111707 News As Talked About on The Harry Thomas Show week in review

=============================================================================================

BBC To Apologize For 9/11 Truth Hit Piece?
Scandal-hit network desperately scrambles to offset legal action over lies and bias in February 2007 documentary

The BBC could be forced to apologize and admit mass public deception for airing a documentary on the 9/11 truth movement that was clearly riddled with errors, lies and bias, as the scandal-hit corporation desperately squirms to avoid a potential court case brought by a British scientist.

John A. Blacker, a qualified physicist & mechanical engineer and a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, is currently engaged in a pre-action protocol with the BBC in an attempt to settle out of court and get an apology from the broadcaster as well as a guarantee that the program will never be shown on television again.

In a letter to the BBC , Blacker cites a catalogue of errors, distortions and outright lies that were contained in the program, arguing that the documentary is an insult to those that lost their lives on 9/11.

"The Conspiracy files team spoke to and recorded the testimony of many eyewitnesses, fire fighters, police officers, and public high witnesses, plus also officialdom high witnesses and had access to written testimony from many high witnesses via official sites on the WWW," writes Blacker. "YET NOT ONE SINGLE HIGH WITNESS WAS PRESENTED IN THE DOCUMENTARY TO PUT THE TRUTH PERSPECTIVE," he adds.

"The Conspiracy Files Documentary was a work of Total Public deception from start to end, perfectly crafted to stealthily deceive and forward nothing which was conclusive either one way or the other, in other words, perfect propaganda YELLOW journalism by stealth, omission & deception," Blacker concludes, after citing dozens of examples of bias, fraud and agenda-driven presentation.

In a clear sign that BBC are struggling to form a case for the legal defense of the program, they have put back a meeting with Blacker for the third time in succession, now agreeing to a late November date.

In our review of the documentary , we slammed the program as a tissue of lies, bias and emotional manipulation from beginning to end, listing 17 clear examples of gross inaccuracy, distortions, obfuscations and character smears.

After the show aired in the UK, Producer Guy Smith subsequently appeared on The Alex Jones Show but failed miserably to address these concerns , only being able to repeat empty sound bites about how the show was intended to be an impartial investigation.

The BBC were embroiled in a similar spat later that same month when footage emerged of one of their correspondents reporting the collapse of WTC Building 7 on 9/11 over 20 minutes before it actually fell , leading to claims that the broadcaster was, either wittingly or unwittingly, being fed a script as events unfolded on the day. At the very least, the saga painfully illustrated why the establishment media cannot be trusted when major news events occur because they simply act as a feedback loop for whatever the authorities tell them, no matter how dubious the facts of the matter are.

=============================================================================================

Silverstein quickly exited the stage after 9/11 truthers shouted his coined phrase "Pull It," referring to statements he made on PBS that 'the decision was made to pull' Building 7-- a seeming admission that the building was brought down intentionally via controlled demolition. That idea poses uncomfortable implications concerning the 9/11 attacks.

We Are Change members continued to inform the public in the building's proximity after Silverstein quickly exited the stage, and calmly explained the circumstances to passersby.

Silverstein is mistaken if he thinks it's time to party outside the open wound of Ground Zero. Word has spread about the under-reported WTC7 collapse-- the third modern steel frame building ever to collapse 'from fires', which fell hours after the Twin Towers, though it was not hit by a plane and suffered only minor damage and small flames.

=============================================================================================

House Subcommittee Presentation Equates 9/11 Truth With Terrorism
Represents the internet, sites such as myspace and youtube as a virtual terror training camps

A House Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing on "Terrorism and the Internet" held last week, and broadcast on C-Span, featured a panel of "experts", including representatives formerly of the RAND Corporation and the Simon Wiesenthal Center who presented 9/11 truth websites sites alongside sites that celebrate the attacks and offer training in terrorist tactics.

The hearing was chaired by Democratic Rep. Jane Harman, and ranking Republican, Rep. Dave Reichert. It was supposed to focus on the use of the internet by "home grown terrorist recruiters" yet in a shocking move it blatantly related the 9/11 truth movement with so called radical "jihadists".

In a very poorly prepared and delivered PowerPoint splurge, Mark Weitzman (pictured far right) stated:

Under the heading "Internet: Incubator of 9/11 Conspiracies and Disinformation " Weiztman threw in video of WTC building 7 collapsing on 9/11 as posted on various 9/11 truth affiliated websites, along with screen shots of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth site and other sites, such as Killtown's, who raised awareness of this .

Weiztman's presentation represents the latest disgusting effort to lump in the movement to uncover the truth behind the 9/11 attacks, a movement which includes hundreds of first responders, firefighters, police, former intelligence officials and the largest 9/11 families representative group, with jihad groups and real Islamic extremists in order to demonize it.

Later on in the hearing, former RAND corporation director Bruce Hoffman re-iterated Weitzman's presentation, stating "These falsehoods and conspiracy theories have now become so ubiquitous and so pervasive that they are believed, so you have almost a parallel truth, and it has become a very effective tool for recruiting people."

Whichever way Hoffman dresses this up, it is plain fact that we have not been given the truth about what happened on 9/11. We have been subject to a "received truth", an official story that when compared with physical evidence does not hold water. In the absence of any real independent investigation, the evidence unearthed during six years of research by individuals and groups who want the truth has made the issue a phenomenon.

In recent polls up to 80% of Americans do not believe they have been told the truth about 9/11. Respected intelligence veterans agree with them. NIST, the body tasked with investigating the collapse of the buildings "cannot explain" why they fell. Yet corporate academics such as Bruce Hoffman continue to insinuate that the truth about 9/11 is and always has been set in stone and any deviation from the official story is a "falsehood".

To then implicitly suggest that the millions of Americans who have questioned the government version of events on 9/11 are synonymous with a vast minority of violent extremist radicals is either extremely ill informed or purposefully misleading.

Over recent months we have witnessed a growth in this disturbing trend to attempt to equate peaceful 9/11 researchers and truth activists with violence and extremism. The prime culprits have been establishment "news" hacks who are raising the same talking point ad infinitum, dubbing the global truth movement "anarchists" and violent individuals who may be aiding terrorists.

Talking heads such as Fox News bigot Bill O'Reilly and his frothing caricature Glenn Beck over on CNN, have specifically targeted 9/11 truthers in segments designed to portray the movement as dangerous and sow the seed in the minds of what viewers they have left that peaceful truth seekers are actually in league with violent terrorists.

People like O'Reilly and Glenn Beck would relish the opportunity to have their baseless allegations "proved right", and should some act of violence or terrorism be carried out, whether real or staged, they would love to blame it on the 9/11 truth movement, in a similar way to how the patriot movement was blamed for the OKC bombing in 1995.

The bill to which these hearings are tied, H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 , defines "violent radicalization" as "The process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change."

It further defines "homegrown terrorism" as "The use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

The bill's reference to how "The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens," is shocking.

Remember, the bill is not aimed at "Al-Qaeda" websites or arabic forums that post alleged Bin Laden video tapes, it is aimed at American citizens using American based websites, like the very one you're reading now.

The opportunity for the state to seize upon violent posts left by trolls and use them to entrap peaceful 9/11 truthers under the guise that they "promoted violence" should be a major concern for us all.

We have preached a doctrine of absolute non-violence from the very beginning and we will continue to do so. Anyone who calls for violence in a message board post is either a Fed, a Mom's basement dwelling troll who spends their entire day attempting to debunk the 9/11 truth movement, or a completely deluded moron who is unrepresentative of the vast majority of the 9/11 truth movement.

Those individuals who advocate violence should be sought out and investigated individually. Any plans to try and entrap prominent 9/11 truth movement figures using guilt by association should be abandoned immediately and we will ceaselessly emphasize this point until this current wave of propaganda subsides.

Aside from the attack upon 9/11 truth groups, the depiction of the internet as a whole drawn up by the House Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing is farcical. The panel does it's best to present the entire internet as some sort of vicious hate filled breeding ground for radical murderous terrorists. They give the impression that the youth of America are being recruited in their thousands to take down the country in some sort of monolithic war of civilizations. They depict myspace and youtube in such a way as to leave the average American viewer with the impression that those websites are akin to terror training camps.

One cannot help being reminded of the film reels of the McCarthy hearings of the early 1950s as the House is presented poorly thrown together slideshows that suggest that there are dangerous terrorists everywhere, on all manner of internet chat rooms, forums and message boards recruiting American teenagers to wage Jihad.

The informed masses can see through this garbage, they understand that freedom and the peaceful push for truth are the only way to counter any form of extremism. Thus the continued effort by the authorities to diminish civil liberties at home, to wage unprovoked aggression abroad and to demonize those who question such moves is contradictory to their own logic of fighting a "war on terror". Unless, that is, the war on terror is a fraud, perpetuated on a basis of fearmongering power politics.

Finally, ask the Simon Wiesthenthal Center (Mark Weitzman in particular) to stop conflating terrorist violence with 9/11 truth, and even though he has not extended the courtesy to us, be polite;

=============================================================================================

LOVELAND, Colo. -- About a half dozen protestors were asked to leave a local coffeehouse Saturday where Giuliani was visiting, after they shouted questions about conspiracies surrounding the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

No formal arrests were made, according to Loveland Police Sgt. Greg Eisentraut, but about a half dozen protesters were removed from the event, after trying to ask Giuliani whether he had advanced knowledge of the terrorist attacks. One protestor, who was detained by police, described himself as the publisher and Editor-In-Chief of New York Megaphone and was led away by officers on both arms, yelling, “I have an excellent attorney.”

“What you did was illegal,” he screamed at police officials. “What you did was a violation of the f------ Bill of Rights.”

The protesters used megaphones to scream that Giuliani had advanced knowledge of the pending towers' collapse. They also made other claims, including that Giuliani was not a true conservative because of his views on abortion. After Giuliani left, attendees honked their car horns to drown out the protestors, who remained outside the parking lot, yelling into megaphones and arguing with Giuliani backers.

Giuliani downplayed the protestors, who dogged him throughout the coffeehouse visit.

“It’s part of America,” Giuliani said. “You learn when you are mayor of New York City that people have all kinds of different opinions, all kinds of different views. It’s not anything I don’t expect; it’s not anything I haven’t faced before, probably considerably bigger than this. After being mayor of New York for eight years, I would consider this event kind of a minor, four-, five-person protest.”

He said conspiracy theorists are protesting all over the place. “It’s very sad,” he said. “It’s not true. But you’re not going to convince them it’s not true. Somehow their emotions overtake they logic and their rationality.”

=============================================================================================

John Feal, founding member of the Feal Good foundation, and a Q&A period with foundation attorney Sean Riorden: 9/11 First Responders: 9/11 symposium West Hartford CT 11/03/07.

=============================================================================================

Lee Hamilton Admits WTC 7 Issue Remains Unresolved

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, November 16, 2007

Cincinnati, Columbus and Seattle members of 911 Truth and We Are Change attended a Speech given by Lee Hamilton at Miami University in Hamilton, Ohio.

Lee Hamilton is the former Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission. After the speech a few members of the audience were allowed to ask brief questions.

After being heckled by the audience sycophants for pointing out the U.S. government's policy of rewarding terrorist states like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, a man asks Hamilton to comment on the collapse of Building 7.

Hamilon struggles to provide an answer, citing the "extreme heat from the collapse of the twin towers," somehow failing to explain how heat can demolish a building 350 feet away.

Hamilton admits that the WTC 7 issue has "not been finally resolved" and that other questions about the attack will linger on, before stating that he did not believe the U.S. government was involved in 9/11.

=============================================================================================

Giuliani used questions on a number of topics to weave into the larger weave of his 9/11-based consciousness, including a claim that he decided to run for president after the attacks (despite an eye at a 2000 run circa 1998).

It was also fused in with his thinly-veiled publicity-stunt phone call to his wife in the middle of a speech before the NRA which turned focus from his unsteady ground over the protection of the 2nd Amendment (he shifted from outright gun control advocacy to the still Constitution-threatening statement that "Your right to bear arms is based on a reasonable degree of safety")

This clip pairs his most recent 9/11 references with his long-string of forward-projecting nostalgia for the United States' darkest hour.

=============================================================================================

To start with, here is an mp3 recording of the air traffic controllers during the moments leading up to the crash of United Flight 93. It lasts 3 minutes and 58 seconds.

