Saturday, July 23, 2005

The Axis of Logic: Why The Hell Are They Doing All This (Normal) Crap?

she took the time to do this...

she took the time to tell the rest of us...

she took the time to make sense of her position...

she took the time most likely without making much money...


she gets me skimming her work...

she gets my educated guess it's good...

she gets my benefit of the doubt: she's not crazy...


Axis of Logic

United States

The Painful Truth of Freedom’s Demise

By Nancy Levant
Jul 22, 2005, 10:33

Jul 21, 2005
There are a thousand critically important issues to deal with in today’s world, but American citizens need to be very careful. The creation of social chaos is the fundamental tool used by Constitutional destroyers to divide and conquer the ability to focus on the big prize, which is freedom. Our focus should not be upon partisan details, but upon Constitutional dismantling. Our political opinions and leanings will all be non-issues if there is no Constitutional Republic.

As each day passes, and we continue to see our “representatives” refusing to represent American freedom, and as we continue to see our voting powers eliminated by the non-elected partnership-stakeholding system of leadership, one wonders if there will ever be another election. Specifically, one wonders if Martial Law will be implemented before another election date rolls around. Due to the fact that our nation has been totally and very skillfully bankrupted by highly educated economic experts, one wonders if we have been set up to purposefully crash, whereby giving Martial Law its jurisdiction.

It should be very clear to every American citizen that 1) something is terribly wrong with our “representative government,” and 2) our representatives and their corporate partners are recreating public law. Our rights as American citizen are being systematically, purposefully eliminated. Therefore, our opinions about this social condition and that cultural trend are pointless. In the very near future, changes could occur in America that will make all partisanship null and void. Martial Law knows no partisanship and cares not for opinion. It knows only military-style dictatorship.

At this point in time, I strongly suggest that American people prepare for the worst. All indicators lead to renegade politicians who are overthrowing the American government and its Constitution. No one can deny this fact. Equally, a Martial Law system is totally, completely in place thanks to three or more decades of powers amassed through presidential Executive Orders and many, many Acts.

Consider the following:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders in to effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen-year period.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when the President declares a state of emergency, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

Add to these Executive Orders the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, which would give state governors and public health officials the power to:

* Force individuals suspected of harboring an "infectious disease" to undergo medical examinations.
* Track and share an individual's personal health information, including genetic information.
* Force persons to be vaccinated, treated, or quarantined for infectious diseases.
* Mandate that all health care providers report all cases of persons who harbor any illness or health condition that may be caused by an epidemic or an infectious agent and might pose a "substantial risk" to a "significant number of people or cause a long-term disability." (Note: Neither "substantial risk" nor "significant number" are defined in the draft.)
* Force pharmacists to report any unusual or any increased prescription rates that may be caused by epidemic diseases.
* Preempt existing state laws, rules and regulations, including those relating to privacy, medical licensure, and--this is key--property rights.
* Control public and private property during a public health emergency, including pharmaceutical manufacturing plants, nursing homes, other health care facilities, and communications devices.
* Mobilize all or any part of the "organized militia into service to the state to help enforce the state's orders."
* Ration firearms, explosives, food, fuel and alcoholic beverages, among other commodities.
* Impose fines and penalties to enforce their orders.

Then, consider the following:

* Super viruses are manufactured.
* Borders are open to illegals of all shapes and kinds.
* NAFTA-CAFTA-FTAA enforces internationalized economics.
* Imported nuclear devices are known to be in the United States.
* Our nation was bureaucratically bankrupted by the Federal Reserve.
* The Partnership-stakeholding bureaucracy eliminates voting.
* The elected representatives of the American people are rapidly eliminating constitutional rights.
* The American military is completely dedicated to foreign theaters, while a secondary military system has been established on the homeland with new and unimaginable powers over the citizenry.

Let us consider the powers of the Patriot Act II:

SECTION 501 (Expatriation of Terrorists) expands the definition of "enemy combatant" to all American citizens who "may" have violated any provision of Section 802 of the first Patriot Act. (Section 802 is the new definition of domestic terrorism, and the definition is "any action that endangers human life that is a violation of any Federal or State law.") Section 501 of the second Patriot Act directly connects to Section 125 of the same act. The Justice Department boldly claims that the incredibly broad Section 802 of the First USA Patriot Act isn't broad enough and that a new, unlimited definition of terrorism is needed.

Under Section 501 a US citizen engaging in lawful activities can be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen again. The Justice Department states that they can do this because the person "had inferred from conduct" that they were not US citizens. Remember Section 802 of the First USA Patriot Act states that any violation of Federal or State law can result in the "enemy combatant" terrorist designation.

SECTION 201 of the second Patriot Act makes it a criminal act for any member of the government or any citizen to release any information concerning the incarceration or whereabouts of detainees. It also states that law enforcement does not have to tell the press who they have arrested, and they never have to release the names.

SECTION 301 and 306 (Terrorist Identification Database) set up a national database of "suspected terrorists" and radically expand the database to include anyone associated with suspected terrorist groups and anyone involved in crimes or having supported any group designated as "terrorist." These sections also set up a national DNA database for anyone on probation or who has been on probation for any crime, and orders State governments to collect the DNA for the Federal government.

SECTION 312 gives immunity to law enforcement engaging in spying operations against the American people and would place substantial restrictions on court injunctions against Federal violations of civil rights across the board.

SECTION 101 will designate individual terrorists as foreign powers and again strip them of all rights under the "enemy combatant" designation.

SECTION 102 states clearly that any information gathering, regardless of whether or not those activities are illegal, can be considered to be clandestine intelligence activities for a foreign power. This makes newsgathering illegal.

SECTION 103 allows the Federal government to use wartime martial law powers domestically and internationally without Congress declaring that a state of war exists.

SECTION 106 is bone chilling in its straightforwardness. It states that broad general warrants by the secret FSIA court (a panel of secret judges set up in a star chamber system that convenes in an undisclosed location) granted under the first Patriot Act are not good enough. It states that government agents must be given immunity for carrying out searches with no prior court approval. This section throws out the entire Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures.

SECTION 109 allows secret star-chamber courts to issue contempt charges against any individual or corporation who refuses to incriminate themselves or others. This section annihilates the last vestiges of the Fifth Amendment.

SECTION 110 restates that key police state clauses in the first Patriot Act were not sunsetted and removes the five-year sunset clause from other subsections of the first Patriot Act. After all, the media has told us: "This is the New America. Get used to it. This is forever."

SECTION 111 expands the definition of the "enemy combatant" designation.

SECTION 122 restates the government's newly announced power of "surveillance without a court order."

SECTION 123 restates that the government no longer needs warrants and that the investigations can be a giant dragnet-style sweep described in press reports about the Total Information Awareness Network. One passage reads, "thus the focus of domestic surveillance may be less precise than that directed against more conventional types of crime."

*Note: Over and over again, in subsection after subsection, the second Patriot Act states that its new Soviet-type powers will be used to fight international terrorism, domestic terrorism and other types of crimes. Of course the government has already announced in Section 802 of the first USA Patriot act that any crime is considered domestic terrorism.

SECTION 126 grants the government the right to mine the entire spectrum of public and private sector information from bank records to educational and medical records. This is the enacting law to allow ECHELON and the Total Information Awareness Network to break down any and all walls of privacy. The government states that they must look at everything to "determine" if individuals or groups might have a connection to terrorist groups. As you can now see, you are guilty until proven innocent.

SECTION 127 allows the government to takeover coroners' and medical examiners' operations whenever they see fit.

SECTION 128 allows the Federal government to place gag orders on Federal and State Grand Juries and to take over the proceedings. It also disallows individuals or organizations to even try to quash a Federal subpoena. So now defending yourself will be a terrorist action.

SECTION 129 destroys any remaining whistle blower protection for Federal agents.

