab=main&bill=h110-5056">H.R. 5056</a>, the Iran Diplomatic Accountability Act of 2008, which is also supported by the supported the <a href="https://secure2.convio.net/psr/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=277">Physicians for Social Responsibility</a> . Without the benefit of a truthful media, it has been a difficult task to any individual or group to offset the Bush-Cheney propaganda. Physicians for Social Responsibility has worked hard to educate the world on the consequences of such a war, and has been urging and petitioning our leaders to pursue resolution through diplomacy, not bombs. Others -- from Wes Clark to moveon.org have waged similar efforts. See their petitions near the top, right, of this blog page. (You can also read more on the Iran War efforts in my <a href="http://canarypapers.blogspot.com/2008/06/think-war-in-iraq-is-bad-wait-til-you.html">June 28 post</a>)<br /><br /><span style="color:#990000;">HEALTH CARE</span>: The only presidential candidate to support <em>true </em>universal health care, Dennis Kucinich has twice co-sponsored <a href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-676">H.R. 676</a>, the only true universal health care plan that has ever been put before Congress. Introduced before both the 109th and 110th Congress, in 2005 and 2007, the bill has been slow to gain cosponsors on Capitol Hill. Why are so many in Congress hesitant to support this plan? Look again to corporate influence, as H.R. 676 doesn't stand to line the pockets of the insurance industry, which has grown to be little more than a profit-greedy middle-man, antagonistic to providing needed health care. Instead, H.R. 676 seeks to provide universal, quality health care for all Americans, bar none. This plan would grant Americans the same quality of health care enjoyed by other developed countries in the world, who have -- unlike our government -- put the health and well-being of their citizens above corporate interests and, yes, without losing their shirts.<br /><br /><span style="color:#990000;">IMPEACHMENT OF DICK CHENEY</span>: In April 2007, Kucinich proposed <a href="http://kucinich.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=3750">H.R. 333</a>, the articles of impeachment for Cheney. Why wouldn't our Congress support impeachment of Cheney? Pelosi opposed impeachment, as it might be "divisive and likely unsuccessful." What she didn't mention are the corporate donors who profit from Cheney's wars and other deals, and who would pull the plug on campaign funds to any politician who voted to unthrone Cheney, who is said by some to be the most powerful man in the world. Dennis Kucinich -- unphased by the political repurcussions to himself -- has worked long and hard and almost single-handedly, like David to Goliath, toward bringing justice to this war criminal. Guilty of treason and multiple crimes against humanity, Cheney was the primary planner of the illegal war for oil in Iraq, responsible for the deaths of 4100 American citizens, nearly 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens, and maiming of millions upon millions of both American and Iraqi citizens.<br /><br /><strong></strong><span style="color:#990000;">IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH</span>: The <a href="http://kucinich.house.gov/NEWS/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93581">articles to impeach Bush</a>, introduced by Kucinich one month ago, in June 2008, were also shelved, with Pelosi's opposition the same as she gave on Cheney. Our president -- although little more than a hapless hand puppet to Cheney -- is also guilt of crimes against humanity, treason and war crimes.<br /><br /><br /><div align="center"><span style="color:#990000;"><strong>What is the sound of one hand clapping? <p></strong></span></p></div><div align="left">Zeus and I often ponder this question, in so many words, when considering the battles betwen right and might, as they are waged by mere mortals, such as Dennis Kucinich, against truly evil empires, such as that of Bush-Cheney. <p>Make no mistake: It's no accident that Dennis Kucinich has been portrayed by our media as a kook. Few politicians have the shown the courage to buck the coercive influences of our broken political system to endorse and support Kucinich's work. But, the fact is: You will find few experts in any field -- scientists, politicians, diplomats, activists, policy makers -- who stand firmly on the the moral, ethical right side of any issue, who do not also hold Kucinich in the highest esteem. <p>Which brings us back to National Dennis Kucinich Day. How will you celebrate it? <p><strong>You could spend 20 or so minutes signing the various petitions linked-to on this page to stop the war in Iran before it starts.