In the tape, there are two communications which purport to be from the hijacked aircraft.

The first transmission is at 1 minute and 14 seconds into the recording. [mp3 download]

The second transmission is at 2 minutes and 3 seconds into the recording. [mp3 download]

There is a very noticeable tone overlaying the supposed communications from United Flight 93. This tone is at 440 Hz and is the frequency of aircraft alternating power. If you listen carefully, you can hear the same tone at a much lower level on some of the other aircraft communications. My question is why the radio transmitting from what is supposed to be United Flight 93 has such a pronounced tone. When compared to the other aircraft (indeed to other air traffic tapes from other incidents such as TWA 800) it is clear that something is very unusual about this radio. It is easy to suspect that we are not really hearing Flight 93 but an unshielded aircraft radio somewhere on the ground quickly wired to an aircraft power supply to "spoof" the controllers.

Now then, let us filter out that tone.

Here is the filtered version of the first transmission.

Note the claim that they have a bomb on board the plane.

Here is the filtered version of the second transmission.

This radio transmission clearly mentions a list of demands! If indeed this transmission is coming from Flight 93, then the hijackers believe that they are planning to land the plane at some point and trade hostages for whatever those demands are. They do not appear to be aware of a plan to crash into a building. More to the point if this is what the hijackers are saying, then this is what the passengers of Flight 93 also think.

And here is the most important part. From the transmission about a list of demands to the first report of a puff of smoke in the air where Flight 93 was flying at altitude is just 45 seconds. From the transmission about the list of demands it is clear that the hijacker is untroubled by any unruly passengers. We know the plane is at 35,000 feet altitude, as that is the confirmation the controller is asking for as the tape starts. The only way that United Airlines Flight 93 could have crashed in the 45 seconds after the second transmission regarding the list of demands would have been to point nose directly down and power down the whole way without any interruption. This leaves no time for the passengers to burst through the door, or the hijacker pilot to react. Any struggle over the controls would have sent the plane spiralling across the sky, pointed up as much as down.

Therefore, if these radio transmissions are genuine, we now know two facts. The hijackers were talking about a list of demands, not suicide. And the story of the passengers crashing the plane during a fight with the hijackers simply could not have happened that way.

=============================================================================================

20,000 in Colorado to be Vaccinated Against the Flu as a Statewide Pandemic Drill

Flu vaccinations will be delivered to over 20 locations statewide via helicopters and trucks leaving from Buckley Air force base throughout the state of Colorado Saturday. This pandemic training drill according to an article in the Daily Camera is made possible through a federal grant, and will test how emergency workers would respond to a health crisis. This drill has been promoted through a website named www.whatifcolorado.com and details all of the 20+ locations the flu inoculations will be given. In some instances children as young as 5 years of age will be given this “emergency shot”. The delivery of a vaccination full of the deadly toxin mercury (Themerisol) as part of a federally sponsored pandemic drill to children of the age of five is reckless endangerment by the State of Colorado.

There can be no doubt that the use of Thermisol in the vaccinations, and flu shots should be reason enough to stay away from mercury laced vaccinations. This article by Dr. Donald Miller, Jr. Mercury on the Mind details the horrific ,and deadly effects of mercury in vaccinations. The warning signs are everywhere, yet mainstream government agencies and even local news cast continue to put out reports that depict this toxic substance as harmless and is even good for you like in this local news segment suggests.

Recently Bush has signed away U.S. authority to deal with a pandemic to the U.N. at the latest SPP summit that convened in Montreal, Canada September 2,, 2007 as laid out in a stunning article by Jerome Corsi

The U.N., in control of rounding up American citizens and placing them in quarantine camps is now a reality because of the traitorous acts of this administration, through agreements like SPP and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 51 that will grant dictatorial powers to the president in the event of a national emergency. Jurisdiction that until recently used to be under FEMA and National Guard, the later is currently deployed and serving in Iraq. The foundation for an American dictatorship has been laid, and the frightening knowledge of government sponsored terrorist attacks almost always corresponding with drills such as the N.O.R.A.D stand down of 9/11 and the 7/7 bombing drills are cause enough to worry whenever drills of this magnitude are scheduled and funded by the government.

In the event of a real pandemic emergency instead of a friendly national guard forces dealing with the threat, possible action taken by militarized units of foreign U.N. soldiers in conjunction with the U.S. military can only result in more deaths, violence and the further spread of infection into surrounding areas as people flee from the untold amounts of death and mayhem that would herald a outbreak on the magnitude Colorado is preparing for.

A military base shipping and delivering vaccinations to public staging areas should be of major concern to the general public due to numerous instances in which our government has admittedly through unclassified documents administered deadly poisons, radioactive substances, and viruses to both civilians and military personal as guinea pigs.

Here are just a few article examples of such documented cases reaching the public.

A protest of this event will occur at the Denver inoculation center at Coors Field starting at 7:30 a.m. We encourage people statewide to make their presence known from early that morning until the late afternoon, by handing out literature, and creating signs in an attempt to inform the public of the dangers of mass vaccinations. Governor Bill Ritter will be at this event according to the whatifcolordado.com website and must be notified that drills of this magnitude are a dangerous precedent, and have often been linked to the outbreaks themselves.

“November Mass Vaccination Exercise (source: whatifcolorado.com website)
…This exercise is designed to test the capabilities of the state and local public health partners to do just that. Colorado Governor Ritter is scheduled to attend a Denver-area exercise site on the morning of November 17. Approximately 20,000 doses of influenza vaccine ware purchased by CDPHE and local health departments for use during this exercise. All exercise activities will be evaluated to improve future planning and preparedness efforts.”

There have been a countless number of instances of populations that have been mass vaccination going horribly wrong. This time line shows just how serious of a situation that a drill of this magnitude can be, and will be protested accordingly here in Colorado. Anyone with in the general area meet us at Coors field parking lot at 7:30a.m. , and help us distribute, over 700 copies of Alex Jones film ENDGAME and this informational flier outlined below to would be participants.

Disease Outbreaks Among Vaccinated Populations
- In 1871-2, England, with 98% of the population aged between 2 and 50 vaccinated against smallpox, it experienced its worst ever smallpox outbreak with 45,000 deaths. During the same period in Germany, with a vaccination rate of 96%, there were over 125,000 deaths from smallpox. (The Hadwen Documents)

- In Germany, compulsory mass vaccination against diphtheria commenced in 1940 and by 1945 diphtheria cases were up from 40,000 to 250,000. (Don't Get Stuck, Hannah Allen)

- In the USA in 1960, two virologists discovered that both polio vaccines were contaminated with the SV 40 virus which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell tissue cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. (Med Jnl of Australia 17/3/1973 p555)

- In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organization after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate. (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990)

- In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children. (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)

- In the 1970's a tuberculosis vaccine trial in India involving 260,000 people revealed that more cases of TB occurred in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. (The Lancet 12/1/80 p73)

- In 1977, Dr Jonas Salk who developed the first polio vaccine, testified along with other scientists, that mass inoculation against polio was the cause of most polio cases throughout the USA since 1961. (Science 4/4/77 "Abstracts" )

- In 1978, a survey of 30 States in the US revealed that more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. (The People's Doctor, Dr R Mendelsohn)

- In 1979, Sweden abandoned the whooping cough vaccine due to its ineffectiveness. Out of 5,140 cases in 1978, it was found that 84% had been vaccinated three times! (BMJ 283:696-697, 1981)

-The February 1981 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 90% of obstetricians and 66% of pediatricians refused to take the rubella vaccine.

- In the USA, the cost of a single DPT shot had risen from 11 cents in 1982 to $11.40 in 1987. The manufacturers of the vaccine were putting aside $8 per shot to cover legal costs and damages they were paying out to parents of brain damaged children and children who died after vaccination. (The Vine, Issue 7, January 1994, Nambour, Qld)

- In Oman between 1988 and 1989, a polio outbreak occurred amongst thousands of fully vaccinated children. The region with the highest attack rate had the highest vaccine coverage. The region with the lowest attack rate had the lowest vaccine coverage. (The Lancet, 21/9/91)

- In 1990, a UK survey involving 598 doctors revealed that over 50% of them refused to have the Hepatitis B vaccine despite belonging to the high risk group urged to be vaccinated. (British Med Jnl, 27/1/1990)

- In 1990, the Journal of the American Medical Association had an article on measles which stated “Although more than 95% of school-aged children in the US are vaccinated against measles, large measles outbreaks continue to occur in schools and most cases in this setting occur among previously vaccinated children." (JAMA, 21/11/90)

- In the USA, from July 1990 to November 1993, the US Food and Drug Administration counted a total of 54,072 adverse reactions following vaccination. The FDA admitted that this number represented only 10% of the real total, because most doctors were refusing to report vaccine injuries. In other words, adverse reactions for this period exceeded half a million! (National Vaccine Information Centre, March 2, 1994)

- In the New England Journal of Medicine July 1994 issue a study found that over 80% of children under 5 years of age who had contracted whooping cough had been fully vaccinated.

- On November 2nd, 2000, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) announced that its members voted at their 57th annual meeting in St Louis to pass a resolution calling for an end to mandatory childhood vaccines. The resolution passed without a single "no" vote. (Report by Michael Devitt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a serious topic but the video below sums up the nuttiness of vaccines rather nicely!

=============================================================================================

In this speech filmed live following a showing of Endgame at the Alamo Drafthouse, Alex opens up by discussing the Bayer tainted blood scandal, before elucidating on how the Madison Avenue propaganda chiefs try to convince us that life is boring and redundant and that only their products and cultural brainwashing can provide us with any excitement, and how we are made to feel weak and pointless so that we can be more easily dominated and enslaved.

Alex then expands into talking about how the deliberate attempt to lose your own ego sets you on a path of liberating enlightenment as you are able to open up your intellect and psyche and become more empowered. He then contrasts this with how the global elite behave and how their devote their entire lives to being ruthless and reveling in the phony idol worship that comes as a result. This speech is all about solutions and getting past the fear and the intimidation and taking action. Alex takes questions at the end.

Subscribers also get instant access to hundreds of other documentaries, every Alex Jones film, special video reports, e-books and audio interviews, along with a growing library of exclusive material.

Click here to subscribe and start enjoying the benefits of Prison Planet.tv!

=============================================================================================

Another Meaningless Taser Death: Police Use Of Stun Guns Out Of Control
Confused? Distressed? Need Help? Get tasered

The latest taser incident to be captured on film again highlights how fast our society is sleepwalking into a brutal police state where it is the norm for cops to react with extreme physical force and even torture towards anyone who acts out of the ordinary in any way whatsoever.

The video, released Wednesday, shows the brutal tasering and consequent death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski last month at Vancouver airport.

Captured by a member of public, the footage shows the moments before police arrived and murdered Dziekanski by tasering him three or four times.

The film quite clearly reveals that Mr Dziekanski is suffering some sort of anxiety attack in the airport as he is breathing very heavily, sweating profusely and appears to be attempting to barricade himself in an empty area separated by a glass cordon. Clearly the barricade he fashions is not going to stop anyone getting through and appears to be more a cry for help.

Dziekanski at first seems to respond to passers by who attempt to calm him down but he clearly cannot understand what they are saying and becomes more distressed. After throwing a wooden table at the glass cordon and knocking a computer to the floor, the police arrive and within seconds taser Dziekanski sending him flailing to the ground screaming in agony.

The police then surround him and as the officers yell at Dziekanski to stop moving, which is impossible when 50,000 volts of electricity are moving through your body, a voice can be heard yelling "hit him again, hit him again." The four large officers then jump on top of him, restraining his arms and sitting on his head. One officer appears to strike Dziekanski in the head with a baton.

The video also contradicts the officers' report which states that the man they encountered was out of control. Police also said even after he was tasered once, he remained combative. But the video shows that after the first shot, Dziekanski fell to the ground and was writhing in agony.

An investigation is ongoing and the official cause of death has not been made public.

The fact that police immediately reach for tasers now in any delicate situation, even a non threatening one, speaks volumes about the society we now live in.

In another disgusting case reported today a man who slipped into a diabetic coma on the top deck of a bus in Leeds, England has described how he was used for electric stun gun "target practice" after he "failed to respond to instructions" and police "mistook him for a suicide bomber".

