Wednesday, April 19, 2006

NEIL YOUNG: "Are you?"

[Ed note: Finally, photos! First up we have Mr. Daniel Estulin, an investigative journalist who's spent the last 13 years studying a secret society of some of the richest and most powerful people in the world, The Bilderberg Group, who has a book on them published in 21 languages in 28 countries (see below), and who lives in Spain because it's more difficult to kill him there. Duuude. That's crazy. Oh well, you go dawg. I mean, aw what the hell - good luck!]

American Free Press

Bilderberg Book Suppressed by Portuguese

By James P. Tucker Jr.

Daniel Estulin, the Spanish journalist who has collaborated with American Free Press in exposing the world shadow government, reports that his book, Clube Bilderberg—Os Senhores do Mundo (The Bilderberg Club—Lords of the World), is being suppressed in Portugal.

AFP, having published Jim Tucker’s Bilderberg Diary, plans to follow by publishing Clube Bilderberg in English. Someone working for Temas e Debates, the company that planned to publish his book in Portugal, said the Portuguese government is pressuring it not to not sell his Bilderberg book.

“Apparently, it really took the government by surprise and scared them,” Estulin said. “They are afraid this could turn into a world phenomenon. In fact, it is turning into a world phenomenon, as we have signed 28 countries and 21 languages.”

“The government and my publisher in Portugal are trying to suffocate this book because they are afraid it will create a groundswell that could turn into a populist movement in Portugal as it already has in Venezuela, Colombia and Mexico where the first edition of the book sold out in less than four hours and caused riots in front of the embassies,” Estulin said. “Due to the mainstream media blockade, you have not seen or heard [of this] on national television or in the press.”

Estulin is seeking to initiate a groundswell on the Internet to pressure Temas e Debates to publish his book. He is also asking that people contact media outlets.

“The more people call and harass the publisher and the government, the less willing they will be to pull this off,” Estulin said. “If we don’t do something, we will only be less free in the future. That’s what Bilderbergers want.”

(Issue #10/11, March 6 & 13, 2006)

Please make a donation to American Free Press

Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003


[Ed note: And... the cover of the original graphic novel (comic book) by writer Alan Moore and artist David Lloyd that begat the movie... "V for Vendetta". And, what a movie it is. I couldn't believe what they were saying - I was loving it! In knowing what to look for it was easier for me to separate fact from fiction, and recognize that fiction was clearly being used to identify and indict fact. The idea that in the near (near! near!) future the government will sponsor terrorist attacks to engineer a fascist takeover is a clear attack on the failings of our present system facilitating the exact same. It's that simple. And, it doesn't suggest this is a "new" idea the government discovered, nor even that anything especially bad happened to subvert democracy. It just sort of... happened. They were clearly talking about "us" devolving at the hands of government manufactured paranoia over everything from terrorism to biological and nuclear weapons to natural disasters to pandemics to everything else we see on TV right now. The present as sold to us by the mass-media is artificially terrorizing us into the future the movie predicts, and the lines of history leading to their fantasy were clearly drawn from our reality. Phenomenal stuff, they know and they want to show, and they made a hell of a Hollywood flick to boot. Since I don't want to include any spoilers, I'll leave it at this: go see it!]

[Ed note: Alright, either we take these folks seriously or we don't. I mean, do we or do we not respect our favorite artists, writers, thinkers, messiahs, philosophers, icons, heroes, role models... and anyone else worth respecting? Either we pay attention or we pay the price for shortselling our appreciation of the attention they paid to us, dammit. And that's that. This ain't about no Presidential-puppet floundering in F--kupville, it's about the system that allowed him to get away with so much for so long - and that is still trying to save him. To avoid The Next Bush we've got to be smarter than assuming that paradise parades behind the puppet, that the forces at work are the forces we see, that a politician who makes $400,000 a year is truly controlling his own strings in a world of multi-billionaires and the historically wealthy, and that if he wasn't serving their interests he would be nearly as untouchable across the spectrum of public debate. It makes no sense. If he goes, and I mean "if", then I'll be happy to see him gone. But, whether he stays or goes, the forces that put him in and kept him in are just going to try again. This time, maybe they'll use someone a bit smoother, maybe a bit smilier, hell - maybe even a Democrat! I mean, c'mon. If we think THEY are going to "save" us all, then in a political climate where the Republican President's approval stands at 37%, ask yourself one question: why haven't they even tried?]

Yahoo! News

Young's Anti-War Album a Growing Drumbeat

Wed Apr 19, 5:07 PM ET

If the snippets Neil Young is posting on his Web site are any indication, his upcoming album, "Living With War," will be a serious musical broadside against the Bush administration and the Iraq war.

Young isn't alone in his feelings of discontent.

Pink, known more for her slams against bubble-headed pop stars than political figures, assails President Bush in the searing attack "Dear Mr. President" on her album "I'm Not Dead Yet," released this month. And the new single from Pearl Jam always politically minded is titled "World Wide Suicide," about a soldier's death.

All represent a steady, if not increasing anti-war sentiment since the war began in 2003. Whereas even superstar acts like the Dixie Chicks and Madonna faced backlash when they uttered opposition to the war in comments or song, more mainstream acts are more comfortable these days expressing critical thoughts.

"People were, certainly in the first couple of months, very cautious, and they are less so now," said Sean Ross at Edison Media Research, which conducts research for radio stations and others. "So it took people time to get past whether they were willing to say things."