</strong> Or you can spend some time giving your voice to whatever issues concern you. Or not, as is also your right. But please know that, in the absence of your voice, there are powerful voices out there, already speaking on your behalf, who are not acting in the best interest of this country, or you, or your children or grandchildren. Which leaves an awesome job for men, such as Dennis Kucinich, who do speak for your better interests. <p>Zeus and I, we keep up with the issues and speak out as much as possible. We realize, of course, that we'll likely be the only ones celebrating National Dennis Kucinich Day on July 4th, since were the ones who invented it, and no one ever reads our blog. Still. As the last sparks from the last Roman candle flicker out, we'll honor Dennis Kucinich by making a wish for our country, the same way we do when we blow out the candles on our birthday cakes. <p>While it seems, at times, that we, as a country, have little more than a wing and a prayer to work with, we are grateful for this small-built man, named Dennis Kucinich, whose work to restore our country and our Constitution places him shoulder to shoulder with the great men who originally founded this country with a vision toward freedom from oppression. <p></p><p>SEE LINKS AT TOP RIGHT FOR PETITIONS/ACTIVISM TO STOP THE WAR IN IRAN BEFORE IT STARTS. <p></p><p>READ MORE ABOUT DENNIS KUCINICH HERE: <p><a href="http://american-iranian.org/publications/articles/2008/05/interview-with-congressman-dennis-kucinich-by-hooshang-amirahmadi.html">Interview with Congressman Dennis Kucinich by Hooshang Amirahmadi</a><br /><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joshua-scheer/rep-dennis-kucinich-tack_b_35182.html">Rep. Dennis Kucinich Tackles Healthcare</a> </p></div>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-24656441109717399842008-07-01T09:53:00.019-04:002008-07-02T09:38:03.591-04:00Psst.... Whatever You Do, Don't Look at the Big Fat Stinking Elephants in the Room<span style="font-size:130%;">By any standard, Obama's June 30th speech was an act of patriotism...</span><br /><br />And his choice to deliver the speech from Harry Truman's hometown of Independence, Missouri was apropos, given the historic parallels of our times: Anti-terrorism is the new McCarthyism, decribed nearly 60 years ago by Harry Truman as, "The use of the big lie and the unfounded accusation against any citizen in the name of Americanism or security. It is the rise to power of the demagogue who lives on untruth; it is the spreading of fear and the destruction of faith in every level of society."<br /><br />It was perhaps no accident, then, that the message echoed throughout Obama's speech mirrored the wisdom of Edward R. Murrow, who spoke against McCarthyism and the complicity of the media when he said, fifty years ago, "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it."<br /><br />If you heard Obama's speech and did not hear a call to dissent against a regime that has robbed our country -- not only of its foundation, but of its voice -- then you weren't listening:<br /><br /><span style="color:#990000;"><strong>Now, we may <em>hope</em> that our leaders and our government stand up for our ideals, stand up for what's right, and there are many times in our history when that's occurred. But when our laws, when our leaders or our government are out of alignment with those ideals, then</strong> <strong>the dissent of ordinary Americans may prove to be one of the truest expressions of patriotism. </strong></span><br /><span style="color:#990000;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000000;">and</span><br /><br /><span style="color:#990000;"><strong>Recognizing a wrong being committed in this country's name, insisting that we deliver on the promise of our Constitution, these are the acts of patriots, men and women who are defending what is best in America. And we should never forget that, especially when we disagree with them, especially when they make us uncomfortable with their words. </strong></span><br /><span style="color:#990000;"></span><br />It is no surprise that the media have downplayed the importance of this speech.<br /><br />Aside from being a historic speech, seeded with courageous truths pertinent to these very times, this speech served as a notice to us all that Obama indeed *gets it* -- that there is more to patriotism than wallpapering your car with flag bumper stickers, or wearing a flag pin, or standing by your president, no matter what, even when your president happens to be a war criminal. Obama gets it. And you don't have to read between the lines to understand that he shares our frustration in having our voices silenced for the past 7 years, by a complicitious media, controlled by a government that labels dissenters as unpatriotic or as conspiracy theorists.