Tasers are supposed to be the last response before lethal action, in the last year over 300 people have died in admitted cases in the US alone from being tasered. Every week we post stories of old women, children and disabled people being shot with tasers. The weapons are even being used in schools .

If you electrify any person, they stand a good chance of being killed, even more so if they are a child or an old person, and even more so if you do it three or four times before having a 200 plus pound man sit on the head of the victim.

The heart of the issue is that this was another act of wanton police brutality and torture by means of tasering.

The police are now trained that "pain compliance," a euphemism for torture, is acceptable in apprehending anyone even if that person poses no physical danger.

In many cases, cops will taser someone even if they offer no resistance whatsoever, simply for the sick enjoyment of the power trip as the victim begs and pleads not to be tortured.

Consider the recent case of UCLA student Mostafa Tabatabainejad (video below) , who was stunned over and over again for refusing to show his ID at a campus library.

Tabatabainejad agreed to leave and was on his way out of the building before cops tasered him and then proceeded to order him to get back on his feet just so they could shock him over and over again as he cried and moaned for them to stop.

Consider also the case of Andrew Meyer , a University of Florida student who was grabbed by cops and tazed after he asked John Kerry a question at a public Q&A.

Police now use the taser as if it is a pair of handcuffs or pepper spray. Consider also the case of a man in Portland who was tasered by police for filming them conducting a warrantless search when in pursuit of a felon running through a neighbour's property. The police came onto the property in search of someone else and ended up tasering the man that lived there!

What is just as concerning as the volume of cases of taser incidents being caught on camera is the reaction of a mindless selection of society, brainwashed by the media, that enjoy watching the videos online and like to see thuggish police inflict unnecessary pain, suffering and death. The incidents are so commonplace now that onlookers call for tazings when they perceive someone to have "stepped out of line".

The bottom line is that taser use is being abused by police all over the country as cops are trained that torture is a perfectly acceptable response to somebody who acts out of the ordinary, asks the wrong question or refuses to show their papers.

=============================================================================================

The brilliant, award-winning movie of 1976, "Network," a satirical film about a fictional TV network, features Peter Finch as the ranting, neurotic anchor who is about to be fired due to low ratings. He needs to vent his anger about this dire situation, as well as his contempt for modern society and the decay of its morality. And so, one night he no longer can contain his intense feelings and begins to shout, "I want all of you to get up out of your chairs, I want you to get up right now, sit up, go to your window, open it and yell 'I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore.'"

Will we Americans continue to be the silent majority that stood by and watched as the White House war machine launched the invasion and occupation of Iraq? Will we also continue to be the same voiceless, sheeple-like society that will once again watch as this war machine launches an attack on Iran, the current monster/bogeyman now lined up in their sights? What will it take for Americans to finally have their fill of this never-ending madness and say, "We are mad as hell and we cannot and will not take it anymore?"

In the movie Network Howard Beale was obviously trying to save his job and increase his ratings by using an outrageous tirade to motivate Americans to rebel against the decrepit, decaying state of the American society as he viewed it at that time. Well, we may not have a Howard Beale amongst us today, shouting at us to wake up and get mad, but we do have an American government that is running roughshod over our Constitution, continuing to promote an illegal, immoral war in Iraq and completely refusing to listen to the wishes of the American electorate. While that should inspire an outrage it has resulted in not much more than a general passive silence.

Following 9/11, Americans watched as Bush & Co. forced the USAPATRIOT Act through Congress; watched as Bush attacked Afghanistan and Iraq; watched as Abu Grahib, Guantanamo, CIA renditions, NSA spying and other highly questionable events took place; watched as Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, failed completely in their oversight responsibilities and totally rolled over as the Bush/Cheney agenda accelerated into high gear.

We are in the midst of a horrific nightmare; a bad dream reminiscent of that tragedy called the Vietnam War. This nation, today, is going through the agony of watching a president, the Congress and a military machine hell-bent on pursuing a senseless, disastrous war with no end in sight -- a stubborn, nonsensical direction that is so similar to the illogical decisions made during the Vietnam War when Nixon, Kissinger and other war-hawks just would not accept the reality of that situation. So they refused to stop the bloodletting -- not until more than 58,000 of our military died and we were expelled from that country. The current chaotic situation in the Middle East cannot wait for a solution until the next election is held or until Bush & Cheney are sent packing.

The question is who in this nation of 300 million will step forward and map out a logical plan that will finally bring an end to this bloody fiasco and allow our troops to come home? At this point there is no one in Washington, DC, or anywhere else in this country who seems to have the wisdom and courage to make it happen. We as a nation are seemingly trapped in a vicious circle where Bush, with the complicity of the Congress, continues to feed more and more billions of dollars into that Middle East black hole that quickly sucks it in, then demands more and more billions to feed those fires that cannot be quenched.

With the 2006 elections, the Democratic Party miraculously became the majority party in both the U.S. House and the Senate. It was a minor miracle and, yes, a chance that America was on a distinct path to stop the misguided foreign policy of the Bush administration and begin a new, rational direction. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid proclaimed that a new day had dawned. The time for change had finally come. John Conyers strongly hinted impeachment, Henry Waxman could hardly wait to initiate numerous investigations. In the Senate, Carl Levin, Patrick Leahy, and others readied hearings. The scene was set for new, energetic leadership to right the wrongs that had been perpetrated by the ham-handed Republican leaders.

Since that time of euphoria, great hopes and aspirations, what has happened? Basically, nothing and I mean nothing! The insane war goes on without missing a beat, more of our troops and Iraqi civilians die, and billions upon billions of dollars are appropriated time and time again. Democrat leadership holds hearing after hearing, demands more and more information, gets nowhere, and then threatens to issue subpoenas, but does not. Bush & Co. and the Republican minority in both the House and the Senate continue on the course that they had previously set, undeterred by all the hearings, demands for e-mails and just thumb their noses at all the threats to subpoena.

There is something very strange about this entire situation. Pelosi was quick to take the issue of impeachment off the table and often reinforces that very questionable position. Harry Reid has the power to dictate exactly what resolutions and legislation will come before the Senate for consideration. Also does it not seem that Nancy Pelosi, in particular, seems to be more or less paralyzed when confronted and continually challenged by the White House? Is there something very questionable and very alarming going on behind the scenes that has changed this scenario from one of hope and optimism to one of passive capitulation for some reason that we may never know? So far, Pelosi and Reid have completely failed to adhere to the wishes of the American people. The calls for them to step down will soon begin in earnest if this inept duo cannot and will not step up.

I watched the recent Democratic debates, moderated by Tim Russert, someone whom I certainly do not admire. But he asked a terrific question that brought answers from Clinton, Obama and even Edwards that absolutely stunned me and, I am sure, many others watching that night. He asked each of them if they would guarantee that they would end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home before the end of their first terms in office. The answer from each of them was exactly the same (just as if they each had been coached by Bush & Cheney beforehand), they each said no! They could not and would not promise that they would do so. Their response to Russert's question was simply unbelievable and should cause all of us to fear for the future.

What should Clinton, Obama and Edwards have said in answer to that explicit question? Here is my take on what they should have said: "I will tell you this. No one can predict the future and what conditions will be like when I assume office. But I will promise you this. When elected, I will do everything in my power to stop this war and bring our troops home just as quickly as possible. If some unforeseen, catastrophic event takes place that jeopardizes that undertaking, I may have to use an alternate, temporary strategy. But, I will guarantee that I will do anything and everything at my command to follow the mandate that was given to me by the American electorate and abide by their wishes to bring this war to an end." I believe that if one of them had taken that position it would have been a grand slam home run, but all three struck out.

One more very important point to make. The Democrats, when they assumed control of Congress, were automatically given prominent access to the bully pulpit, a great weapon and tool for informing the American public of what the issues are and what must be done to solve the greatest problems that our nation faces. Have the Democrats made use of this bully pulpit? No, they have completely failed. Americans badly need to know the Democratic strategies for solving our many problems. In this way the American public can be well informed and support the positions of the Democratic Party -- that is, if they feel that those strategies make sense.

But the Democratic leadership, again Pelosi and Reid, have not risen to the occasion. The question is why? Have they somehow been muzzled? Just why do they not use the bully pulpit to the greatest degree possible? Yes, the mainstream, controlled media is an impediment but clever and determined leadership could find a way around that. There are progressive-minded TV and news outlets; for example, Keith Olbermann of Countdown on MSNBC, and others that could be utilized to good advantage if real dedicated effort were put into an intensive campaign to reach the American mind.

What will it take for this society and the American people to finally say, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore"? The fact is that neither I nor anyone else in America that I am aware of today has that answer. I sincerely wish that some one of us had that answer because the fate of our nation and the entire world is hanging in the balance. I really believe that the American people, in the end, must be the deciding factor in this immense, most critical issue. There has to be a point at which we as a society and a people completely understand that the direction of this nation is on a course of impending disaster if the actions of this Bush administration cause the entire Middle East to erupt into even more chaos and all-out regional war. And that can definitely happen if those in power make the decision to launch massive air strikes against Iran as they threaten to do almost on a daily basis.

Is there not one person in America that has the courage and the fierce determination to come forward and motivate our society to get mad as hell, to finally vent its outrage and to demand that the Iraq War be defunded and brought to a final conclusion? And, at this point, I firmly believe that defunding if the only logical way to end it. Funds should be used to facilitate an orderly and safe withdrawal for our troops.

If there is not one such true American patriot in America, then the people will remain largely passive, silent and unable to express their outrage and dissent. And then our democracy will continue its descent into being no more than a pseudo-democracy that will slowly but surely die.

The question remains: is this society completely incapable of getting mad as hell?

=============================================================================================

A former technician at AT&T, who alleges that the telecom forwards virtually all of its internet traffic into a "secret room" to facilitate government spying, says the whole operation reminds him of something out of Orwell's 1984.

Appearing on MSNBC's Countdown program, whistleblower Mark Klein told Keith Olbermann that a copy of all internet traffic passing over AT&T lines was copied into a locked room at the company's San Francisco office -- to which only employees with National Security Agency clearance had access -- via a cable splitting device.

"My job was to connect circuits into the splitter device which was hard-wired to the secret room," said Klein. "And effectively, the splitter copied the entire data stream of those internet cables into the secret room -- and we're talking about phone conversations, email web browsing, everything that goes across the internet."

Asked by Olbermann how he knew what was being sent along those particular lines, Klein said it was all part of his former job:

"As a technician, I had the engineering wiring documents, which told me how the splitter was wired to the secret room," Klein continued. "And so I know that whatever went across those cables was copied and the entire data stream was copied..."

According to Klein, that information included internet activity about Americans.

"We're talking about domestic traffic as well as international traffic," Klein said. " And that's what got me upset to begin with."

Previous Bush administration claims that only international communications were being intercepted aren't accurate, Klein says.

"I know the physical equipment, and I know that statement is not true," he added. "It involves millions of communications, a lot of it domestic communications that they're copying wholesale, sweeping up into that secret room."

When Olbermann asked Klein if being involved in the process reminded him of a scene in the film Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the former technician said he had another movie in mind.

"Actually, I'm a little older so my thought was George Orwell's 1984 and here I am forced to connect the big brother machine," he said. "And I felt I was in a funny position, but I needed my job, so I didn't want to make a fuss a the time. But after I retired, I thought about it some more." According to ABC News, Klein believes AT&T has similar operations in place in as many as 20 other sites.

He is in Washington to lobby Congress not to pass a proposed telecom immunity bill, which would provide legal immunity to companies who secretly participated in NSA warrantless eavesdropping programs. Some of the nation's largest telecommunications companies are currently facing an array of class-action lawsuits related to the matter.

=============================================================================================

British Premier Gordon Brown says he would not rule out a nuclear strike against Iran over its nuclear standoff, if diplomacy failed.

Brown, who analysts believe has stepped back from shoulder-to-shoulder relations with the US since taking office in June, said Britain was part of an 'international alliance' aiming to stop Iran's nuclear program, AFP reported on Sunday.

"While nothing should be ruled out, it is important to say that the sanctions that we are placing on Iran are having some effect," he claimed.

Brown described the US as the country's most important ally adding that Washington plays an absolutely essential role in Britain's foreign policy.