SECTION 202 allows corporations to keep secret their activities with toxic biological, chemical or radiological materials.

SECTION 205 allows top Federal officials to keep all financial dealings secret, and anyone investigating them can be considered a terrorist.

SECTION 303 sets up national DNA database of suspected terrorists. The database will also be used to "stop other unlawful activities." It will share the information with state, local and foreign agencies for the same purposes.

SECTION 311 federalizes your local police department in the area of information sharing.

SECTION 313 provides liability protection for businesses, especially big businesses, that spy on their customers for Homeland Security, violating their privacy agreements. It goes on to say that these are all preventative measures - has anyone seen Minority Report? This is the access hub for the Total Information Awareness Network.

SECTION 321 authorizes foreign governments to spy on the American people and to share information with foreign governments.

SECTION 322 removes Congress from the extradition process and allows officers of the Homeland Security complex to extradite American citizens anywhere they wish. It also allows Homeland Security to secretly take individuals out of foreign countries.

SECTION 402 is titled "Providing Material Support to Terrorism." The section reads that there is no requirement to show that the individual even had the intent to aid terrorists.

SECTION 403 expands the definition of weapons of mass destruction to include any activity that affects interstate or foreign commerce.

SECTION 404 makes it a crime for a terrorist or "other criminals" to use encryption in the commission of a crime.

SECTION 408 creates "lifetime parole" (basically, slavery) for a whole host of crimes.

SECTION 410 creates no statute of limitations for anyone that engages in terrorist actions or supports terrorists. Remember: any crime is now considered terrorism under the first Patriot Act.

SECTION 411 expands crimes that are punishable by death. Again, they point to Section 802 of the first Patriot Act and state that any terrorist act or support of terrorist act can result in the death penalty.

SECTION 421 increases penalties for terrorist financing. This section states that any type of financial activity connected to terrorism will result to time in prison and $10-50,000 fines per violation.

SECTIONS 427 sets up asset forfeiture provisions for anyone engaging in terrorist activities. There are many other sections that I did not cover in the interest of time. The American people were shocked by the despotic nature of the first Patriot Act. The second Patriot Act dwarfs all police state legislation in modern world history. (Many thanks to Alex Jones for this important list and research).

The only remaining question for American people is whether Executive Orders, and acts such as the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act and the Patriot Act II are imposed “in case of crisis,” or whether they are created as part of a pre-determined decision to dismantle Constitutional America. And either way, is this how we want to live?

Carefully consider all the above. Carefully consider the fact that the American military has been out of the country for 50+ years, fighting U.N. battles. And carefully consider that most of the Executive Orders were written prior to 9-11, and that the first Patriot Act was immediately passed following 9-11 without Congress having access to the contents of the Act. Something is terribly wrong, and my greatest fear is that American people will never have another opportunity for a national vote. It would appear that other plans are in the making.

Copyright by Nancy Levant
Copyright© All Rights Reserved.


The ABC's of the Northwoods Documents (...and you've gotta know your ABC's...)

ABC News

U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba

Book: U.S. Military Drafted Plan to Terrorize Cities to Provoke War With Cuba

By David Ruppe
ABC News

N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001 - In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

Top Stories

* Poll: Americans Say World War III Likely
* Pressure on U.S. to Use More Surveillance
* Dangerous Currents Stalk Florida Panhandle

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told

"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."

Gunning for War

The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.

(Page 2 of 4)

The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show.

Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote, "the objective is to provide irrevocable proof … that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic]."

Top Stories

* Poll: Americans Say World War III Likely
* Pressure on U.S. to Use More Surveillance
* Dangerous Currents Stalk Florida Panhandle

The plans were motivated by an intense desire among senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized power in 1959 to become the first communist leader in the Western Hemisphere — only 90 miles from U.S. shores.

The earlier CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by Cuban exiles had been a disastrous failure, in which the military was not allowed to provide firepower.The military leaders now wanted a shot at it.

"The whole thing was so bizarre," says Bamford, noting public and international support would be needed for an invasion, but apparently neither the American public, nor the Cuban public, wanted to see U.S. troops deployed to drive out Castro.

Reflecting this, the U.S. plan called for establishing prolonged military — not democratic — control over the island nation after the invasion.

"That's what we're supposed to be freeing them from," Bamford says. "The only way we would have succeeded is by doing exactly what the Russians were doing all over the world, by imposing a government by tyranny, basically what we were accusing Castro himself of doing."

'Over the Edge'

The Joint Chiefs at the time were headed by Eisenhower appointee Army Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, who, with the signed plans in hand made a pitch to McNamara on March 13, 1962, recommending Operation Northwoods be run by the military.

Whether the Joint Chiefs' plans were rejected by McNamara in the meeting is not clear. But three days later, President Kennedy told Lemnitzer directly there was virtually no possibility of ever using overt force to take Cuba, Bamford reports. Within months, Lemnitzer would be denied another term as chairman and transferred to another job.

(Page 3 of 4)

The secret plans came at a time when there was distrust in the military leadership about their civilian leadership, with leaders in the Kennedy administration viewed as too liberal, insufficiently experienced and soft on communism. At the same time, however, there real were concerns in American society about their military overstepping its bounds.

There were reports U.S. military leaders had encouraged their subordinates to vote conservative during the election.

Top Stories

* Poll: Americans Say World War III Likely
* Pressure on U.S. to Use More Surveillance
* Dangerous Currents Stalk Florida Panhandle

And at least two popular books were published focusing on a right-wing military leadership pushing the limits against government policy of the day.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee published its own report on right-wing extremism in the military, warning a "considerable danger" in the "education and propaganda activities of military personnel" had been uncovered. The committee even called for an examination of any ties between Lemnitzer and right-wing groups. But Congress didn't get wind of Northwoods, says Bamford.

"Although no one in Congress could have known at the time," he writes, "Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had quietly slipped over the edge."

Even after Lemnitzer was gone, he writes, the Joint Chiefs continued to plan "pretext" operations at least through 1963.

One idea was to create a war between Cuba and another Latin American country so that the United States could intervene. Another was to pay someone in the Castro government to attack U.S. forces at the Guantanamo naval base — an act, which Bamford notes, would have amounted to treason. And another was to fly low level U-2 flights over Cuba, with the intention of having one shot down as a pretext for a war.

"There really was a worry at the time about the military going off crazy and they did, but they never succeeded, but it wasn't for lack of trying," he says.

After 40 Years

Ironically, the documents came to light, says Bamford, in part because of the 1992 Oliver Stone film JFK, which examined the possibility of a conspiracy behind the assassination of President Kennedy.

(Page 4 of 4)

As public interest in the assassination swelled after JFK's release, Congress passed a law designed to increase the public's access to government records related to the assassination.

The author says a friend on the board tipped him off to the documents.

Top Stories

* Poll: Americans Say World War III Likely
* Pressure on U.S. to Use More Surveillance
* Dangerous Currents Stalk Florida Panhandle

Afraid of a congressional investigation, Lemnitzer had ordered all Joint Chiefs documents related to the Bay of Pigs destroyed, says Bamford. But somehow, these remained.

"The scary thing is none of this stuff comes out until 40 years after," says Bamford.

«PREVIOUS 1. 2. 3. 4.



COINTERLUDE: The New York Times

The Dangerous Comfort of Secrecy
Published: July 12, 2005

"The Bush administration is classifying the documents to be kept from public scrutiny at the rate of 125 a minute."



COEPILOGUE: George Washington University

April 30, 2001

Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962

In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”


The Clash of Civilizations: London Living is Pricey, London Life is Cheap...

How the Government Staged the London Bombings in Ten Easy Steps

Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet | July 13 2005

1) Hire a Crisis Management firm to set up an exercise that parallels the terrorist attack you are going to carry out. Have them run the exercise at the precise locations and at the very same time as the attack. If at any stage of the attack your Arabs get caught, tell the police it was part of an exercise.