<br /><br />So it was also no surprise yesterday when, at the conclusion of Obama's speech -- before he'd scarcely had time to clear his throat -- the mainstream media abruptly flashed to footage of the Wes Clark/John McCain fracas, revolving around, what? Patriotism. Wouldn't be prudent, after all, to leave the people reflecting overlong on a speech, that urged them to own the truth: <em>dissent is not unpatriotic. </em><br /><br />Divide and conquer is the order of the day and has been since 9-11, when dissenters of Bush-Cheney policies began being painted with the "terrorist-brush." Even now, our allies, such as Germany, are blackmailed with the terrorist paint brush, as the Bush regime has coerced them with this choice: join our war efforts against Iran or risk being seen as a terrorist appeaser.<br /><br />This is, of course, the elephant in the room: the upcoming Iran War, aka World War III, designed and implemented by two of the biggest, stinkiest elephants ever to darken America's doorstep -- Bush & Cheney, terrorists at large.<br /><br />In the coming days, as we witness the fruition of the propaganda campaign leading up to the <a href="http://www.workers.org/2008/world/iran_0619/">"unavoidable"</a> war in Iran, we should each be asking ourselves: "Am I a patriotic dissenter, or a terrorist appeaser?"<br /><br /><span style="color:#990000;"></span><br /><span style="color:#990000;">(see video of Obama's full speech on patriotism at the bottom of this page)</span><br />Links to petitions to STOP THE WAR IN IRAN can be found on the links, page right.<br />The full transcripts of Obama's speech can be found at the The New York Times:<br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/us/politics/30text-obama.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=politics&adxnnlx=1214921849-dlXqex86gflW3ctWu12zNQ">http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/us/politics/30text-obama.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=politics&adxnnlx=1214921849-dlXqex86gflW3ctWu12zNQ</a>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-63667531127881686232008-06-30T20:41:00.006-04:002008-06-30T21:08:24.452-04:00NPR Interview with Seymour Hersh: Covert Operations in IranWe've heard several interviews this week with Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh. This NPR Fresh Air interview is by far the most comprehensive we've heard to date. It's 45 minutes long and is worth every second of your time, if you value knowing the facts. The facts here pertain to the U.S.- Bush-Cheney covert actions in Iran -- past and present -- including the military and congressional actions that appear to be paving the way to war in Iran.<p>NPR Fresh Air interview with Terry Gross and Seymour Hersh: <p><a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92025860">http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92025860</a></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-6367837807923656002008-06-28T05:50:00.013-04:002008-07-01T08:22:41.823-04:00Think the War in Iraq was a Bad Idea? Wait 'til You See What Bush-Cheney & Co. Have in Mind for Iran.<span style="font-size:130%;"></span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">Perhaps you missed the headlines: America on the Brink of War Against Iran. <p></span></p>Or perhaps not, since this news has been conspicuously absent from the mainstream media in America. Now. Before you brush this news aside as the rantings of a tinfoil hat-wearing Chicken Little, running in circles, squawking, "The sky's falling!" consider that Congress is set to vote, any day, on the very resolutions that will finalize the Bush-Cheney preparations for war against Iran, waged on the claims that Iran has WMDs. Or that they *will* have WMDs. <em>Any day now.</em> Even though the intelligence and inspectors' reports say otherwise. Sound familiar? <p>(At this point, before you read on, please consider pausing long enough to protest ResolutionS 362 AND 580: <a href="http://capwiz.com/justforeignpolicy/issues/alert/?alertid=11518951">http://capwiz.com/justforeignpolicy/issues/alert/?alertid=11518951</a>) <p><a href="http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1312/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=25062">http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1312/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=25062</a> <p>Consider, also, what the U.N.'s chief weapons inspector and director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- which oversees nuclear inspections in Iran -- said, just last week, <p><br /><blockquote><span style="font-size:85%;"><strong>“I DON'T believe that what I see in Iran today is a current, grave and urgent danger.... A military strike, in my opinion, would be worse than anything. It would turn the region into a fireball."