Washington and its allies have stepped up rhetoric against Iran to intimidate the country into abandoning its nuclear program.

However, the Islamic Republic has repeatedly emphasized nuclear weapons have no place in its defensive doctrine.

The UN nuclear watchdog has recently said there is no evidence supporting the West's allegations against Iran, an announcement that outraged Zionist officials.

=============================================================================================

The Iowa caucuses are known for their “living-room chats” where ordinary Iowans can meet candidates face-to-face and talk about what interests voters. When candidates have larger events or make major policy speeches, the crowds are bigger, but there is often still an opportunity for questions. But under the pressures of major media coverage, with polls narrowing in Iowa, campaigns can potentially control questions and coverage by planning questions ahead of time.

While no campaigns admit to this practice, at a recent Hillary Clinton campaign event in Newton, Iowa, some of the questions posed to the New York Senator were planned in advance, planting some audience members in the crowd.

On Tuesday Nov. 6, the Clinton campaign stopped at a biodiesel plant in Newton as part of a weeklong series of events to introduce her new energy plan. The event was clearly intended to be as much about the press as the Iowa voters in attendance, as a large press core helped fill the small venue. Reporters from many major national news outlets came to the small Iowa town, from such media giants as The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, the Associated Press, and CNN.

After her speech, Clinton accepted questions. But according to Grinnell College student Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff ’10, some of the questions from the audience were planned in advance. “They were canned,” she said. Before the event began, a Clinton staff member approached Gallo-Chasanoff to ask a specific question after Clinton’s speech. “One of the senior staffers told me what [to ask],” she said.

Clinton called on Gallo-Chasanoff after her speech to ask a question: what Clinton would do to stop the effects of global warming. Clinton began her response by noting that young people often pose this question to her before delving into the benefits of her plan.

But the source of the question was no coincidence—at this event “they wanted a question from a college student,” Gallo-Chasanoff said. She also noted that staffers prompted Clinton to call on her and another who had been approached before the event, although Clinton used her discretion to select questions and called on people who had not been prepped before hand. Some of the questions asked were confusing and clearly off-message.

The practice of planting audience members to ask specific questions does not appear to be a common practice, or at least not a politically acceptable one. “Our campaign does not plant questions,” said Lauren Rose, Communications Director for Governor Bill Richardson’s campaign. When asked what she would think of other campaigns who did plant audience members, Rose said, “I think campaigns should give Iowa caucus-goers the chance to ask the questions they want.”

When asked if the John Edwards campaign employed such practices, Jenni Lee, Edwards’s Iowa Press Secretary said, “No, they ask whatever they want.”

=============================================================================================

Eloise Harper Reports: The Clinton campaign has admitted to planting questions in Iowa. They have confirmed that a campaign staffer approached a student to ask Sen. Clinton a question about global warming during a campaign stop at a biodiesel plant in Newton, Iowa, on Nov. 6.

The story was first reported by Patrick Caldwell, a junior at Grinnell College and the features editor of The Scarlet and Black college newspaper. He reported that student Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff was approached by the campaign to ask a question. She told the reporter that "they wanted a question from a college student." She also said that she "noted that staffers prompted Clinton to call on her and another who had been approached before the event, although Clinton used her discretion to select questions and called on people who had not been prepped beforehand. Some of the questions asked were confusing and clearly off-message."

Clinton Campaign spokesperson Mo Elleithee tells ABC News that "on this occasion a member of our staff did discuss a possible question about Sen. Clinton's energy plan at a forum. However, Sen. Clinton did not know which questioners she was calling on during the event. This is not standard policy and will not be repeated again."

The staffer still remains with the Clinton campaign and they would not reveal his or her name. The campaign did not comment on whether this is the only time they have planted questions among audience members.

Last month Clinton got into a tough exchange with Iowan Randall Rolph at an event in New Hampton, Iowa. She accused him of being a plant from another campaign and the two engaged in a heated back and forth. The exchange prompted extended media coverage.

=============================================================================================

Constitutional amendment would aim to prevent White House political dynasty

Conservative activist, Americans for Tax Reform founder and lobbyist Grover Norquist, reports The Sunday Times, is working on a constitutional amendment that would forbid succession of elected and appointed offices from one family member to another. Norquist seeks to warn the public, and create discourse, on the subject political dynasty and its increasing relevance in America's highest office.The amendment would not apply to Sen. Hillary Clinton's run for the presidency in 2008, as the term is not immediately following that of her husband, and 42nd President of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Were Senator Clinton elected to two terms as President, Bush and Clinton family members would have populated the White House for nearly 30 years.

The United States, however, considers itself to be a more mature democracy. Grover Norquist, one of America's most influential Republican activists, aims to turn the question of dynasty into a campaign issue.

"It will be ridiculous to have Mr President and Madam President in the White House, he said. "We're the United States of America. How can we say to President Mubarak [of Egypt], �You can't hand off the presidency to your son, it's got to be your wife' or, �Hey Syria and North Korea, you've got to knock this stuff off and be like us'.

In Greenwood, some voters expressed enthusiasm for a "two-for-one presidency, saying they liked the Clintons' "package. Others left the hall full of praise for Bill but with doubts about Hillary.

=============================================================================================

Crude oil prices hit an all-time high this week, closing above $98 a barrel for the first time in history.

According to the AAA, many drivers in my home state of California are already paying more than $4 a gallon for regular unleaded gas. And in one town south of Big Sur, unleaded gas topped $5 a gallon.

The U.S. dollar is at an all-time low, even when compared against the hapless Canadian loonie. Five years ago, a loonie was worth 60 cents. Today, it's worth $1.12 and climbing.

Yesterday, WorldNetDaily reported that the Chinese are considering abandoning the U.S. dollar as their national reserve currency. WND quoted Craig Smith's assessment of the consequences of such a move by Beijing on our economy: �If that were to happen, all bets are off, and we will be in a depression that makes 1929 look like child's play, or we will experience Weimar Republic inflation as the dollar makes extreme moves toward devaluations.�

On Tuesday, the U.S. national debt topped $9 trillion for the first time in history, according to the U.S. Treasury Department's daily accounting of the national debt. Nine trillion dollars! The number is so staggeringly high that it exceeds our ability to comprehend it in monetary units.

Million, billion, trillion � in financial terms, for most of us, it means a lot of money, really a lot of money, but that is about as specific a picture as most ordinary people can grasp.

Let's put all these �illions� into perspective. A million seconds is roughly 12 days, whereas a billion seconds is approximately 32 years.

We understand dollars. And we understand time. So it would take 12 days to pay back a million dollars at a dollar a second. But if you started right now, you'd pay back a BILLION dollars, at a dollar a second, in the year 2039.

A trillion seconds is roughly 32 thousand years. At a dollar a second, you'd pay back a TRILLION dollars in the year 34007.

The U.S. debt stands at $9 trillion. If my calculator is working, then at a dollar a second, the U.S. could be debt- free in the year 290007.

The point of that little exercise was two-fold. The first was to clarify the sheer volume of the debt; the second was to demonstrate the possibility that anybody in government really believes we can ever pay it off.

Each U.S. citizen's share of the national debt works out, according to the National Debt clock, to $29,947.50. That means the average American family of five owes, collectively, $149,737.50.

It also means that unless the average American family of five has a net worth of at least $149,737,50 in assets excluding liabilities (they don't), America is already bankrupt.

Over the past few years, there has been growing public concern about the emerging �Security and Prosperity Partnership� plan that some say is really a �deceptive roadmap� to a coming North American Union and a new, unified currency tentatively called the �amero.�

The feds steadfastly deny such a plan exists, even as it opens the borders to Mexican truck traffic, widens the I-35 corridor from Mexico to Canada and, counterintuitively, refuses to tighten the borders with either Mexico or Canada, despite both logic and widespread public demand.

All of these things have brought me to believe that powerful forces outside of our government � like the shadowy international Money Trust members of the �Bilderberg Group� � made a decision to force the formation of the North American Union along with the amero. There decisions have been instituted in the past via the Trilateral Commission, which is the dba for the nefarious Conference on Foreign Relations. Destroying the American dollar could force the crisis that would force the creation of the North American Union. To quote the title of a book of the 1960s era, �None Dare Call It Conspiracy.�

Ordinary Americans may not fully grasp just how dire the true economic picture is, but you can bet our leaders do. Yet from the White House to the Federal Reserve, nobody seems particularly eager to address the issue, preferring instead to talk about the �budget,� as if the budget WERE the debt, rather than merely a measure of our ability to keep up with our payments on the debt.

It is almost as if they already have a Plan B in reserve, ready and waiting to be triumphantly introduced � just in the nick of time.

=============================================================================================

It is becoming harder to chronicle the treasonous, dirty, despicable acts perpetrated by our government. Our sovereignty should not be given away, nor should it be for sale to the highest bidder as it is something to protect and it further defines us as a nation. The enemies of sovereignty are many and some include the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the North American Free Trade Agreement, (NAFTA), and the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). Our government is in collusion with powerful private corporate interests, and they are working together to create a North American Union. Every nation has the right and duty to protect its citizens, and it ceases to exist as a sovereign independent country if it fails to defend and control its own national borders. Multinational corporations view borders as barriers to increased profits and envision a world without them. Much of America's key infrastructure has been sold or is being leased to foreign corporations. We are surrendering our sovereignty, and the corporate takeover of America is almost complete. Some will have us believe that doing away with our sovereignty will bring big rewards and will benefit all. Tell that to the middle class and working poor. The result of globalization has meant that we have exchanged self-sufficiency, independence, and sovereignty for dependency.

The WTO serves as a middleman, forcing nations to change its laws and brings unwanted meddling in domestic affairs. It severely undermines national sovereignty and allows for the domination of trade policies by multinational corporations. The WTO has given free reign and granted entrenched rights to the world's largest banks and corporations. It has the power to impose sanctions and lacks any real democratic accountability with hearings and disputes conducted by secret tribunals. It also has the power to overturn sovereign nation's laws in areas of tax, labor, environment, and consumer safety. The U.S. was forced to change tax laws relating to Foreign Sales Corporations, and the WTO rules that each year the U.S. must issue at least 65,000 H-1B work visas or be fined for not allowing enough foreign labor to enter the country. With more frequency, multinational corporations are turning to the WTO in an effort to change U.S. laws including zoning laws which could be changed by international courts. Former Republican House speaker Newt Gingrich said of the WTO, “We need to be honest about the fact that we are transferring from the United States, at a practical level significant authority to a new organization.” Our own laws should never be changed or overridden by a body of unelected bureaucrats. The WTO has lead to the loss of more sovereignty and democracy which has limited our decision making.

NAFTA has lead to the loss of millions of American jobs, it has created trade deficits with both Canada and Mexico and has accelerated the destruction of the middle class. NAFTA severely undermines our sovereignty and control. Under Chapter 11, new rights and privileges were granted to foreign investors operating in Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. It has lead to state, provincial and municipal governments being challenged by corporations using their new rights to undermine environmental and judicial decisions. Foreign corporate investors can sue NAFTA countries for cash compensation in secret tribunals if they feel their rights have been violated. Foreign investors have been granted more rights than U.S. corporations and American citizens. CAFTA is equally as devastating, and is essentially an outsourcing agreement that will lead to the loss of more jobs and it will gut all buy American laws which give preference to local companies. Under CAFTA, multinational corporations will have the power to challenge environmental and public interests laws. It could also undermine immigration laws, giving international tribunals the power to rule over Congress. CAFTA seeks to wipe out American laws, and along with NAFTA is being used to breakdown national independence and sovereignty. It was former secretary of state Henry Kissinger who called NAFTA a step towards a New World Order. Many who view NAFTA as a success want to use it as the model for the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), which would encompass the whole hemisphere.