2) Hire four Arabs and tell them they're taking part in an important exercise to help defend London from terrorist attacks. Strap them with rucksacks filled with deadly explosives. Tell the Arabs the rucksacks are dummy explosives and wouldn't harm a fly.

3) Tell four Arabs to meet up at London Underground and disperse, each getting on a different train. Make sure Arabs meet in a location where you can get a good mug shot of them all on CCTV which you can later endlessly repeat to drooling masses on television.

4) While four Arabs are in London, plant explosives in their houses in Leeds. Plant some explosives in one of their cars in Luton for the police to later discover. Remember that Qu'ran and flight manual in the hijackers' car? Ha ha, they fell for that one hook, line and sinker. No need to change tactics on this one.

5) Before the bombings take place, make sure you warn any of your buddies who are scheduled to be anywhere near where the bombs go off. If this gets leaked to the press, just deny it.

6) 4th Arab goes out partying in London night before and ends up getting out of bed late. No worries, the 9/11 'hijackers' did the same thing but that didn't cause us a big problem. 4th Arab catches bus to see if other Arabs are waiting for him. 4th Arab starts hearing about explosions in the London Underground. 4th Arab comes to the realization that this he is being set up and freaks out. 4th Arab starts fiddling in his rucksack. 4th Arab sets bomb off and is blown up.

If you hired any additional Arabs and they also got wind of the set up, make sure tere are GPS locators in the rucksacks so you can have police snipers ready to kill them before they can blow the whistle.

7) After the bombs go off, put out a story for over an hour that the explosions are a simple electrical fault. This gives you cover time to make sure the lazy bus Arab is dead and any other hired Arabs who reneged are also dead. Make sure any CCTV footage that doesn't support your official story is either seized or destroyed.

8) A few hours after the bombings, have one of your boys post an 'Al-Qaeda statement' claiming responsibility. Don't worry about the whole 'misreferencing the Qu'ran' thing, these idiots don't have the attention spans to figure it out.

9) After you have made sure that all the Arabs are dead and you are managing the story accordingly, wait for four days until the police piece together the story and find the explosives you planted in Leeds and in the car in Luton. Remember that Qu'ran and flight manual in the hijackers' car? Ha ha, they fell for that one hook, line and sinker. No need to change tactics this time either. The time delay will convince the gullible public that a real investigation is taking place. Create a background of the hired Arabs being militant Muslims. The drooling masses, as was the case with the '9/11 hijackers,' will ignore stories of neighbours saying they were the quiet, educated types who liked children and playing sports.

BBC excerpt: One local resident described him as "a nice lad".

"He liked to play football, he liked to play cricket. I'm shocked."

Another resident said he was just a "normal kid" who played basketball and kicked a ball around.

10) Sit back and enjoy as Blair and his minions grandstand in front of television cameras about staying the course in the war on terror. The pay raise, extra agency funding, and power to strip more freedoms and liberties made the ten easy steps to staging a terrorist attack a worthwhile venture. The dozens of dead people were necessary collateral damage. This is a dirty war, we need to be less moral than the terrorists to defeat them.

And that's how the government staged the bombings in ten easy steps.

Granted, you can interchange different pieces of the puzzle. The bombers could be real terrorists that knew exactly what they were doing. All you would need to do is control the 'mastermind' behind the attack.



Yahoo! News

UK Police: Man Killed Unrelated to Probe

Associated Press Writer
35 minutes ago

LONDON - The man shot and killed on a subway car by London police in front of horrified commuters had nothing to do with this month's bombings on the city's transit system, police said Saturday in expressing their regrets.

A day earlier, the police commissioner said the man was "directly linked" to Thursday's attacks, in which bombs on three subway trains and a bus failed to detonate properly. No one was injured.

"For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets," a police spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity.

The man, whose identity has not been released, was shot Friday at a subway station in the south London neighborhood of Stockwell. Witnesses said the man appeared to be South Asian and was wearing a heavy padded coat when police chased him into a subway car, pinned him to the ground and shot him in the head and torso.

A police spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity that the man was unconnected to Thursday's incidents, in which bombs placed on three subway cars and a double-decker bus failed to detonate properly.

Later, a Metropolitan Police official said on condition of anonymity that the man was "not believed to be connected in any way to any of the London bombings." The official requested anonymity because no official announcement had been made concerning a link to the July 7 attacks that killed 56 people, including four attackers.

Hours after the man was killed, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair said the shooting was "directly linked" to the investigations.

"The man who was shot was under police observation because he had emerged from a house that was itself under observation because it was linked to the investigation of yesterday's incidents," police said Friday.

"He was then followed by surveillance officers to the station. His clothing and his behavior at the station added to their suspicions."

Police investigating Thursday's attacks also said Saturday they had arrested a second man in the same south London neighborhood where the shooting occurred and another person was detained.

Thousands of officers fanned out in a huge manhunt amid hopes the publication of images of four suspected attackers would lead to their capture.

Security alerts kept the city of about 8 million on edge. Police briefly evacuated east London's Mile End subway station in one such incident and one witness reported the smell of something burning. Service was suspended on parts of two subway lines, but police said later the incident "turned out to be nothing."

The mourning continued, with hundreds packing Westminster Cathedral for the funeral Mass of Anthony Fatayi-Williams, a 26-year-old who was among the 52 people killed by four suicide bombers in the first wave of attacks on July 7.

"These present atrocities and Anthony's death have raised great emotions in us," Auxiliary Bishop of Westminster Alan Hopes told mourners. "We are angry, we are appalled and we are grieving. But as Christians we cannot yield to bitterness, we cannot yield to thoughts of revenge."

The Metropolitan Police said the second arrest late Friday was "in connection with our inquiries" into Thursday's attacks. The first suspect, whose identity also has not been released, was being questioned at a high-security London police station.

Police would not say whether the men arrested were among the four suspected of carrying bombs onto three subway trains and a bus Thursday. The bombs failed to detonate properly and no one was injured in the attacks, which echoed the much deadlier blasts two weeks earlier.

Police said they had a good response to Friday's release of the photos, taken from the British capital's ubiquitous closed-circuit surveillance cameras, which have proved a boon for investigators.

The closed-circuit TV images of the suspects stared from the front pages of British newspapers Saturday.

"Faces of the four bombers," said the Daily Telegraph.

"The Fugitives" said The Times.

The Daily Mail labeled them "Human Bombs."

One image shows a stocky man in a "New York" sweatshirt running through a station. Another depicts a man in a white baseball cap and a T-shirt adorned with palm trees. Two others are in dark clothes, slightly obscured by a poor camera angle.

A statement posted Friday on an Islamic Web site in the name of an al-Qaida-linked group claimed responsibility for Thursday's attacks.

Authorities, however, were skeptical. The group, Abu Hafs al Masri Brigades, has also claimed responsibility for the July 7 bombings — as it did for the 2003 New York City blackout and many other events.

These have been days of high tension, disruption and fear on the London Underground. The union for subway and bus drivers said workers would be justified in staying away from work if the government fails to take more precautions to make the operators safe.

"I think they're going to strike again," commuter Warren West, 27, said of the bombers. "I think they're doing to London what's happening in

Heavily armed officers patrolled with clear instructions to stop suicide bombers — if necessary, with a shot to the head.

"If you are dealing with someone who might be a suicide bomber, if they remain conscious, they could trigger plastic explosives or whatever device is on them," Mayor Ken Livingstone. "Therefore, overwhelmingly in these circumstances, it is going to be a shoot-to-kill policy."

SOURCE -;_ylt=AhhdO9NlwY237xkzyUmg2NS9Q5gv;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Friday, July 22, 2005

The Clash of Civilizations: London Living is Pricey, London Life is Cheap...