</strong> <p></span></p></blockquote><br />History seems to be repeating itself. Using the same blueprint they used to trick America into an illegal war in Iraq, Bush-Cheney are making a case for war in Iran, <em>despite</em> that all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in November 2007 that Iran had stopped nuclear weapons-related work in 2003 and had not resumed it as of last year, <em>and despite</em> that IAEA inspectors have found no evidence of nuclear weapons work in Iran.<br /><p>History is, indeed, repeating itself: Has it been only 5 years since the Bush Administration similarly disregarded -- ridiculing as naive -- the findings of IAEA inspectors Mohamed ElBaradei and Hans Blix, who told the Bush Administration there was no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq? <p><br /><blockquote><p><span style="font-size:85%;">October 1997: <strong>IAEA reports Iraq is free of nuclear weapons. </strong><p>February 2001: <strong>Colin Powell reports that Iraq is "contained" and is "unable to project conventional power against his neighbors" and that "he threatens NOT the United States."</strong> <p>February 2002: <strong>CIA confirms that Iraq has not provided WMDs to terrorists. </strong><p>August 2002: "We now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.... Many of us are convinced that Saddam will acquire nuclear weapons fairly soon." -- Dick Cheney <p>September 2002: "Iraq is six months away from producing a (nuclear) bomb." President George W. Bush <p>September 2002: "Iraq’s military forces are able to use chemical and biological weapons, with command, control and logistical arrangements in place. The Iraqi military are able to deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of a decision to do so;” -- from the document: Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Assessment of the British Government <p>September 2002: "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." -- Condi Rice <p>January 2003: <strong>"In the course of these inspections we have not found any smoking gun,"</strong> Hans Blix <p>January 2003: "He has weapons of mass destruction -- the world's deadliest weapons -- which pose a direct threat to the United States, our citizens and our friends and allies." -- President George W. Bush <p>March 6, 2003: <strong>"The IAEA finds no indication of resumed nuclear activities in Iraq."</strong> -- IAEA director general/UN inspector, Mohamed ElBaradei <p>March 16, 2003: "Mr. ElBaradei is, frankly, wrong." -- Dick Cheney, three days before the invasion of Iraq. <p>May 1, 2003: "We found the weapons of mass destruction." -- President George W. Bush <p>June 26, 2008: “We have found the weapon of mass destruction in Iraq. It is oil." -- Dennis Kucinich <p><p></span></p><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br />That was Iraq. This is Iran:<br /><br /><blockquote><span style="font-size:85%;">December 2005: <strong>"We haven't seen a smoking gun in Iran. We haven't seen an underground production enrichment facility. We haven't seen enough materials in Iran...to put into a weapon."</strong> -- Mohamed ElBaradei, IAEA <p>October 2007: <strong>"There is NO evidence of a concrete, active nuclear weapon program” going on inside Iran."</strong> -- Mohamed ElBaradei, IAEA report <p>October 2007: "The Iranian regime needs to know that if it stays on its present course, the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences." -- Dick Cheney <p>October 2007: "If Iran had a nuclear weapon, it'd be a dangerous threat to world peace. So I told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested" in ensuring Iran not gain the capacity to develop such weapons." -- President George W. Bush <p>November 2007: "Mohamed ElBaradei is an apologist for Iran....Even a stopped clock is right twice a day" -- John Bolton <p>March 2008: "Obviously, they’re also heavily involved in trying to develop nuclear weapons enrichment, the enrichment of uranium to weapons-grade levels,” -- Dick Cheney <p>June 4, 2008: “We reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat....George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to vanquish it, and intends to act on that matter BEFORE THE END OF HIS TERM in the White House.” -- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert <p><br /></span></p></blockquote>To that end, Israel just recently carried out a full rehearsal of an air assault on Iran, to the tune of nearly 100 warplanes aimed at Iran's nuclear sites -- nuclear sites which, according to International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, are being used to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes: <em>power, not weapons use</em>. Yet, today, as in October 2002, Cheney is poised to, in his own words, "discredit inspections in favor of disarmament," which translates roughly to: <em>So what if there aren't any nuclear weapons? We're going in, anyway.