After the 9/11 attacks, Young released the song "Let's Roll," about the passengers who helped prevent United flight 93 from reaching its target that day. It was embraced as a patriotic message during a time of crisis.

The few songs that did touch the topic at that time were also patriotic Toby Keith's "Courtesy of the Red, White & Blue (The Angry American)" and Paul McCartney's "Freedom."

But Young was also an early opponent of the war. And on "Living in War," the rock legend expresses his frustration in blunt songs such as "Let's Impeach the President."

Justin Sane from the rock group Anti-Flag, which has been active in its opposition to the war and President Bush, said artists have always been at the forefront of social change, and expressing political views in song is a way to bring attention to issues being overlooked in the mainstream media.

"It's left to artists to make the statements that should be getting put into the public discourse that are not," he said.

If there's a growing number of artists expressing their opinions about the war, Sane said, it's because "people who may have ignored it before can no longer ignore it, and artists who ignored it before can no longer ignore it. ... It just becomes something that is this white elephant in the country and I don't think artists can ignore it any longer."

Still, songs with a political context remain in the minority, and there hasn't been an overwhelming indictment of the war or Bush in a multitude of songs.

"The acid test will be when there is some anti-war commentary on country radio," he said. "That hasn't happened yet."


On the Net:


Peace by practicing the preaching...



Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy -

Music -


P.S. This story is only 9 minutes old. Mmm. Fresh meat...

Yahoo! News

Pentagon Releases Extensive Gitmo List

By BEN FOX, Associated Press Writer

9 minutes ago

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - The U.S. government released the first list of detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay prison on Wednesday — the most extensive accounting yet of the hundreds of people held there, nearly all of them labeled enemy combatants.

In all, 558 people were named in the list provided by the Pentagon in response to a Freedom of Information lawsuit by The Associated Press. They were among the first swept up in the U.S. global war on terrorism for suspected links to al-Qaida or the Taliban.

The list is the first official roster of Guantanamo detainees who passed through the Combatant Status Review Tribunal process in 2004 and 2005 to determine whether they should be deemed "enemy combatants."

Those named are from Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and 39 other countries. Many have been held at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay for more than four years. Only a handful have faced formal charges.

Some names are familiar, such as David Hicks, a Muslim from Australia charged with fighting U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan. He is one of 10 detainees selected to be tried by a military tribunal, on charges of attempted murder, aiding the enemy and conspiracy to commit terrorism.

Hicks allegedly fought for the Taliban, and Australian news media have said British authorities contend he admitted undergoing training with British Islamic extremists, including Richard Reid, who was convicted of trying to blow up a trans-Atlantic airliner with a shoe bomb.

Lesser-known detainees on the list include Muhammed al-Qahtani, a Saudi who reportedly was supposed to be the 20th hijacker in the Sept. 11 terror attacks. Although his presence at Guantanamo had been reported, the military had previously declined to confirm it.

U.S. authorities denied al-Qahtani entry at Orlando, Fla., before the suicide hijackings. But testimony of the trial Zacarias Moussaoui quoted an al-Qaida leader as describing al-Qahtani as the last hijacker for the mission who would "complete the group."

Others on the list, such as an Afghan identified only as "Commander Chaman," remain mysterious.

In all, the detainees on the list came from 41 countries. The largest number — 132 — came from Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan followed with 125, then Yemen with 107.

Partial, unofficial lists of Guantanamo Bay detainees have been compiled in the past by news organizations, lawyers and human rights groups. The U.S. had previously declined to release any list of names except the 10 who have been formally charged.

Even with the latest release, the Pentagon has not provided a full list of all the more than 750 prisoners that the military says have passed through Guantanamo.

The release of the list on Wednesday, ordered by a federal judge, came amid wide criticism of the almost total secrecy surrounding the Guantanamo Bay detention center, where the United States now holds about 490 detainees.

"This is information that should have been released a long time ago, and it's a scandal that it hasn't been," said Bill Goodman, legal director of the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, which has helped coordinate legal efforts on behalf of Guantanamo detainees.

The combatant status hearings at Guantanamo Bay were held from July 2004 to January 2005.

All detainees at the prison during that period had such a hearing. Of the 558 detainees who received one, the panels classified 38 as "no longer enemy combatants" and the military later released 29 of those detainees from Guantanamo.

The remaining nine, including an undisclosed number of Uighurs who can't be sent back to their native China because of the possibility they could face persecution, are being held in a part of the detention center with extra privileges known as Camp Iguana, a military spokesman said.

The names of many Guantanamo Bay detainees were disclosed publicly for the first time on March 3, when the Pentagon released some 5,000 pages of transcripts to the AP.

More names came in subsequent releases of documents — but always buried within the text of transcripts that often contained only partial information about the detainees.

With the list released Wednesday, which was accompanied by some 500 more pages of transcripts that the Pentagon said it inadvertently omitted from earlier releases, the Pentagon went further than ever in identifying who has been held at the high-security detention center on a U.S. Navy base at the southeastern edge of Cuba.

The new information will help lawyers for detainees and human rights groups who have tried to monitor Guantanamo Bay, said Mark Denbeaux, a law professor at Seton Hall University in New Jersey who has analyzed previous Guantanamo Bay documents released by the Pentagon.

"Lawyers have been asking for this stuff for 2 1/2 years," he said.

Email Story IM Story Discuss Printable View