"You know in England if you commit a crime, the police don't have a gun and you don't have a gun. So if you commit a crime: "Stop! Or, or I'll say stop again!"

- Robin Williams, Metropolitan Opera House, New York, 1986


Yahoo! News

London Police Kill Man at Subway Station

Associated Press Writer
8 minutes ago

LONDON - Plainclothes police chased a man in a thick coat through a subway station, wrestled him to the floor and shot him to death in front of stunned commuters Friday. Police said the shooting was "directly linked" to the investigations of the bomb attacks on London's transit system.

Appealing for help from the public to capture the suspects, police released photographs of four men suspected of launching Thursday's second wave of terrorist attacks, saying they bore similarities to the July 7 bombings that claimed 56 lives. Police said the bombs on Thursday partly detonated and contained homemade explosives.

The police photographs showed one man, wearing a dark shirt with "New York" across the front, running through a subway station. Another was shown on the top of a double-decker bus, while the other two men were shown at separate subway stations.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair told a news conference in central London that his force was facing its "greatest operational challenge ever" and that anti-terrorism officers were working around the clock.

SOURCE -;_ylt=AgdM9lZ99ERBPsj.tcb2DG.9Q5gv;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Thursday, July 21, 2005

The Clash of Civilizations: London Leering At Your Laptop...

here they come...

surf's up...

for now...


The Guardian

Police ask for tough new powers

PM told of need for three-month detention of suspects and crackdown on websites

Alan Travis and Richard Norton-Taylor
Friday July 22, 2005

Police last night told Tony Blair that they need sweeping new powers to counter the terrorist threat, including the right to detain a suspect for up to three months without charge instead of the current 14 days.

Senior officers also want powers to attack and close down websites, and a new criminal offence of using the internet to prepare acts of terrorism, to "suppress inappropriate internet usage".

They also want to make it a criminal offence for suspects to refuse to cooperate in giving the police full access to computer files by refusing to disclose their encryption keys.

The police would also like to see much clearer information given to the public about the threat level, the creation of a specialist border security agency and further discussions about the use of phonetap evidence in terrorist cases.

The Association of Chief Police Officers published its list of 11 further changes in the law it wants after meeting Mr Blair and security services chiefs yesterday.

MI5 and MI6 wanted yesterday's meeting to discuss Britain's entire counter-terrorism strategy and how to fill the intelligence gaps exposed by the London bombings.

Whitehall officials confirmed that, as reported in yesterday's Guardian, the security and intelligence agencies want a new system of plea bargaining. Convicted terrorists would be given lighter sentences if they supplied information before their trials.

Suspects would be given the chance to provide information in "intelligence-only" interviews and none of the information would be used against them in trials.

Officials also said MI5 was "in principle" in favour of the product of phone taps being used as evidence in trials. What has not been resolved is who would pay for the resources needed to transcribe the tapes in a way that would satisfy defence lawyers, according to counter-terrorism sources.

The prime minister has said he is willing to consider any "gaps in the law" that police and security chiefs identify as a result of the London attacks.

Ken Jones, the chairman of Acpo's terrorism committee and Sussex chief constable, said: "The evolving nature of the current threat from international terrorism demands that those charged with countering the threat have the tools they need to do the job.

"Often there is a need to intervene and disrupt at an early stage those who are intent on terrorist activity, in order to protect the public. Clearly our legislation must reflect the importance of such disruptive action."

The most controversial of the police proposals is the demand to be able to hold without charge a terrorist suspect for three months instead of 14 days. An Acpo spokesman said the complexity and scale of counter-terrorist operations means the 14-day maximum is often insufficient.

"The complexities and timescales surrounding forensic examination of [crime] scenes merely add to the burden and immense time pressures on investigating officers," he said. Three-month periods would help to ensure the charge could be sustained in court.

[Ed note: then how come they always seem to catch suspects on the same day?]

Other powers police told Mr Blair they needed include:

· Terror suspects to give compulsory answers to questions similar to obligations on company directors in fraud trials;

· A duty on the private sector to install protective security in designated locations;

· Putting private security staff at the disposal of the police in the immediate aftermath of an outrage;

· New generation CCTV cameras at ports and airports.

The police sought extra funding for a regional network of Special Branch officers and a further £45m to ensure national coverage for the new generation CCTV cameras, which scan number plates and alert intercept teams.

"The terrorist attacks in London on July 7 and today provide an opportunity for us to reflect on our systems and practices to ensure they are sufficient to counter such unprecedented events," Mr Jones said.

SOURCE -,16132,1533917,00.html

The Clash of Civilizations: London Longing for Lebanon...

he's not wrong...

so is he wrong to speak out?

he's not wrong...

so is he wrong to analyze?


he's not right...


he's not wrong...


he's got a point...


his people are listening...


he's got to be heard...


he's got to be invited to the table...

after all...

if his "opinion" is crazy...


all his followers are crazy...


"war" is normal...


The New York Times

Militant London Sheik Had Predicted More Terror Attacks

Published: July 22, 2005

LONDON, July 21 - On the eve of four attempted bombings here on Thursday, Sheik Omar Bakri Mohammad, one of Britain's most outspoken militant clerics, predicted that another terrorist attack would hit London.

In a wide-ranging telephone interview late Wednesday night, Sheik Bakri also blamed the British government for the July 7 terror attacks that killed at least 56 people on three London Underground trains and a double-decker bus. He said "hundreds" of young, disaffected British-born Muslims now felt compelled to take action in Britain to protest Prime Minister Tony Blair's foreign policy, especially the support of the American-led invasion in Iraq, which they perceive as anti-Muslim.

"Unless British foreign policy is changed and they withdraw forces from Iraq, I'm afraid there's going to be a lot of attacks, just the way it happened in Madrid and the way it happened in London," he said during a 40-minute conversation.

His preaching is heard or seen by hundreds of people in central London halls and on his Web site, where he has urged young men to fight "jihad" against "occupiers" in Iraq, Israel and Chechnya. He routinely refers to the Sept. 11 hijackers as "the magnificent 19."

A Syrian-born, 47-year-old father of seven who has lived in North London for 19 years, Sheik Bakri was granted asylum in 1986, and receives public assistance of £300, or $545, each month. On the cover of The Sun on Wednesday, his photograph was accompanied with three bold words: "SEND HIM BAK."

Britain's home secretary, Charles Clarke, has identified Sheik Bakri as one of several extremist clerics who could be deported from Britain. As part of a new package of antiterror legislation, the British government is considering banning clerics from urging people to join a holy war or running a pro-jihad Web site.

Sheik Bakri said he would probably leave Britain within the next several days on his own, possibly permanently. He would not say where he intended to go.

"After all, I could worship God here, I could worship God back in Lebanon," he said. "I could do evil here, I could do that back in a Muslim country."

Sheik Bakri has preached to larger crowds of young people within the last year, blaming the United States and Britain for harming Muslims worldwide. He has also encouraged young people to join a "global jihad," but he insisted Wednesday night that he had never encouraged anyone to strike Britain. In fact, he said, he had urged some young people to take their jihad intention abroad.

"Nobody said, 'Go out in London and bomb,' " he said.

He said he believed that the British government and the British people deserved the "blame" for the July 7 attacks, saying Mr. Blair's re-election on May 5 made the attacks in London "inevitable."

"They know that the prime minister has his hands full of the blood of Muslims in Palestine and in Iraq and in Afghanistan," he said of young Muslims. But he said the policies of the West's "war on terror" had incensed young people, causing some to want to strike out against Britain. "We hear from many people who say they want to attack," he said.

Sheik Bakri has said Osama bin Laden warned European countries with troops in Iraq last April, giving them 90 days for them to remove their troops. No one listened, he said.

As for his own future, he acknowledged that he no longer felt at home in Britain. "They want to deport me, let it be," he said moments before the conversation ended. "They want to arrest me, let it be."