<br /></em><em><p></em></p>So here we are, perched on the precipice of another war. Only, this war carries the potential to escalate out of control, possibly even to the scale of the sky-falling scenario that Chicken Little envisioned. The question now is: Is there any one here who knows why the U.S. and Israel should not join in war against Iran? Speak now, or forever hold your peace: <a href="http://capwiz.com/justforeignpolicy/issues/alert/?alertid=11518951">http://capwiz.com/justforeignpolicy/issues/alert/?alertid=11518951</a> <p><br />Read more here: <p>When Did Iran Stop Beating Its Wife?<a href="http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,158545,00.html">http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,158545,00.html</a><br /><p>When Did Iran Start Beating Its Wife Again?<a href="http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/node/1448">http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/node/1448</a> <p>This article has some important background, particularly on banking and financial sanctions, including the Bush Administration's blackmailing of other countries into supporting these sanctions, which are a lead-up to war -- The March 20, 2008 Declaration of War on Iran: <a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/03/24/the-march-20-2008-us-declaration-of-war-on-iran-by-john-mcglynn/">http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/03/24/the-march-20-2008-us-declaration-of-war-on-iran-by-john-mcglynn/</a> <p>Bush-Cheney-Israel Disinformation Campaign to Justify Attack on Iran: <a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/bush-cheney-israel-disinformation-campaign-to-justify-an-attack-on-iran/">http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/bush-cheney-israel-disinformation-campaign-to-justify-an-attack-on-iran/</a> <p>Secret Bush "Finding" Widens War on Iran - Democrats OK Funds for Covert Ops: ><a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/secret-bush-finding-widens-war-on-iran-democrats-ok-funds-for-covert-ops/">http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/secret-bush-finding-widens-war-on-iran-democrats-ok-funds-for-covert-ops/</a> <p>Joint Chiefs Chairman Says U.S. Preparing Military Options Against Iran: <a href="http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/04/25/joint-chiefs-chairman-says-us-preparing-military-options-against-iran/">http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/04/25/joint-chiefs-chairman-says-us-preparing-military-options-against-iran/</a></p><p><p>Seymour Hersh's New Yorker article:<a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh">http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh</a></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-4155152237188854372008-06-26T19:24:00.000-04:002008-06-26T20:02:28.775-04:00Ripped from the Headlines!<div align="left"><span style="font-size:130%;">Capitol Hill Clueless Over the Real Reason Bush Removed North Korea from the Axis of Evil</span> </div><p align="center"></p><p>The folks on Capitol Hill are sqawking up a storm today over Bush's decision to remove North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. "A profound disappointment!" crowed one. "It flies in the face of history!" screeched another. Don't expect anything fancier than this, in the way of explanation, from the media:<br /><a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0608/House_Republicans_blast_Bush_for_North_Korea_decision.html">http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0608/House_Republicans_blast_Bush_for_North_Korea_decision.html</a> <p>Fact is, as some of us have known for a long time, Bush & Cheney have bigger fish to fry, and if there's one thing you need to fry big fish, it's lots and lots of oil. <p>In plainspeak, the reason North Korea has officially been put on the back burner is to clear the path for the war against Iran. This is old news. Perhaps, if the good folks on Capitol Hill were to delve into the tin-foil havens of the internet, they wouldn't be so clueless. But, then, that would defeat the purpose of pretending to not be a part of the neocon agenda, now wouldn't it? <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4835">http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4835</a> </p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-84973180851323299662008-06-26T13:59:00.000-04:002008-06-26T19:05:42.409-04:00Speaking