The North American Union is being created incrementally, using evolution by stealth, and is being done at the expense of our sovereignty. It is being created by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, and SPP working groups who are writing policy initiatives. One of the leading experts on the NAU Jerome Corsi said, “The SPP is creating new trilateral memoranda of understanding and mutual agreements which should be submitted to the Senate for two-thirds votes as international treaties.” He went on to say, “They are sharing their laws and regulations so we can harmonize and integrate our laws into a North American structure, not a USA structure.” Bureaucrats are able to move about almost completely undetected and with little or no scrutiny. There is a real lack of transparency which makes this whole process undemocratic. The SPP was never debated or passed by the Senate, and the American people deserve to be consulted when they are losing their sovereignty and their Constitution is being trampled upon. Those who claim that the SPP is simply about open dialogue and cooperation are being anything but honest. We're talking about political and economic integration including a single North American currency, which would mean the end of our financial sovereignty, the merging of our laws, environmental, health and safety standards, a new court and tax system, and a new NAU constitution. Under the SPP, the U.S. and Canadian military are further merging their command structures. Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul said, “Any movement toward a North American Union diminishes the ability of average Americans to influence the laws under which they must live.” Inside a NAU there is no room for American sovereignty, and how can harmonizing regulations with Mexico and Canada not undermine our independence? Bureaucrats and corporate interests are shaping our future with seemingly no oversight, and as we shed more sovereignty, we will lose the ability to govern ourselves.

More and more of America's critical infrastructure, including highways, are being sold, leased, or manged by private foreign companies which constitutes a surrendering of our sovereignty. The Spanish company Cintra is financing and building the Trans-Texas-Corridor (TTC) and will lease and operate it as a toll road. Cintra-Macquaire consortium already has leases for the Indiana and Chicago Skyway toll roads. The TTC is to be the first leg of a NAFTA Superhighway and will be a borderless open transportation system that is the necessary infrastructure needed for a North American Union. Many of the trucks and freight trains filled with Chinese containers unloaded in Mexican ports will have Kansas City as a destination. To handle the increased flow of Chinese cheap goods, Kansas City will have an inland port, and part of the facility will include a Mexican customs office. It is to be staffed by Mexican government custom officials as Mexico wants the right to inspect their own trucks. More disturbing is that it is to be considered sovereign Mexican territory. Imagine a little piece of Mexico in the heartland of the United States. The Financial Services SPP working group has also outlined plans to improve Mexico's infrastructure using Canadian and American tax dollars. This will further facilitate the flow of cheap goods from China and benefit multinational corporations. All across America, already paid for roads and freeways are being converted into toll roads. Charging tolls for roads that have already been paid for is criminal, and furthermore the selling and leasing of key infrastructure to foreign interests threatens our sovereignty and security.

We are witnessing the destruction of a sovereign independent America as well as the transfer of power from our elected government to unelected, accountable bureaucrats. In many cases we are already powerless and bound by international treaties, which in some cases take precedence over our own laws. Any move towards a North American Union represents a betrayal of the American people, the Constitution, self-government, freedom, independence, sovereignty, our culture, and our values. Ron Paul said of the North American Union, “The real issue is national sovereignty. Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution.” The attack on our democracy continues, and the raping of American sovereignty has left it a shadow of its former self. We are losing our ability to control our own destiny.

=============================================================================================

Foolish globalism will hurt United States

The Grand Globalist surveyed the panoramic vista from his lofty office suite. He could see all the places in the world in a moment's time. And yet the Grand Globalist was not pleased with what he saw.

As he looked down, the Globalist could see people far below, scurrying around like ants, not realizing how tiny and pathetic their little lives were.

Indeed, that was the problem: The ants were all different. They were diverse. Each bunch of ants lived in its own stupid ant heap, which, in the ants' pathetic manner, they called "countries." And each country had its own idiotic ant-culture, each insisting on flying, even saluting, its unique ant-flag.

It was all so . . . messy. From his vantage point, the Globalist knew that the world would be a better place if everyone lived by the same rules - set by him, of course. No walls, no restrictions on trade or travel. Then it would be easy for the Globalist to move the chess pieces of geopolitics - pluck up a factory here, put it there; migrate a population from there to here - according to his own master game plan.

But the Globalist was having a hard time with America. Those stubborn creatures called "Americans" were threatening his planetary order.

So the Globalist summoned his two underlings tasked with handling the U.S. portfolio. One was code-named Elephant, the other Donkey.

"Look," said the Globalist to his flunkies, "I have given you power and glory - I even split it between the two of you, because I thought you two would like to share credit for 'bipartisan accomplishment.' You, Elephant! I gave you the White House, so that you could sell off American assets, including the ports, and divert the military overseas, leaving the homeland undefended against illegal aliens and drugs. Mission: only partly accomplished!"

Continuing, the Globalist said to Elephant, "I know that your president tried, but I want more! I don't just want bilingualism in America; I want the Tower of Babel!"

Elephant protested: "But master! Republicans loved globalism, back when it seemed a one-way street for them - the profitable export of American wares. But recently, Republicans have figured out that 'globalism' is actually a two-way street; if we seek to influence others, others will seek to influence us. Republicans now see encroaching international law as globalism's downside."

The Globalist glowered, soul-freezingly, at his Republican stooge: "Very disappointing." Then he turned an only slightly warmer eye to his other henchperson.

"And as for you, Donkey, I gave you control of Congress, so that you could spearhead such useful legislation as the immigration bill - a big amnesty for illegal aliens - and you failed. Just last week, you couldn't even get the mini-amnesty DREAM Act through Congress. At the rate you're going, Donkey, you're never going to drown American sovereignty in the wide sea of humanity.

"And speaking of the sea," the Globalist continued, "what about that Law of the Sea Treaty? Turning the ocean's resources over to an international governing consortium of un-elected bureaucrats - now that's hot!"

Donkey protested: "Give me the White House, as well as Congress, and I'll give you not only the Law of the Sea Treaty, but also the Kyoto Treaty. That'll be enough one-worldism to warm even your heart."

The Globalist stared quizzically down at Donkey. "Can you really deliver rank-and-file Democrats?"

Donkey grinned eagerly, thinking of future promotions. "Ordinary Democrats are a lot like ordinary Republicans when it comes to sticking up for the country - if they know the truth, that is. But they won't. To get those two treaties enacted, I won't tell my people what's actually in the treaties. I'll just tell them that the treaties are anti-Republican. In the current partisan climate, that'll be good enough."

The Grand Globalist smiled at the prospect.

James P. Pinkerton's e-mail address is jim@jamesppinkerton.com

=============================================================================================

A new plan by Facebook Inc. that would attach advertisements to names and photos of users who like the products may be illegal under a privacy law, the New York Times reported Friday.

The statute says that a lawsuit for damages may be brought by "any person whose name, portrait, picture, or voice is used within this state for advertising purposes or for the purposes of trade without the written consent first obtained" and that such action could be a criminal misdemeanor.

Facebook, of Palo Alto, Calif., said its new Social Ads platform would let users link themselves to a product.

The Times quoted William McGeveran of the University of Minnesota Law School, who wrote in his blog that the law could apply to Facebook users anywhere if the ad appeared in New York.

Earlier this month, Palo Alto-based Facebook launched another system, Facebook Ads, that will let marketers target specific interest groups.

=============================================================================================

The Liberty Dollar organization announced this morning, via the letter appended here, that federal agents today raised its offices in Evansville, Indiana, and confiscated all its property and equipment.

This moves seems extraordinarily bold considering that Liberty Dollar's right to operate already was being litigated in federal court.

Let's hope that Liberty Dollar soon can force the government to answer in federal court for today's action.

I sincerely regret to inform you that about 8 this morning a dozen FBI and Secret Service agents raided the Liberty Dollar office in Evansville, Indiana.

For approximately six hours they took all the gold, all the silver, all the platinum, and almost two tons of Ron Paul Dollars that were just delivered last Friday. They also took all the files and computers and froze our bank accounts.

We have no money. We have no products. We have no records to even know what was ordered or what you are owed. We have nothing but the will to push forward and overcome this massive assault on our liberty and our right to have real money as defined by the U.S. Constitution.

But to make matters worse, all the gold and silver that backs up the paper certificates and digital currency held in the vault at Sunshine Mint has also been confiscated. Even the dies for minting the gold and silver Libertys have been taken.

All this has happened even though Edmond C. Moy, the director of the U.S. Mint, acknowledged in a letter to a U.S. senator that the paper certificates did not violate Section 486 and were not illegal.

The possibility of such action was the reason the Liberty Dollar was designed -- so that the vast majority of the money was in specie form and in the people's hands. Of the $20 million Liberty Dollars, only about a million is in paper or digital form.

I regret that if you are due an order, it may be some time until it will be filled, if ever. It now all depends on our actions.

Everyone who has an unfulfilled order or has digital or paper currency should band together for a class-action suit and demand redemption. We cannot allow the government to steal our money.

Many of you read the articles quoting the government and Federal Reserve officials saying the Liberty Dollar was legal. You did nothing wrong. You are legally entitled to your property. Let us use this terrible act to band together and further our goal -- to return America to a value-based currency.

Please forward this important alert so everyone who possesses or uses the Liberty Dollar is aware of the situation.

Please go here to sign up for the class action lawsuit and get your property back:

Thanks again for your support at this darkest time as the damn government and its dollar sinks to a new low.

=============================================================================================

In the clip below, Fox and Friends' Brian Kilmeade openly calls for US support for acts of terrorism—such as car bombings—in Tehran. His criminal remarks are a direct offense to victims of terrorism all around the world and render Kilmeade morally equivalent to terrorist groups like al Qaeda which he ostensibly denounces.

=============================================================================================

Buried in the 621-page House-Senate conference report on the Defense Department appropriations bill -- and page A19 of Monday's Washington Post, is a $100 million request to enhance space warfare.

As if it didn't already have enough work in Iraq, the Pentagon plans to divert funds from an appropriation to improve submarine-launched Trident missiles to develop a "global strike" program which would allow the US to target and dispatch a "precision-guided" warhead anywhere in the world within two hours.

"The new program, dubbed Falcon, for 'Force Application and Launch from CONUS,' centers on a small-launch-vehicle concept of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency," veteran intelligence reporter Walter Pincus reveals in today's paper. "The agency describes Falcon as a 'a reusable Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle (HCV) capable of delivering 12,000 pounds of payload at a distance of 9,000 nautical miles from [the continental United States] in less than two hours.'"

"The vehicle would be launched into space on a rocket, fly on its own to a target, deliver its payload and return to Earth," he adds. "In the short term, a small launch rocket is being developed as part of Falcon. It eventually would be able to boost the hypersonic vehicle into space. But in the interim, it will be used to launch small satellites within 48 hours' notice at a cost of less than $5 million a shot."

Pincus says the House and Senate also added $100 million beyond Bush's request for "space situational awareness," legal jargon for protecting US satellites in space and being able to attack "the enemy's satellites."

"Enhancing these capabilities is critical, particularly following the Chinese anti-satellite-weapons demonstration last January," the House-Senate conferees wrote in thereport, referring to a January incident in which the Chinese targeted and destroyed a weather satellite in orbit.

An earlier iteration of this story characterized the space vehicle as a satellite, which it is not under a strict definition of the word.

=============================================================================================

Unless the world bans human cloning it may be just a matter of time until we share the Earth with exact copies. This is according to a major UN policy analysis released this morning.

The report’s authors propose outlawing human reproductive cloning while allowing restricted therapeutic cloning as the most viable “compromise” option for the international community to adopt.

South Africa’s proposed regulations on cloning are in line with this compromise: permitting the use of human eggs to create stem cells for therapeutic and research purposes — but still prohibiting reproductive cloning.

Professor Jacquie Greenberg, the associate professor with the Human Genetics Research Group at UCT, says: “The guidelines are specifically for stem cell use which is what the debate pivots around.”

The Health Department is expected to finalise its regulations on therapeutic cloning, which are governed by the National Health Act, by the end of this year.

A deadlock over cloning at a UN General Assembly in 2005 blocked the adoption of an international convention and resulted instead in the non-binding UN Declaration on Cloning.

=============================================================================================

The world should quickly ban cloning of humans and only allow exceptions for strictly controlled research to help treat diseases such as diabetes or Alzheimer's, a U.N. study said on Sunday.

Without a ban, experts at the U.N. University's Institute of Advanced Studies said that governments would have to prepare legal measures to protect clones from "potential abuse, prejudice and discrimination".

"A legally-binding global ban on work to create a human clone, coupled with freedom for nations to permit strictly controlled therapeutic research, has the greatest political viability of options available," the study said.

"Whichever path the international community chooses it will have to act soon -- either to prevent reproductive cloning or to defend the human rights of cloned individuals," said A.H. Zakri, head of the Institute, which is based in Yokohama, Japan.