The Guardian

Muslim community reacts with sorrow

David Pallister
Friday July 22, 2005

Members of the Muslim community reacted with sorrow and anxiety to yesterday's bomb attacks.

They were fearful that the same home-grown group of radicalised Britons were responsible. But a message posted on the website of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee warned people against rushing to conclusions.

"Let's not get carried away," it said. "Remember - the Oklahoma Bomber" - a reference to the massive explosion which was initially and wrongly attributed to Islamists.

Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain, the leading moderate organisation which met with Tony Blair about seeking ways of defusing extremism in Muslim young people, said: "Today's attacks highlights the urgent need for all communities to help the police to catch those who are intent on causing such havoc in London. They must be caught before they harm more innocents."

A spokesman for the Muslim Association of Britain reiterated its response to the July 7 bombs. He said: "Our policy has been clear from the very first bomb this month. Anyone who is acting to create insecurity and cause harm to people should be hunted down. The country's security should be the utmost priority."

Massoud Shadjareh of the Islamic Human Rights Commission said: "It is very unclear what has happened but it is very worrying. It was bad enough what happened two weeks ago and we don't want any escalation."

Mr Shadjareh said reported hostile incidents had increased a great deal since the July 7 bombings. "And that, of course is only the number we are told about. This is not going to be helpful," he said.

A spokesman for the Islamic Society of Britain said: "We're all very shaken . This is not going to make anything easier for our community which has already been under an intense spotlight.

"We feel like [we are] on an ocean with no sign of the shore and we are going farther into the ocean. We don't know what to do. It's all too much."

SOURCE -,16132,1534038,00.html

“They have the desire to use their terrorist techniques to frighten us,” Bush said


i gotta be honest with you...


i mean dude...

dude has huge cojones...


when fighting a bad guy...

i gotta say...

even when he only speaks in short bursts of semi-coherency...

like Duke, Clint, Charles, Chuck, Sly, Arnie...

and other American Heroes...


he plays a hell of a cowboy...


Hours after the explosions, President George W. Bush did not directly mention the bombings but repeated during a trade speech that the United States would not be frightened by acts of terrorism.

“They have the desire to use their terrorist techniques to frighten us,” Bush said in the speech on a major US-Central American trade pact. “They understand when they kill in cold blood it ends up on our TV screens. And they’re trying to shake our will.” “They don’t understand our country though. They don’t understand that when it comes to the defense of universal freedoms, this country won’t be frightened,” he added.

SOURCE -§ion=0&article=67325&d=22&m=7&y=2005


such a strong leader...

such a simple message...

such a strong speech...

such a subtle message...



you're either with us...


you're a pussy...



The Clash of Civilizations: "London Likes Fish'n'Chips, yeh?"


that first bombing wasn't a steak...

it was a chip...

and you can't have just one...


and it's freakin' europe...

i mean...

half of them are in the E.U...

i mean...

they call their "fries" chips...

i mean...

they even eat them with mayo...

i mean...

look what happened in spain...


that was a big enchilada...


and the espanolish people flipped out...


then they got out of iraq...




aw heck...

who're we kidding...

you've been to a convenience store...

you know it ain't hard to sell chips...


Yahoo! News

Two Arrested in London Subway, Bus Blasts

Associated Press Writer
50 minutes ago

LONDON - Police in London have arrested two men in connection with four attacks on three subway trains and a double-decker bus on Thursday, a scene hauntingly similar to deadly explosions set off by four suicide bombers exactly two weeks before. It was an inescapable message that life in London now means living with the threat of terror.

The explosive devices were either faulty or too small to cause bloodshed, and the only reported injury turned out to be an asthma attack. But the lunch-hour blasts rattled a capital already on edge after the July 7 explosions, which killed 52 people and four suicide bombers.

Police said one man was detained near Downing Street, site of the prime minister's residence; the other was picked up near Tottenham Court Road, close to the Warren Street subway station where one attack took place.

"We can't minimize incidents such as this," Prime Minister Tony Blair said. "They're done to scare people, to frighten them and make them worried."

They did that.

Authorities said it was too early to determine whether the attacks were carried out by the same organization as the July 7 blasts — or whether they were linked to al-Qaida.

But NBC News reported that British authorities told their U.S. counterparts that backpacks and explosives used Thursday were identical to those in the July 7 attacks. And the British Broadcasting Corp. reported "speculation" that the devices were so similar they may even have been part of the same batch.

"Clearly, the intention must have been to kill," Police Commissioner Ian Blair told reporters. "You don't do this with any other intention. And I think the important point is that the intention of the terrorists has not been fulfilled."

Londoners fled the three Underground stations at midday, some sprinting barefoot after leaving their shoes behind in the scramble.

Witnesses on the Underground heard a pop like a bursting champagne cork. Others smelled an odor like burning rubber. At least one reported a minor explosion in a man's backpack, and then the man muttering that something had gone wrong.

Bus passengers reported a bang on the upper level, where windows were blown out. But some witnesses said the blast wasn't loud. Witnesses first saw the police running up the road, followed soon after by news cameramen lugging tripods.

The prime minister appealed for calm, and a Buckingham Palace garden party for 8,000 people, hosted by Queen Elizabeth II, went ahead.

But even among the famously stoic British, nerves were on edge.

"When I got home, my hands were shaking," said 24-year-old Lisa Chilley, who uses the targeted Oval station. "I'm panicking like hell. It's just too close to home."

Firefighters and police with bomb-sniffing dogs sealed off city blocks and evacuated rows of restaurants, pubs and offices.

Britain's Press Association news agency reported detectives were working on the belief that the bombs were not properly primed — which could help explain the limited damage.

Although authorities did not say how many devices exploded, Paul Beaver, an independent defense expert, said an official told him it appeared that two bombs detonated and two others did not. Detonators are often faulty on commercial and military explosives, he said.

"These attacks don't look like they were a hallmark of any one group," Beaver told The Associated Press. "They don't fit into any clear patterns that we know of except they were timed."

One of the greatest police fears is that an audacious attack will inspire similar attacks, said Rachel Bronson, director of Mideast Studies at the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations. "It's all done to sow terror, and there's nothing more terrifying than bombs followed by bombs," she said.

Alarmingly, it appears the group was able to attack in the midst of an intense investigation of the previous bus and train bombings. Often such follow-up attacks are uncovered and thwarted, Bronson said.

"What is very worrisome, London intelligence, which is among the best in the world, was not only surprised two weeks ago, but they're surprised by this," she said.

Emergency teams were sent to the three Underground stations after the attacks, and the police commissioner said forensic evidence collected could provide a "significant break."

In one closely watched development, an armed police unit entered University College hospital shortly after the blasts. Sky News TV reported that police were searching for a man with a blue shirt with wires protruding from his pocket. Officers asked employees to look for a black or South Asian man about 6-foot-2.

By late Thursday, the hospital said police had searched the facility but that three small rooms in an unoccupied part of the complex were cordoned off.

The attacks paralleled the July 7 blasts, which involved explosions at three Underground stations simultaneously starting at 8:50 a.m., followed about an hour later by a bomb going off on a bus. Those bombings took place in the center of London.

Thursday's attacks were more spread out and occurred during the lunch hour — beginning at about 12:38 p.m.

The bombs, which targeted trains near the Warren Street, Oval and Shepherd's Bush stations, did not shut down the subway system, only three of its lines. The bus was hit while on Hackney Road in east London.

Near the bus explosion, firefighters and police, some with bomb-sniffing dogs, sealed off a city block of restaurants, shops and apartments. Residents peered through the curtains of upper floor windows, speaking on cell phones.

With fear spreading to other capitals, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said authorities would begin conducting random searches of packages and backpacks carried by people entering the subway.