of the War for Oil in Afghanistan... I Mean Iraq... I Mean IranWith all the renewed media *cough* <cough>interest in Afghanistan and bin Laden over the past few weeks, scant scrutiny's been given to the no-bid contracts going to Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, et al, as they prepare to collect the spoils from our illegal war in Iraq. Even less scrutiny's gone to Iran, where we are perched to go war. <p>some background: <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO505A.html">http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO505A.html</a> and <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9437">http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9437</a> <p>While we've been busy thinking about gas prices and who's more patriotic -- Cindy or Michelle -- support has been growing on Capitol Hill to pass Resolutions 362 and 580, giving Bush license to go to war against Iran, not unlike the Iraq war resolution passed in 2002.<br /><br />The broken-wing-bird ruse being used by the Administration, with the apparent complicity of the media, seems to be working because, for whatever reason, everyone's looking the other way. Few Americans seem aware that, as early as next week, the House could pass Resolution 362, with its sister resolution, Resolution 580, gaining support in the Senate, as we speak. I suppose they'll tell us about it when we need to know. Right?<br /><br />Read about it here: <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/06/23/iran-war-resolution-may-be-passed-next-week/">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/06/23/iran-war-resolution-may-be-passed-next-week/</a> and here: <a href="http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/25/while_we_sleepwar_with_iran_is/">http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/25/while_we_sleepwar_with_iran_is/</a><br /><br />And, when you're done, toss some dissent to your Representatives: <a href="http://capwiz.com/justforeignpolicy/issues/alert/?alertid=11518951">http://capwiz.com/justforeignpolicy/issues/alert/?alertid=11518951</a> <p></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-2906415738871855192008-06-26T13:16:00.000-04:002008-06-26T18:06:56.165-04:00Dennis "David" Kucinich Takes Aim at Bush "Goliath" Cheney<div align="center"><em></em></div><div align="center"><em><p></em></div><div align="center"><em>We have found the weapon of mass destruction in Iraq. It is oil.</em></div><div align="center"><em>-- Dennis Kucinich, June 26, 2008</em></div><em></em><br />Who needs to shop in the big & tall suit shops, when you have a giant of a political conscience like Dennis Kucinich? <p><a href="http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34371">http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/34371</a> <p>You won't find much mention of Kucinich in the mainstream media. He's too short, he doesn't have chisled features and, besides, he's telling the truth, and if there's one thing people abhor, it's hearing the truth before it's time. A few years from now, the truth will catch on and be all the buzz on Capitol Hill and the cable news. Until then, if you want the truth, you'll have to contend with the fact that it arrives, albeit unfashionably early, in a package that many Americans have been brainwashed into believing isn't credible, for its size.</p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-36635609663634884392008-06-26T12:56:00.000-04:002008-06-26T18:09:24.952-04:00And in the same "Ich bin ein Berliner" spirit of solidarity...... what better day, than today, to sign the petition urging the presidential candidates to, for cripesakes, get off the fence and endorse the treaty against cluster bombs? <a href="http://www.crossleft.org/node/6305">http://www.crossleft.org/node/6305</a> <p><a href="http://www.crossleft.org/node/6305"></a>Last month, 111 countries around the world signed the ban against cluster bombs, but the U.S. (you guessed it) didn't. <p>Here's the thing: It's not enough to loathe Bush policies from the tips of your hair to the tips of your toes, or even to cast your vote against the Bush policies in November. There is so much to be done in the coming days, months and years. Our voices do count. Don't let the enormity of our problems intimidate you to silence, to some fatalistic, "Aw, what the hell" attitude. In the words of Margaret Mead: <p><em>Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.