Almost all governments oppose human cloning and more than 50 have legislation outlawing cloning. But negotiations about an international ban collapsed in 2005 because of disagreements over research cloning, also known as therapeutic cloning.

=============================================================================================

Rudy Giuliani's false image as a conservative is further debunked by his pining over globalist-kingpin David Rockefeller as he presents him with a medal from the Business Council of the United Nations circa 1994.

Giuliani thanks him personally for his "contributions to world peace," and listed amongst his influential activities membership organizations including the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group (yes, Giuliani mentions this secretive group) and the Americas Society.

David Rockefeller has done a great deal as an individual to subvert sovereignty and shrink the United States' ability to continue what he condemns as "auto-determination." Furthermore, the organizations listed by Giuliani work specifically to exert and maintain extra-national influence and are anything but patriotic, and instead aim to dissolve borders in favor of control by world bodies.

This is further evidence that, while Giuliani is not a formal member of the Council on Foreign Relations, he is well within their sphere of influence. And as he apparently regards these groups, and Mr. Rockefeller in particular, as a "force for freedom and peace in the world," the valid question is raised-- whose interests would he serve.

"Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

=============================================================================================

'I feared I'd end up dead in the woods like Dr Kelly,' says biological warfare expert who criticised Britain and U.S.

An EU expert on biological warfare has told how she fears ending up 'dead in the woods' like scientist Dr David Kelly after an alleged campaign of intimidation by members of MI6 and the CIA.

Jill Dekker, a bio-defence expert based in Brussels, has reported a string of sinister incidents – including the parking of a hearse outside her house – after making a speech critical of British and American policy in the Middle East.

Her claims are included in a new book by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker which argues that Dr Kelly was murdered to silence his criticism of the grounds for going to war in Iraq.

American-born Dr Dekker has been billed at security conferences as the director of the 'public health preparedness programme' at the European Homeland Security Association (EHSA), a security think tank.

She was placed under the protection of the Belgian government after reporting a series of sinister incidents earlier this year.

The Belgians confirm that they mounted a three-month protection operation earlier this year for Dr Dekker, who has advised the European Commission on bio-terrorism issues, but refuse to be drawn on the extent to which her fears were wellfounded or why the protection was eventually lifted.

The EHSA bears many of the hallmarks of a 'front' organisation for espionage activities, although Dr Dekker refuses to say anything about it except that it answers to the French government.

Established in 2004, it holds workshops and conferences, and claims partnerships with a number of security-based thinktanks around the world.

It appears to exist only in cyberspace, with its staff, including its president, French career diplomat Richard Narich, only contactable by email. Dr Dekker is not listed on the EHSA website and the organisation was yesterday not responding to any calls.

Dr Dekker says the 'intimidation' against her started in March, as she was flying to Florida to give a speech on Syria's weapons programme to an intelligence summit. She says she was subjected to a 'heavy-handed' interrogation by a man she suspects of being a British intelligence operative.

She believes the speech made her powerful enemies because she argued that billions of dollars spent by the US government to develop a smallpox vaccine has been wasted because scientists – including British experts – have used a different viral strain to the one she believes is being developed in Damascus.

=============================================================================================

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

The mainstream Democrats -- represented, say, by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Joe Biden, and Christopher Dodd -- have not levied war against the United States. Their treason lies instead in committing the second offense: They adhere to enemies of the country, giving them aid and comfort.

The enemies are President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney. Like no other president and vice president in history, these men attacked their country.

It was not our geography George Bush and Richard Cheney invaded. Instead they abandoned and subverted the bedrock institution of our constitutional democracy: the rule of law. By word and deed, Mr. Bush repeatedly and arrogantly sets himself above the law, claiming obedience to be a matter of presidential choice. Mr. Cheney orchestrates, coaches, applauds and iterates.

This cannot stand if the country we know and cherish is to survive. George Bush and Richard Cheney are literally enemies of the state; long before now and by any measure of constitutional justice, they should have been impeached and removed from office.

Abjectly, continuously and stubbornly refusing to hold them accountable, however, the mainstream Democrats adhere to this criminal president and vice president: Nothing they have asked for has been denied, no barriers placed in their way. That is giving them aid and comfort, and that is treason. George Bush and Richard Cheney took the country to war illegally, with a deliberate, carefully designed and executed package of fear-mongering propaganda: lies, distortions and deceptions. No informed citizen entertains the slightest doubt about this.

Lying to the people and the Congress was the most despicable violation of the rule of law by Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, but many more followed: torturing prisoners, denying habeas corpus, spying on U.S. citizens, nullifying new laws with "signing statements" and so on and on. The litany of impeachable offenses is long and painful, but the so-called "War on Terror," these men insist, makes all of it acceptable, even necessary. Nearly six years have elapsed since the Bush administration first defeated the rule of law. For most of these years, a Republican Congress saw fit not to intervene, or even to question this behavior, so effective was the administration's propaganda campaign and so firm were the bonds of partisanship. But now the mainstream Democrats control the Congress.

Also during these six years, the truth emerged, and now we can see the "War on Terror" truly for what it is -- an overarching megalie, an untruth of such unimaginable scope and magnitude it recalibrates for an entire nation the perception of reality. (Aryan supremacy was the megalie of Nazi Germany.) No one should be surprised that the threat of terrorism has increased, not diminished, since 9/11: the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were not even remotely intended to combat it.

We know the Bush administration, when it took office, was indifferent to terrorism, brushing aside explicit warnings about al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden; we know the president was planning instead, at least six months before 9/11, to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq; we know of a National Security Council memorandum dated Feb. 3, 2001, concerning the "capture of new and existing oil and gas fields" in Iraq; we have acquired with a lawsuit the maps of Iraqi oil fields Vice President Cheney's "Energy Task Force" was studying a month later; we have learned how the privatized structure of Iraq's postwar oil industry was designed by the Bush administration a year before the war began; we know the administration was negotiating pipeline rights-of-way with the Taliban, unsuccessfully, until five weeks before 9/11; we know the final threat to them was a "carpet of bombs"; we are aware of President Bush twice refusing offers from the Taliban to surrender Osama bin Laden, before and after the carpet of bombs was unleashed; we've read of the five "megabases" in Iraq to house 100,000 troops for as long as 50 years; we've learned the U.S. Embassy compound under construction in Baghdad will be ten times larger than any other in the world; and we know Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell, and British Petroleum/Amoco are poised to claim immense profits from 81 percent of Iraq's undeveloped oil fields.

We also know President Bush, a month before 9/11 in August of 2001, notified the governments of Pakistan and India he would launch a military mission into Afghanistan "before the end of October."

Between the dates of the president's announcement and his order to attack, the Trade Towers and the Pentagon were struck by the hijacked airliners. Seizing in a heartbeat this spectacular opportunity to disguise and launch the preplanned invasions, the Bush administration concocted the megalie, and the "War on Terror" was born.

The "War on Terror" is a conscious and ingenious masquerade for the geostrategic pursuit and control of Middle Eastern oil and gas resources. The facts place this beyond dispute. Mr. Bush's claim of "taking the fight directly to the terrorists … and the states that harbor them" was yet one more intentional deception, as subsequent events fully demonstrated. In Afghanistan the state was overthrown instead of apprehending the terrorists -- Osama bin Laden remains at large -- and in Iraq, when we invaded, there were no terrorists at all. But today both "states" are fitted with puppet governments and dotted with permanent U.S. military bases in close proximity to their hydrocarbon assets.

Only the Bush administration continues to natter about a bogus "War on Terror." Others are more candid:

Republican Sen. Senator Charles Hagel: "People say we're not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America's national interest. What the hell do you think they're talking about? We're not there for figs." (Speaking at Catholic University, Sept. 24, 2007)
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, in his book The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World: "I'm saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: The Iraq war is largely about oil."
Democratic Sen. Jon Tester: "We're still fighting a war in Iraq and people who are honest about it will admit we're there over oil." (Associated Press, Sept. 24, 2007)
Gen. John Abizaid, retired CENTCOM commander: "Of course it's about oil, we can't really deny that." (Speaking at Stanford University, Oct. 13, 2007)
The criminal fraudulence of the "War on Terror" is fully documented, but the contemporary press has been derelict in failing to expose the mega-lie and publicize it. The mainstream Democrats are equally derelict in ignoring it. Failing to hold President Bush accountable for his crimes constitutes the most profound obstruction of justice. And failing to contradict his hideous megalie clearly reinforces the president's hand: the mainstream Democrats are now accomplices.

The damage done by the Democrats' treason is equally great in prospect. Without exposing the lie of the war in Iraq and acting upon the exposure, there is no credible and reliable way to stop the administration's insane intention of attacking Iran. The proffered rationales -- and the fraudulence -- are identical, as the Democrats stride toward complicity in yet another illegal and immoral war.

Why can't the mainstream Democrats speak sublime truth to demonic power? Doing so, they claim, would be too "divisive" and jeopardize the party's success in next year's election.

This strategy is politically suicidal. A Democratic sweep in 2008 grows dimmer every day.

The rank-and-file Republicans who continue to believe Mr. Bush's lies about the "War on Terror" will not vote for a Democrat. The rank-and-file Democrats who see through the lies are increasingly enraged by the insipid waffling of their mainstream candidates. And roughly half the American people don't bother to vote at all, repelled by the tawdry attack ads and negativity of bitterly partisan, superficial, sophomoric and issue-avoidance politicking.

If the mainstream Democrats do nothing to change this, they will wind up where they're headed -- disappointed and defeated in 2008 -- and they will deserve it. Only by exposing and acting on the truth about the war can they change any Republican minds, regain the support of disenchanted Democrats and attract the politically inert, indifferent Americans. A new style of politics needs badly to be engaged, one that is dedicated not merely to winning elections, but to a genuine concern for truth, for justice, for the rule of law and for integrity in public service.

The most direct and honorable way of invoking such a style is by impeaching George Bush and Richard Cheney. Never in our history have the high crimes and misdemeanors been so flagrant, and the people of our country know it.

Yes, congressman Kucinich sought with a "member's privilege" motion to initiate an impeachment proceeding on the floor of the House of Representatives. But Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer moved immediately to kill the initiative, only to be thwarted by a Republican trick. Finally, Nancy Pelosi, desperate to avoid a floor debate, managed to have the matter referred to the Judiciary Committee, where Chairman John Conyers has been sitting on the original bill since last April. The giving of aid and comfort to the enemies will, seemingly, continue.

But the mainstream Democrats now face a carpe diem moment of truly historic measure: If they choose, they can foreswear their treason. It was a majority, bipartisan vote that sent the impeachment bill to Judiciary, and that is all the political cover the Democrats need to take the next courageous and necessary step.

For the sake of the rule of law, for the sake of the integrity of the Congress, for the sake of the country's future and incidentally for the sake of a potential Democratic victory in 2008, the politics of truth and justice must be showcased. The Judiciary Committtee must hold hearings immediately, to see if impeachment is in fact warranted -- and polls say the greater part of the country thinks it is.

If the mainstream Democrats will not do this, if their treason continues, then decent and thinking citizens everywhere -- concerned patriots all -- can only weep for their country.

=============================================================================================

New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer will withdraw a controversial plan that would have allowed undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses, a spokeswoman told CNN Tuesday night.

Spitzer plans to withdraw the proposal on Wednesday, spokeswoman Jennifer Givner told CNN.

The governor is in Washington, D.C., for a meeting with New York's congressional delegation on the issue, she said.

Spitzer's plan drew national attention and stirred opposition from critics, some of whom expressed concern over possible voter fraud.

"I believe this is just a fundamental issue of right and wrong," said Rep. Tom Latham, an Iowa Republican who opposes Spitzer's plan. "And to give people official recognition when they come in and break the law in their first act in this country is simply wrong."

Seventy-six percent of Americans oppose giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, according to poll conducted in October for CNN by the Opinion Research Corp.

=============================================================================================

Earlier today (November 15, 2007), Brave News Films (BNF) debuted FoxNewsPorn.com. Video displayed there is entirely, entirely, footage from the Fox News Channel. Just hours ago, Digg banned that domain for carrying "adult content." Additionally, YouTube flagged FoxNewsPorn.com as 18+. It essentially checks your I.D. before you can watch it.