But Transport for London, which runs the British capital's bus and transport network, rejected such measures. Spokesman Steve Taylor said it would be impractical to check bags or install airport-style metal detectors and X-ray machines. London buses and subways carry 9 million passengers a day.

"We are running a massive transport infrastructure," he told the AP. "Would people accept an additional 30 to 40 minutes on their journey every morning and afternoon? It would bring the network to a standstill."

Dozens of people living near the attacks were unable to return home by late Thursday evening, and police set up reception areas to help them.

Among those affected was Eileen Moreland, 91, who has lived since 1950 in an apartment complex above Warren Street station.

"I'm feeling a bit shaky because I haven't been very well and I find it difficult to walk," she said.

For some commuters, the new closures would hardly matter. Fethi Brandou, 36-year-old gardener, said he'd be reluctant to take the Underground again_ no matter what.

"I wouldn't take the Tube now," he said. "I'll buy a bicycle or walk."

Associated Press writers Thin Lei Win, Kate Bouey, Brian Murphy, Beth Gardiner, Jason Keyser, Jill Lawless, Sarah Blaskovich and Michael McDonough in London contributed to this report.

SOURCE -;_ylt=ApXJk7uc1q4fa5p6Jl2D8LGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

House Votes to Extend Patriot Act ("Yawn... man incrementalism is so bo-ring!")

you know...

we look at these things in the abstract...


"okay, they gave themselves the "right" to do bad stuff..."


"they haven't done anything yet..."

and that makes sense...

for now...



they are using it now...

and we just don't know how...

after all...

we didn't know they arrested 5000 muslims for "terrorism"...

and formally charged 2...

what else don't we know....

what really happened today...


1 entry found for incrementalism.

in·cre·men·tal·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nkr-mntl-zm)

n. Social or political gradualism.


incre·mental·ist n.

[Download Now or Buy the Book]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


"No Great thing is created suddenly, any more than a bunch of grapes or a fig. If you tell me that you desire a fig, I answer you that there must be time. Let it first blossom, then bear fruit, then ripen."

--- Epictetus, Discourses, Book I, Chapter 15


Incrementalism - A Lie from the Pit of Hell!

By Flip Benham

There is a lie that has infected the pro-life movement for the past 29 years. It has paralyzed the Church of Jesus Christ. It has moved us from standing upon the Word of God to end child killing, to relying upon our own ability to make compromises with the enemy of God in order to stop abortion. This lie, more than anything else, has rendered us defenseless and ineffective in the battle for life. It is the primary reason that we still have abortion in our land today. It has caused us to believe that we can legislate this evil out of our culture slowly but surely by education, sound reasoning, and political maneuvering. It is called incrementalism. It gives the appearance of accomplishing a desired end but, in reality, it only enables the enemy to continue killing.



First They Came for the Jews

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

- Pastor Martin Niemöller


Yahoo! News

House Votes to Extend Patriot Act

Associated Press Writer
5 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The House voted overwhelmingly Thursday to extend the USA Patriot Act, the nation's main anti-terrorism tool, just hours after televisions in the Capitol beamed images of a new attack in London.

As similar legislation worked its way through the Senate, House Republicans generally cast the law as a valuable asset in the war on terror. Most Democrats echoed that support but said they were concerned the law could allow citizens' civil liberties to be infringed. Following more than hours of debate, the House approved the measure 257-171.

The bulk of the back-and-forth centered on language making permanent 14 of 16 provisions that had four-year sunset, or expiration, provisions under the original law, which Congress passed overwhelmingly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The bill also proposed 10-year extensions to the two other provisions set to expire on Dec. 31, one allowing roving wiretaps and another allowing searches of library and medical records. They were the focus of most of the controversy as members plowed through the main legislation and 18 amendments.

"While the Patriot Act and other anti-terrorism initiatives have helped avert additional attacks on our soil, the threat has not receded," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record) of Michigan, the top Democrat on the committee, said that while "I support the majority of the 166 provisions of the Patriot Act," the extensions could lessen accountability. "Ten years is not a sunset; 10 years is semi-permanent," he said.

The Bush administration hailed the vote.

"After measured deliberation and a public debate, the House has again provided the brave men and women of law enforcement with critical tools in their efforts to combat terrorism and protect the American people, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said in a statement.

As the House debated the legislation, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved its own extension of the bill, though it included only four-year extensions for the roving wiretap and records search provisions.

A competing bill also has been approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which would give the FBI expanded powers to subpoena records without the approval of a judge or grand jury. That ensured further Senate talks on the terrorism-fighting measure. The House legislation will also have to be reconciled with whatever emerges from the Senate.

The House debate included frequent references to the attacks earlier in the day, two weeks after larger London blasts that killed 56, including four suicide bombers.

The roving wiretap provision, Section 206, allows investigators to obtain warrants to intercept a suspect's phone conversations or Internet traffic without limiting it to a specific phone or identifying the suspect. The records provision, Section 215, authorizes federal officials to obtain "tangible items" such as business, library and medical records.

Advocates argued that such powers already exist in criminal investigations so they should be expressly continued for terrorism investigations. They also cited safeguards in the bill, such as a requirement that a judge approve the records search.

One amendment, passed by a 402-26 vote, requires the FBI director to personally approve any request for library or bookstore records. Another successful amendment sets a 20-year jail term for an attack against a rail or mass-transit vehicle; a 30-year sentence if the vehicle carries nuclear material; and life imprisonment — with the possibility of the death penalty — if anyone is killed in such an attack.

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., a former FBI agent, recalled using such tools in gang and child molestation investigations.

"All we do in the Patriot Act is say, `Look, if we can go after child molesters sitting in the library and bombers who we need to sneak-and-peek on a warrant, we ought to be able to go after terrorists,'" he said.

Critics heralded the bulk of the existing law, but said the sunsets were wisely inserted amid the inflamed passions following the Sept. 11 attacks, and should be retained to assess the long-term impact of the law.

"Periodically revisiting the Patriot Act is a good thing," said Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass. "The Patriot Act was an effort to answer the most difficult question a democracy faces: How much freedom are we willing to give up to feel safe?"

Democrats were incensed after Republican leaders blocked consideration of an amendment that would have blocked the library searches. The House approved identical language last month in a test vote.

"If you don't like it, come up and speak against it," said Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who sponsored the amendment. "But it has passed once and it would likely pass again."


The House bill number is H.R. 3199.

On the Net:

For bill text:


In pullin' a total 180, I just can't believe they still said: "Two Men Claim Hunger Strike at Guantanamo."

Yahoo! News

Two Men Claim Hunger Strike at Guantanamo

Associated Press Writer
1 minute ago

KABUL, Afghanistan - Two Afghans released from Guantanamo Bay claimed Wednesday about 180 Afghans at the U.S. detention facility were on a hunger strike to protest alleged mistreatment and to push for freedom.

Habir Russol and Moheb Ullah Borekzai, who said they left the prison camp on Cuba on Monday and were flown to Afghanistan before being freed, said they did not participate in the hunger strike. They did not say how they knew others were refusing to eat.

A Pentagon spokesman, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Flex Plexico, said he was unaware of a hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay but would inquire.

Amnesty International in London said it knew nothing about hunger strikes at Guantanamo, other than media reports.

Russol said 180 Afghan prisoners "are not eating or drinking." He and Borekzai estimated the men were in the 14th or 15th day of their fast.

Borekzai later told The Associated Press the detainees were protesting because "some of these people say they were mistreated during interrogation. Some say they are innocent."

"They are protesting that they have been in jail nearly four years and they want to be released," he said.

Neil Koslowe, a Washington-based lawyer for 12 detainees from Kuwait, said several inmates told him during a June 20-24 visit to Guantanamo that there was a "widespread" hunger strike over the amount and quality of their drinking water.

The two Afghans released this week said they had been accused of being members of the former Taliban regime, but both said they were innocent. Neither said how long they had been detained.