</em> <p>So, sign the thing, wouldya? <a href="http://www.crossleft.org/node/6305"></a></p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-12352285409466501762008-06-26T10:35:00.000-04:002008-06-26T18:21:56.720-04:00Today, as we stand on the precipice of war with Iran, we would do well to remember...... this day, forty-five years ago today, on June 26, 1963, when President John F. Kennedy stood before the Berlin Wall and delivered his famous "Ich bin ein Berliner" (I am a Berliner) speech, to the cheer of more than one-million West Berliners, chanting "Ken-ne-dy! Ken-ne-dy!" <p>Below is an excerpt from this 8-minute speech, but to really understand how powerfully felt was his stand of solidarity with the West Berliners, you really need to hear and see Kennedy's speech: <p><a href="http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkberliner.html">http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkberliner.html</a> <p><br /><em>Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free. When all are free, then we look -- can look forward to that day when this city will be joined as one and this country and this great Continent of Europe in a peaceful and hopeful globe. When that day finally comes, as it will, the people of West Berlin can take sober satisfaction in the fact that they were in the front lines for almost two decades.</em> <p><br />What better day, than today, to be mindful of the potential we now hold, as a nation, to elect a leader who is already drawing cheers, millions-strong, from citizens around the world who hope -- as we do -- that, one day soon, they may be able to stand again in solidarity with the United States?</p>Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1635174332382739928.post-3076487453495728642008-06-25T16:02:00.000-04:002008-06-25T21:25:49.175-04:00Ralph Nader Pulls the Race Card, Draws a Spade<div> <span style="font-size:130%;">The cat's out of the bag, as Ralph Nader inadvertently let slip the best-kept secret of the campaign season: Barack Obama is half white.<br /></span> </div><p><br />In an interview Monday, June 23rd, from his campaign headquarters in D.C., Nader trumped Geraldine Ferraro, as he drew the race card in discussing the difference between Obama and his democratic predecessors:<p><em>There's only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He's half African-American. Whether that will make any difference, I don't know</em><p><em>I haven't heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What's keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn't want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We'll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards.</em> <p>Speaking further on black politicians, on scary black politicians, on politically threatening scary black politicians like Jessie Jackson, and on how scary threatening black politicians connive to get the white-guilt vote by being black, but acting white, Nader continued his discussion of Obama's half-blackness. <p><em>He wants to show that he is not a threatening, a politically threatening, another politically threatening African-American politician. He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically he's coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it's corporate or whether it's simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up.</em> <p>Statements from the Obama campaign were brief, by comparison. "We are obviously disappointed with these very backward-looking remarks," said Obama campaign spokeswoman, Shannon Gilson, while the Obama campaign's communication director, Robert Gibbs, called Nader's statements, "reprehensible and basically delusional." <br /><br /><br />See a video of the full interview, plus a partial transcript here: <a href="http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jun/25/partial-transcript-ralph-naders-comments/">http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jun/25/partial-transcript-ralph-naders-comments/</a> <p><br /><br /><br />UPDDATE: Wednesday, June 25. Two days after his remarks, and in the wake of public outrage over his earlier statements, Nader's campaign issued a statement that Nader would not retract his comments or issue an apology. </span> <p>Senator Obama, responding Wednesday afternoon to Nader's charges that Obama is neglecting poverty and inner city issues. "What's clear is, Ralph Nader hasn't been paying attention to my speeches," he said. "Ralph Nader's trying to get attention. He's become a perennial political candidate." <br /><br />Speaking like a man whose gifts for diplomacy and grace-under-fire transcend superficial differences, such as race, Obama added, "I think it's a shame, because if you look at his legacy in terms of consumer protections, it's an extraordinary one."Mantis Katz & Zeus Hussein Canaryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10527442275286526732noreply@blogger.com0