Interestingly -- and this is big -- Digg did a deal with the Wall Street Journal yesterday -- Rupert Murdoch's new toy that he'll use to toy with what we know -- and there have been rumors that Digg hopes to be acquired by News Corp. -- as if owning Fox News, MySpace, DirecTV, HarperCollins, the Wall Street Journal, and a slew of other outlets isn't enough for Rupert.

So, Fox's "news" content is too hot for Digg? YouTube considers it 18+? Join the protest here, here, and here.

The time has come for Fox to run a continuous disclaimer along the bottom of its screen that warns that its content is adult-only!

=============================================================================================

Daniel Ellsberg, the former Defense Department analyst who leaked the secret Pentagon Papers history of the Vietnam War, offered insights into the looming attack on Iran and the loss of liberty in the United States at a recent American University symposium. What follow are his comments from that speech. They have been edited only for space.

Let me simplify . . . and not just to be rhetorical: A coup has occurred. I woke up the other day realizing, coming out of sleep, that a coup has occurred. It’s not just a question that a coup lies ahead with the next 9-11. That’s the next coup that completes the first.

The last five years have seen a steady assault on every fundamental of our Constitution . . . what the rest of the world looked at for the last 200 years as a model and experiment to the rest of the world—in checks and balances, limited government, Bill of Rights, individual rights protected from majority infringement by the Congress, an independent judiciary, the possibility of impeachment.

There have been violations of these principles by many presidents before. Most of the specific things that Bush has done in the way of illegal surveillance and other matters were done under my boss Lyndon Johnson in the Vietnam War: the use of CIA, FBI, NSA against Americans.

All these violations were impeachable had they been found out at the time but in nearly every case the violations were not found out until [the president was] out of office so we didn’t have the exact challenge that we have today.

That was true with the first term of Nixon and certainly of Johnson, Kennedy and others. They were impeachable. They weren’t found out in time. But I think it was not their intention, in the crisis situations that they felt justified their actions, to change our form of government.

It is increasingly clear with each new book and each new leak that comes out, that Richard Cheney and his now chief of staff David Addington have had precisely that in mind since at least the early 1970s. Not just since 1992, not since 2001, but [they] have believed in executive government, single-branch government under an executive president—elected or not—with unrestrained powers. They did not believe in restraint.

When I say this, I’m not saying they are traitors. I don’t think they have in mind allegiance to some foreign power or have a desire to help a foreign power. I believe they have in their own minds a love of this country and what they think is best for this country—but what they think is best is directly and consciously at odds with what the Founders of this country [and the Framers of the Constitution] thought.

They believe we need a different kind of government now, an executive government essentially, rule by decree, which is what we’re getting with ‘signing statements.’

Signing statements are talked about as line-item vetoes which is one [way] of describing them which are unconstitutional in themselves, but in other ways are just saying the president says: ‘I decide what I enforce. I decide what the law is. I legislate.’

It’s [the same] with the military commissions, courts that are under the entire control of the executive branch, essentially of the president—a concentration of legislative, judicial, and executive powers in one branch, which is precisely what the founders meant to avert, and tried to avert and did avert to the best of their ability in the Constitution.”

Now I’m appealing to that as a crisis right now not just because it is a break in tradition but because I believe in my heart and from my experience that on this point the Founders had it right. It’s not just ‘our way of doing things’— it was a crucial perception on the corruption of power to anybody, including Americans.

On procedures and institutions that might possibly keep that power under control because the alternative was what we have just seen, wars like Vietnam, wars like Iraq, wars like the one coming.

That brings me to the second point. This executive branch, under specifically Bush and Cheney, despite opposition [even] from most of the rest of the branch, even of the cabinet, clearly intends a war against Iran, which, even by imperialist standards, [violates] standards in other words which were accepted not only by nearly everyone in the executive branch but most of the leaders in Congress.

The interests of the empire, the need for hegemony, our right to control and our need to control the oil of the Middle East and many other places. That is consensual in our establishment. …

But even by those standards, an attack on Iran is insane. And I say that quietly, I don’t mean it to be heard as rhetoric. Of course it’s not only aggression and a violation of international law, a supreme international crime, but it is by imperial standards, insane in terms of the consequences.

Does that make it impossible? No, it obviously doesn’t; it doesn’t even make it unlikely.

That is because two things come together that with the acceptance for various reasons of the Congress—Democrats and Republicans—and the public and the media, we have freed the White House — the president and the vice president—from virtually any restraint by Congress, courts, media, public, whatever.

And on the other hand, the people who have this unrestrained power are crazy. Not entirely, but they have crazy beliefs.

We are heading toward an insane operation. It is not certain. [But it] is likely.… I want to try to be realistic myself here, to encourage us to do what we must do, what is needed to be done with the full recognition of the reality. Nothing is impossible.

What I’m talking about in the way of a police state, in the way of an attack on Iran, is not certain. Nothing is certain, actually. However, I think it is probable, more likely than not, that in the next 15, 16 months of this administration we will see an attack on Iran. Probably. Whatever we do.

And . . . we will not succeed in moving Congress, probably, and Congress probably will not stop the president from doing this. And that’s where we’re heading. That’s a very ugly, ugly prospect.

However, I think it’s up to us to work to increase that small, perhaps—anyway not large—possibility and probability to avert this within the next 15 months, aside from the effort that we have to make for the rest of our lives.

Getting back the constitutional government and improving it will take a long time. And I think if we don’t get started now, it won’t be started under the next administration.

Getting out of Iraq will take a long time. Averting Iran and averting a further coup in the face of a 9-11, another attack, is for right now, it can’t be put off. It will take a kind of political and moral courage of which we have seen very little.

We have a really unusual concentration here and in this audience, of people who have in fact changed their lives, changed their position, lost their friends to a large extent, risked and experienced being called terrible names, ‘traitor,’ ‘weak on terrorism’—names that politicians will do anything to avoid being called.

How do we get more people in the government and in the public at large to change their lives now in a crisis in a critical way? How do we get Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for example? What kinds of pressures, what kinds of influences can be brought to bear to get Congress to do their jobs? It isn’t just doing their jobs. Getting them to obey their oaths of office.

I took an oath many times, an oath of office as a Marine lieutenant, as an official in the Defense Department, as an official in the State Department as a Foreign Service officer. A number of times I took an oath of office which is the same oath of office taken by every member of Congress and every official in the United States and every officer in the armed services.

And that oath is not to a commander in chief, which is not [even] mentioned. It is not to a Fuehrer. It is not even to superior officers. The oath is precisely to protect and uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Now that is an oath I violated every day for years in the Defense Department without realizing it when I kept my mouth shut when I knew the public was being lied into a war as they were lied into Iraq, as they are being lied into war in Iran.

I knew that I had the documents that proved it, and I did not put it out then. I was not obeying my oath, which I eventually came to do.

I’ve often said that Lt. Ehren Watada—who still faces trial for refusing to obey orders to deploy to Iraq which he correctly perceives to be an unconstitutional and aggressive war—is the single officer in the United States armed services who is taking seriously [the matter of] upholding his oath.

The president is clearly violating that oath, of course. [All the personnel] under him who understand what is going on — and there are myriad — are violating their oaths. And that’s the standard that I think we should be asking of people.

On the Democratic side, on the political side, I think we should be demanding of our Democratic leaders in the House and Senate—and frankly of the Republicans —that it is not their highest single absolute priority to be reelected or to maintain a Democratic majority so that Pelosi can still be speaker of the House and Reid can be in the Senate, or to increase that majority.

I’m not going to say that for politicians they should ignore that, or that they should do something else entirely, or that they should not worry about that.
Of course that will be and should be a major concern of theirs, but they’re acting like it’s their sole concern. Which is business as usual. “We have a majority, let’s not lose it, let’s keep it. Let’s keep those chairmanships.”

Exactly what have those chairmanships done for us to save the Constitution in the last couple of years?

I am shocked by the Republicans today that I read [about] in The Washington Post who threatened a filibuster if we … get back habeas corpus. The ruling out of habeas corpus with the help of the Democrats did not get us back to George the First it got us back to before King John 700 years ago in terms of counter-revolution.

I think we’ve got to somehow get home to them [in Congress] that this is the time for them to uphold the oath, to preserve the Constitution, which is worth struggling for in part because it’s only with the power that the Constitution gives Congress responding to the public, only with that can we protect the world from madmen in power in the White House who intend an attack on Iran.

And the current generation of American generals and others who realize that this will be a catastrophe have not shown themselves —they might be people who in their past lives risked their bodies and their lives in Vietnam or elsewhere, like [Colin] Powell, and would not risk their career or their relations with the president to the slightest degree.

That has to change. And it’s the example of people like those up here who somehow brought home to our representatives that they as humans and as citizens have the power to do likewise and find in themselves the courage to protect this country and protect the world. Thank you.”

=============================================================================================

Publisher thanks cops for not beating him during Giuliani incident, but files complaint

Brooklyn reporter booted after asking about 'foreknowledge' of 9/11
When GOP presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani stopped off for a little retail politicking at a Colorado coffee house last Saturday, he came prepared to hammer home his commitment to the war on terror, make a jab or two at Hillary Clinton, and field some tough questions about recently indicted pal Bernard Kerik -- but he apparently wasn't ready for Sander Hicks.

Hicks, a Brooklyn-based journalist, publisher and all-around multimedia maverick, is also a self-described member of the "9/11 Truth" movement, a group convinced that official explanations do not fully account for the Sept. 11 tragedies. As Giuliani shook hands and signed autographs outside of Loveland, Colorado's Loveland Coffee Company, Hicks was waiting with a question.

"Mr. Giuliani, six years ago you told Peter Jennings that 'we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse,'" Hicks said, quoting a remark from the former New York City mayor made during an interview with ABC News. "Where did you get your foreknowledge that the World Trade Center was going to collapse?"

A laughing Giuliani quickly brushed past Hicks according to a video recording of the campaign stop, ignoring the question as he continued to work his way around an informal circle of supporters and press. But Hicks was not ignored by the Loveland Police Department. Two officers immediately took hold of his arms and hauled him into an adjacent parking lot.

"The police were aggressive," Hicks said in an interview with RAW STORY. "There's no need for that. I was there as a professional reporter."

After being led away by officers in what he describes as a "submission hold," Hicks identified himself to authorities and said he was just trying to ask Giuliani a question.

"I'm a member of the media. I'm a publisher and editor-in-chief of the New York Megaphone," he told police, citing a newspaper he runs which claims a readership of more than 60,000. "I'm the only New York reporter here."

After denying officers' assertions that he had pushed people in the crowd, he told authorities that they were violating his right to speak. "What you did was illegal," Hicks said. "What what you did was a violation of my fucking Bill of Rights."

"I was emotional," he told RAW STORY. "My mom was just telling me, 'next time don't cuss.'" Although Hicks was not arrested, officers said he was on private property and ordered him to leave.

"I should not have been grabbed," the journalist said by phone. "We need more reporters to ask these questions. We need more citizens to ask the questions."

Hicks is no new-comer to political controversy. He was the subject of the 2002 documentary film Horns and Halos, which focused on his successful efforts to republish author James Hatfield's unauthorized biography of President Bush, Fortunate Son. The New York Times bestselling book, which included allegations that Bush was arrested for cocaine possession in 1972, was recalled by its original publisher after it was revealed that Hatfield was a paroled felon. Hicks later returned the biography to bookstore shelves through his own boutique publishing house, Soft Skull Press.

'Why don't you let go of my hand'
Hicks' question for Giuliani had referred to an interview with ABC's then-anchor Peter Jennings, conducted only hours after the Sept. 11 attacks in New York, in which the mayor remarked that he and other top city officials had been warned on that the trade center towers were going to come down.

"I went down to the scene and we set up headquarters at 75 Barclay Street, which was right there with the police commissioner, the fire commissioner, the head of emergency management, and we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse," Giuliani said in the interview. "And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building, so we were trapped in the building for 10, 15 minutes, and finally found an exit and got out, walked north, and took a lot of people with us."

Critics of 9/11 conspiracy theories say Giuliani was in fact warned -- but only at the last minute.