The Pentagon announced, meanwhile, that seven Guantanamo detainees had been released and an eighth transferred to the custody a foreign government. In addition to the two released Afghans, three Saudi Arabians, a Jordanian and a Sudanese were freed, the Pentagon said.

The three Saudis, who were not identified, were handed over to Saudi security, the official Saudi Press Agency said in Riyadh. It did not specify whether the three were detained for questioning, saying only that "the regular procedures will be applied accordingly."

In addition, a Moroccan was transferred to control of the government of Spain, U.S. officials said. The Pentagon did not identify the detainees. The Moroccan was identified earlier this week in Spain as Lahcen Ikassrien, who had been charged there for his links to an al-Qaida cell.

The Defense Department has sought to dispute allegations of mistreatment of detainees at Guantanamo, where about 520 prisoners remain, mostly Afghans, Pakistanis and others captured after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

Military investigators said this month they proposed disciplining the prison commander because of abusive and degrading treatment of a suspected terrorist, but that the matter has been referred to the Army's inspector general instead.


Associated Press correspondent Ben Fox in San Juan, Puerto Rico contributed to this report.


GOP-Diddy vs. Press 'Pac: "Heavenly Father may I holla at you briefly / I wanna meet the President, but will he meet me?"

"Heavenly Father may I holla at you briefly
I wanna meet the President, but will he meet me?
He's scared to look inside the eyes of a Thug ni**a
We tired of bein scapegoats for this capitalistic drug dealin
How hypocritical is Liberty?
That blind bi**h ain't never did s**t for me
My history, full of casket and scars
My own black nation at war, whole family behind bars
And they wonder why we scarred, thirteen lookin hard
Sister had a baby as an adolescent, where was God?
Somewhere in the middle of my mind
Is a ni**a on the tightrope, screamin let him die
Can't lie I'm a thug, drownin in my own blood
Lookin for the reason that my momma's strung out on drugs
Down to die, for everything I represent
Meant every word, in my letter to the President..."

- 2Pac, "Letter To The President"


The Boston Globe


Link to Cheney deepens ‘leak-gate’ scandal

By Derrick Z. Jackson, Globe Columnist | July 19, 2005

THE NEWS that Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff was the second possible source in the leaking of the identity of a CIA agent to Time magazine elevates the scandal to a whole new level. It is bad enough for Karl Rove to be accused of being a leaker, since he is President Bush’s chief political strategist.

But if Time’s story holds, I. Lewis Libby’s involvement represents an even more insidious abuse of power. The Bush administration is being accused of leaking the name of Valerie Plame in retribution for a New York Times op-ed article written by her husband, diplomat Joseph Wilson. Wilson wrote that he never found any evidence in a 2002 trip to Africa, contrary to claims made by President Bush in his 2003 State of the Union address, that Saddam Hussein was procuring uranium from Niger for nuclear weapons.

Bush would invade Iraq over weapons of mass destruction that were never found. But Libby, Cheney, and the other influential right-wing hard-liners, such as Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, Richard Perle, and Douglas Feith, saw their dreams come true. Back in the administration of the senior President Bush, Cheney was defense secretary and Libby and Wolfowitz were two of his aides who, after the first Gulf War left Saddam in power, drafted a document advocating ‘‘preemptive’’ war against possible threats.

They said the United States should be ‘‘postured to act independently when collective action cannot be orchestrated.’’

Such provocation was kept at bay when President Clinton beat Bush in 1992 and took office for eight years. But when the junior Bush became president in 2000, the hard right on foreign policy took the helm. They used the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 as an excuse for invading Iraq, even though President Bush’s own 9/11 Commission found no tie between Saddam and 9/11.

Libby was in the thick of whipping up fear over the thinnest of evidence. The level to which Libby and Cheney stooped to get their war was highlighted by the momentous presentation of Saddam’s ‘‘threat’’ before the United Nations Security Council by then Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell gave a presentation six weeks before the war where he said, ‘‘every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions.’’ Those assertions resulted in grudging acceptance of the war from many Democrats.

Virtually all of Powell’s solid sources fell apart when the United States turned Iraq upside down, killing thousands of Iraqi civilians in the process. He would have looked much worse had he listened to everything Libby and Cheney tried to feed him. It was Cheney’s staff who wrote the first draft of Powell’s UN speech. It was Libby who suggested, in strategy meetings at the White House, playing up every possible, conceivable threat of Saddam — with the emphasis on the word ‘‘conceive.’’

A US News and World Report story in the summer of 2003 quoted a senior administration official as saying Libby’s presentation ‘‘was over the top and ran the gamut from Al Qaeda to human rights to weapons of mass destruction. They were unsubstantiated assertions, in my view.’’

Powell, according to both US News and Vanity Fair, was so irritated by Libby’s hodgepodge of unsubstantiated facts that he threw documents into the air and said, ‘‘I’m not reading this. This is bull ...’’

Libby, whose nickname is Scooter, was particularly unhappy that Powell had thrown out sections of the presentation that would have attempted to link Al Qaeda to Saddam, including a discredited report that top 9/11 Al Qaeda airline hijacker Mohamed Atta had a meeting with an Iraqi intelligence official in Prague. According to Vanity Fair, ‘‘Cheney’s office made one last ditch effort to persuade Powell to link Saddam and Al Qaeda and to slip the Prague story back into the speech. Only moments before Powell began speaking, Scooter Libby tried unsuccessfully to reach [Larry] Wilkerson by phone. Powell’s staff chief, by then inside the Security Council chamber, declined to take the call. ‘Scooter,’ said one State Department aide, ‘wasn’t happy.’’’

According to Vanity Fair, Cheney himself urged Powell to go ahead and stake his national popularity on the nonexistent evidence by saying to Powell, ‘‘Your poll numbers are in the 70s. You can afford to lose a few points.’’

America and Iraq would go on to lose more than a few points. Libby may end up as a symbol of a government so driven to ignore the truth it was willing to resort to dirty tricks to stop anyone from telling it.

Derrick Z. Jackson’s e-mail address is

© Copyright 2005 Globe Newspaper Company.


GOP-Diddy vs. Press 'Pac: "Steady gunning / Keep on busting at them fools / You know the rules..."

"First off, f--k your bitch
And the clique you claim
West side when we ride
Come equipped with game
You claim to be a playa
But, I f--ked your wife
We bust on Bad Boys
Niggas f--ked for Life
Plus Puffy tryin' to see me weak
Hearts I rip
Biggie Smalls and Junior Mafia
Some mark a-- bitches
We keep on coming
While we running for yah jewels
Steady gunning
Keep on busting at them fools
You know the rules...

Grab your glocks when you see 2pac
Call the cops when you see 2pac, Uhh
Who shot me,
But, your punks didn't finish
Now, you 'bout to feel the wrath of a menace
Nigga, I hit 'em up!"

- 2Pac, "Hit 'Em Up"


Will Bush Give Rove a Pass?

The Boston Globe | Editorial

Wednesday 20 July 2005

Nothing in the Bush administration happens "by accident." George W. Bush did not win two terms as president by accident. He did it with the carefully thought-out ideas of Karl Rove. Rove has never done anything in his political career without first considering all angles. He then acts when he believes it will further his or his boss's political cause.

Bush has staked his integrity on having an administration that does not leak information. In fact, he has said that he would fire anyone who would do so. Yet he seems to have changed this criterion in the face of the fact that Rove did just that - leaked information that resulted in the outing of an undercover CIA agent ("Bush seems to shift on his grounds for dismissal," Page A1, July 19). By making it appear "accidental" because he made a "casual" remark, Rove has perhaps saved himself from going to prison for having committed a federal crime. But fact is fact: He leaked classified information.

So why has Bush not acted? It seems there are two possibilities. The first is that he is a man of his word only when it suits his interests. Rove has been instrumental in Bush's political success. Perhaps Bush meant to say that he has one set of rules for his advisers and another for everyone else. The second, more disturbing, possibility is that Bush authorized, either explicitly or implicitly, the leak to retaliate against Joseph C. Wilson IV, who publicly presented evidence that the administration was distorting facts to sell the American people on going to war. Either way, the president has painted himself into a corner.


Wednesday, July 20, 2005

General William C. Westmoreland: "Only The Good Die Young..."

The New York Times

William C. Westmoreland Is Dead at 91; General Led U.S. Troops in Vietnam

Published: July 20, 2005

Gen. William C. Westmoreland, the Army artilleryman and paratrooper who failed to lead United States forces to victory in Vietnam from 1964 to 1968 and then made himself the most prominent advocate for recognition of their sacrifices, spending the rest of his life paying tribute to his soldiers, died Monday night in a retirement home in Charleston, S.C., his son, James Ripley Westmoreland, announced.

The general was 91.



General Westmoreland's Death Wish and the War in Iraq

By Norman Solomon
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Wednesday 20 July 2005

After he died on Monday, front pages focused on the failures of William Westmoreland as commander of US forces in Vietnam. Overall, the coverage faulted him for being a big loser, not a mass killer.

The Washington Post noted that Westmoreland "was called a war criminal." But the deaths of thousands of Vietnamese people each week during his four years as the top American general in Vietnam counted for little in the media calculus. The main problem, readers were encouraged to understand, was that Westmoreland pursued a losing strategy. "Historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. called Westmoreland possibly 'our most disastrous general since Custer,'" the Post reported.

From early 1964 until 1968, Westmoreland was in charge of a US military machine that methodically slaughtered Vietnamese people. As the Post's front page antiseptically recalled, "Westmoreland's military strategy was to conduct a war of attrition, trying to kill enemy forces faster than they could be replaced."

Augmenting his strictly military functions, Westmoreland did his best to spin the media. Along the way, he was eager to condemn Americans who exercised their First Amendment rights to oppose a horrific war.

In April 1967, a month when several hundred thousand Americans participated in antiwar protests, General Westmoreland spoke at an Associated Press luncheon and asserted that - despite "repeated military defeats" - the Vietnamese Communist enemy was able to continue the anti-US struggle "encouraged by what he believes to be popular opposition to our efforts in Vietnam." At the time, independent journalist I.F. Stone aptly called it "the oldest alibi of frustrated generals - they could have won the war if it hadn't been for those unpatriotic civilians back home."

The alibi has endured in Media Land. During an October 1990 appearance on ABC's "Nightline," the retired four-star general must have been pleased by the matter-of-fact slant of this question from correspondent Chris Wallace: "General Westmoreland, it's become almost a truism by now that you didn't lose the Vietnam War so much in the jungles there as you did in the streets in the United States. How worried should the president and the Pentagon be now about this new peace movement?"

That rhetorical question came about 10 weeks after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. The White House was falsely claiming that Iraqi forces were poised to keep moving - and much of the initial public rationale for a US military buildup in the Persian Gulf that autumn was based on the argument that those Iraqi soldiers represented an imminent threat poised to invade Saudi Arabia, although more than 100,000 US troops were already stationed in that country.

Responding to the crisis, Westmoreland pushed for war. He echoed the US government line, claiming that the additional US troops being sent to the Gulf were on a mission to defend Saudi borders. During his mid-October appearance on "Nightline," Westmoreland asserted: "Our troops are there to deter any further aggression by Iraq.... They'll be used if Saddam Hussein attacks Saudi Arabia.... They're on the battlefield, but they haven't been committed to combat." True to form, the retired general was engaged in deception.

Westmoreland knew that - if the goal is to drag the United States into war - candor won't do. Step by step, propagandistic messages are necessary to fuel the political momentum for war.

Media messages, drawn from the past, light the war path for the future. The reporting on Westmoreland's life after his death is the kind of coverage that made possible the carnage of the Vietnam War in the first place. The overriding media emphasis is on the importance of winning and the tragic specter of losing.

The grisly spirit that animated Westmoreland's professional life has survived him. Today, no less than during the Vietnam War four decades ago, the Washington Post's description of the US military strategy is accurate - "to conduct a war of attrition, trying to kill enemy forces faster than they could be replaced." But the words, a blend of military and journalistic euphemisms, mask the human realities of the consequences.

Imperial wars of occupation routinely try to kill enough "enemy forces" to snuff out resistance. Behind all the rhetoric coming out of Washington, that approach is central to the US war in Iraq. Like Westmoreland, today's war-makers see death as the ultimate solution.


This article is adapted from Norman Solomon's new book War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death. For information, go to:


The Clash of Civilizations: London Live and Let Die

Latest Evidence Closes Case on London Bombings

Netanyahu warning confirmed

Prisonplanet | July 20, 2005

BRITISH police are considering the possibility that the four key suspects in the recent London attacks may have been tricked into setting off their bombs.

"We do not have hard evidence that the men were suicide bombers. It is possible that they did not intend to die,” a Scotland Yard spokesman said.

According to one police hypothesis, the bombers were tricked by a "master” who told them they would have time to escape — when, in fact, the devices were set to go off immediately.

"The bombers’ master might have thought that he couldn’t risk the four men being caught and spilling everything to British interrogators,” an unnamed security official has said.

Lending weight to the theory is the fact that all four men had paid up their parking tickets before boarding a train at Luton for King’s Cross and that they all bought return tickets to the Capital.

Moreover, the paper said, the men were carrying their explosives inside rucksacks, as opposed to strapped to their bodies, as is common practice among suicide bombers.

None were reported to have cried "Allah-o-Akbar” before setting off their charge — something which most suicide bombers do.

So the official line is now leaning towards the theory that an "Al Qaeda" Mastermind duped the "pawn" bombers into their actions, covering for all the inconsistencies we have thrown up so far.

This comes as no surprise, after the mainstream media have been questioning the official line all weekend. Both the London Mirror and the Independent published articles directly challenging the suicide bomber theory. The bombers were certainly duped, yet there is absolutely no evidence to suggest there was an Al Qaeda guiding hand. The fact that these men had been to Pakistan in 2004 seems to be, for some outlets, stone cold proof that they were Al Qaeda terrorists.

One of the suspected "masterminds" behind the attacks, Egyptian Magdy el Nashar, challenged officials to find any credible evidence to implicate him. It seems they have failed as he has been cleared of involvement by Egyptian authorities.

Meanwhile bigger stories have gone unnoticed. Firstly, on Saturday we published an article highlighting the various instances of elite connections to the bombings and the drill that was taking place on the same morning.

Secondly the fact that the British Government had tracked and possibly arrested and then released their so called suspects has not hit the front pages. Could it be that the plot was discovered and then allowed to happen or aided in some way. The media should be jumping all over the fact that the terror alert level was DOWNGRADED for the first time in four years one month prior to the attacks.

Thirdly, it has gone virtually unreported that the Pound fell 6% in 10 days before London terror attacks, a clear indication of prior knowledge on the part of London's financial establishment.

And we now also have an admission by Israeli authorities that they did indeed receive prior warning of the attacks and warned Benjamin Netanyahu to stay inside his London Hotel.

This clearly indicates first that the story of power surges on the underground was prepared beforehand and used as a cover for over an hour to confuse the media and keep away those who seek the real stories. If Israel knew it was bombs before they went off then why wouldn't British police? It's a tried and tested method and serves the purpose of keeping the public and the media in line at the scene of such events.

Also the scramble to alter the initial AP reports of this story indicates that someone was attempting to cover up this smoking gun.

We've been told that there will be 'No internal inquiry' into the blasts so we might as well shut up and just believe whatever they tell us no matter how many times they change the story.

More as the story develops (and the official line changes again)