"Hicks appears to be trying to resuscitate the claim that Rudy knew the Towers were going to collapse in advance," states an entry at the blog Screw Loose Change, a site which claims to debunk "myths" about Sept. 11. "EMS Battalion Chief John Peruggia was warned by a NYC building engineer at 9:58 AM that the North Tower was in imminent danger of collapse. Presumably either Peruggia or the building engineer proceeded to warn the Mayor. Unfortunately Giuliani has compounded the problem by denying that he had any advance knowledge, perhaps because the kooks generally frame it that he had plenty of warning..."

Hicks had made a a previous attempt to ask about the Jennings interview earlier in the campaign stop, soon after Giuliani arrived on the scene.

"Rudy, hi, I'm Sander from the New York Megaphone," he started, shaking the candidate's hand. "On 9/11, when you said -- " But Giuliani cut him off, saying sharply, "Why don't you let go of my hand?" The exchange was captured on tape by a local Colorado Fox affiliate.

But the candidate was confronted with more 9/11 Truth members once he made his way inside the coffee shop.

"Mayor Giuliani, why'd you have thousands of tons of steel melted down and shipped off to Asia," yelled one activist before being shouted down with chants of "Rudy, Rudy" from the crowd. That individual was also asked to leave by police.

"Hey Rudy, the American people are waking up to the fact that you're a criminal," said another Truther. "You're a criminal, Rudy, you're a fake conservative..." The protesters were affiliated with two 9/11 Truth organizations, We Are Change Colorado and TruthAlliance.

Giuliani: 'The conspiracy theorists are all over'
After leaving the coffee shop -- and moments before Hicks would be whisked away by police -- Giuliani made some brief comments about the disturbance.

"It's part of America," he told reporters. "You learn when you are mayor of New York City that people have all kinds of different opinions, all kinds of different views...the conspiracy theorists are all over, they are protesting all over the place...it's very sad, it's not true. But you're not going to convince them that it's not true."

Although Hicks says he is loosely allied with We Are Change Colorado -- and was in Colorado to speak at one of the group's events -- he is careful to distance himself from tactics he refers to as "heckling."

"I was not a heckler and I did not raise my voice," he told RAW STORY. "I did not scream my question." He even has some measured praise for Loveland police.

"The cops did a good job of defusing the situation in the sense that they were professional, they were level headed. I appreciate the fact that I was not booked, that I was not cuffed, that I was not beaten," said Hicks."But I shouldn't have to say this. Of course I shouldn't have been beaten."

He hastens to add that the police, in his opinion, "were making a political choice that was not their job to make." Even if his opinions about Giuliani and Sept. 11 are incorrect, Hicks said, he still had a right to air them.

"This is the main message: the First Amendment allows me to be wrong," said Hicks. "Let's assume that my line of thinking is completely erroneous...that is for the even playing field of free discourse to figure out. We're supposed to have free speech so that truth and error can both come out."

Hicks has filed a complaint with the Loveland Police Department, a copy of which is available at his blog. "No matter what you believe, Loveland Police should be protecting citizens' First Amendment rights, which include our right to ask questions," he writes. "The First Amendment should be counted on to help get the USA back on track, through open dialogue."

The following video incorporates footage shot by 9/11 Truth groups and news reports from local Colorado affiliates.

=============================================================================================

Journalists and PR minders outnumbered buyers on Friday night as interest in Apple's iPhone miserably failed to live up to the pre-launch hype in the UK.

The iPhone went on sale at stores operated by retail titan Carphone Warehouse, exclusive operator O2, and Apple's own retail chain. The days preceding the launch had been filled with pages of coverage from posh papers and broadsheets alike. O2 announced it was employing 1,400 extra staff to cope with the short-term demand. Even Carphone's PR staff were dispatched to far corners of the land, to provide expert advice to the masses clamouring for iPhones.

But now it looks as if a tight-knit group of media and PR people got caught in a feedback loop. The "event" they imagined simply failed to take place.

The first signs that reality was not following the script came at 7pm, from a Reg reader at Brent Cross. Perched by Wembley on the North Circular, Brent Cross is a shopping hub reaching into millions of affluent punters in Hertfordshire and Oxfordshire, as well as the metropolis itself. He noted that the Carphone and O2 stores were empty of punters, with only "the usual" smattering of shoppers at the Apple Store, playing with iPods.

Reader Ian Ferguson fought his way to the front of a non-existent queue at Carphone Warehouse to get his iPhone, he reported in our comments on Friday night. He was outnumbered by extra staff trying to "upsell" him insurance and over-priced accessories.

Up in Manchester, it was safe to go to the pub at 5pm, an hour before "launch" then get soaked in the rain.

An hour later, bored staff outnumbered prospective purchasers as the stores stood empty.

Dial-A-Phone's Nick has a gallery of the non-existent iPhone mania that was failing to break out, here.

=============================================================================================

Sean Hannity is a nationally syndicated radio and television personality who works for the FOX News Network.

Recently, Rupert Murdoch, owner of FOX News, as well as a score of other mainstream media outlets, has been reported on in the mainstream presses as one of Hillary Clinton's largest campaign contributors for the 2008 presidential race...

Hannity goes on the air every day and proceeds to attack Clinton, as well as the seemingly fictional entity he always refers to as "liberals"... meanwhile, the guy who signs his check is literally funding Hillary.

Sean Hannity is a yellow journalist and a propagandist and his job essentially is to mislead and confuse well-meaning conservatives about the truly important issues facing our nation, and also to reinforce the Left/Right paradigm, which serves to keep Americans blind to or divided about the tyranny that is quickly enveloping our country.

My brother and I confronted him about this fact, as well as some other very pertinent items of truth, at a bookstore in Long Island on 11/10/07.

=============================================================================================

Second major phase of the coordinated destruction of freedom in America targets those who refuse to go along with it

A sustained media propaganda campaign in support of the move to swing the apparatus of tyranny away from phantom Muslim terrorists and towards the American people is in full operation and may pave the way for further attacks on US soil to be blamed on dissenting Americans who speak out against the war and the rise of the domestic police state.

Over the past decade we have witnessed an extreme acceleration of the physical implementation of a framework and infrastructure ready to receive those who will not go along with a coordinated destruction of traditional American values and freedom. With 9/11 came the first opportunity of the 21st century to radically alter the mentality of America and introduce a new order of society.

The corporate media is now preparing the psyche of the American public for a second major shift. This time the effort will be to direct the understanding of the manufactured and fraudulent "war on terror", away from "Islamofascists" and "Al Qaeda" and towards dissenting American citizens.

Over the past month or so we have highlighted this ongoing propaganda campaign in the following articles:

Establishment "news" hacks such as Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Hannity and Limbaugh are raising the same talking point ad infinitum, dubbing the global truth movement, along with the anti-war movement, as "anarchists" and violent individuals who are aiding terrorists.

In the event of another attack on US soil, an army of Neo-Cons secretly sharing the same fetish, would revel in exploiting a hollow opportunity to say "we told you so," even at the expense of thousands of dead dads, moms, sons, daughters and babies.

"But these are just the mindless frothings of talking heads looking for ratings" some might say. When you take them in context with the ongoing actions of the government, however, a clearer more deadly picture emerges.

The propaganda coincides with a House Homeland Security Subcommittee hearing on "Terrorism and the Internet" held last week, broadcast on C-Span, which featured a panel of "experts", including representatives formerly of the RAND Corporation and the Simon Wiesenthal Center who presented 9/11 truth websites sites alongside sites that celebrate the attacks and offer training in terrorist tactics.

Past legislation written up and in many cases implemented by the Bush administration has completely cleared the path for the targeting of American citizens as "enemy combatants" and systematically destroyed the Bill Of Rights. Here is a brief re-cap on some of that legislation:

The once covert but now exposed "anti-terror" domestic wiretapping program has proven that the Bush administration has targeted American citizens in the "war on terror":

"Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials," reported the New York Times on December 16, 2005

The secret warrantless spying program was a complete violation of both the 4th Amendment and FISA.

Not content with now being lawfully allowed to force ISP's and cell phone companies to turn over data about customers without a warrant, the Bush administration pushed for even more authority to spy on American citizens, and was handed a 6 month window this August within which to impose any surveillance policy it likes, and for that program to remain legal in perpetuity.

These types of programs are not new of course, precursors such as COINTELPRO and many other incarnations of the same kind of surveillance programs have been targeting American citizens for decades.

“In a police state the police are national, powerful, authoritarian. Inevitably, national governments yield to the temptation to use the military to do the heavy lifting….once the military is used, however minor initially, the march toward martial law … becomes irresistible.” - Representative Ron Paul of Texas - June 25 1997.

The Posse Comitatus Act is a recognition that the framers of the constitution had a deep distrust of centralized power, particularly centralized military power that might be used against the people. State militias were preferred over a national army. In times of major disaster or emergency, it has been state governors - not the president - who call out that state's contingent of the national guard.

We have witnessed over a long period of time how Posse Comitatus is systematically being erased. After 9/11 this was particularly accelerated. All the so called "experts" were calling for changes to long standing laws, in order to "protect" us. This led to scores of lower level government officials pleading for exactly what the criminal elements higher up wanted all along.

So let's get this right, "terrorists" attack us because they "hate our freedoms" and the answer is to get rid of our freedoms?

Here's another mainstream report from 2002 documenting a senators call to abolish Posse Comitatus and let troops arrest US civilians.

But before the war on terror it was clear that there was preparation afoot for such eventualities. Nothing is under review, this has always been the agenda. They were erasing Posse Comitatus 14 Years Ago. In 911: The Road to Tyranny Alex Jones presents footage of troops training to put Americans into Concentration Camps. This footage includes interrogations and a retired Marine admitting that in 1988 he was kicking down doors in Norfolk, Virginia. The Marines would be ordered to the local Police station where they would don Police uniforms. They would then go to the local gun shop or dealers home and "Take Them Down."

In Alex Jones' feature Police State 2000 he covers Operation Urban Warrior where actors posed as American citizens who were Unconstitutionally seized from their homes by the military and police. These Americans: were rounded up and confined behind barbed-wire.

The actors were told to demand to be let free and state that they had rights. They were also told to demand food and water. The troops in turn were taught to ignore them and to order them to behave in an orderly fashion. "Civil disobedience will not be tolerated" was one of the many disturbing statements heard to emanate from the military's loud speakers.

Over the years there have been countless drills of this nature. The media simply reports them as training for dealing with foreign enemies, yet the volunteers and the participants are always told differently.

In 2005 details of just one of many Military operations on American soil was exposed in the run up to Bush's second coronation. A secret counterterrorism program code-named Power Geyser. A small group of super-secret commandos were hidden among 13000 police and troops and "stood ready with state-of-the-art weaponry to swing into action.".

There have been literally thousands of these kind of operations in the planning and going on for years now. Many designed to use the military on the streets of American cities in direct violation of Posse Comitatus. The Pentagon has a full Command in operation working on these activities, the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).

Whilst Studying US COIN (Counter Insurgency) doctrine at University I was subjected to weekly showings of videos where military operations were carried out in purpose built mock American towns and cities. We were also informed of how future Counter Insurgency would be predominantly conducted from Military bunkers as they had developed the technology to map out entire cities to pinpoint accuracy from satellite images. The cities in the prototypes were of course all American cities.

I remember asking the lecturer what the point was in developing this technology for use in foreign insurgency wars in places such as the mountains of Afghanistan, and why were the drills and testing of the technology being carried out purely in American towns and cities. The answer was of course that in the event of a major terror attack on US soil these types of things would go into operation. The Pentagon does indeed have "War Plans" drafted in the event of any type of terror attack, which would be coordinated by Northcom in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security and would involve martial law and thousands of troops on the streets.

According to respected military affairs analyst William Arkin, Northcom has defined three levels of operations, each of which triggers a larger set of authorized activities. The levels are "extraordinary", "emergency" and "temporary". During emergencies, the military can provide similar support, mostly in response to specific events such as the attacks on the World Trade Center. It is only in the case of extraordinary domestic operations that the unique capabilities of the Defense Department are deployed. These include not just such things as air patrols to shoot down hijacked planes or the defusing of bombs and other explosives, but also bringing in intelligence collectors, special operators and even full combat troops.

But as Arkin's article makes clear, Northcom is doing more than mere coordinating. "Under the banner of 'homeland security', the military and intelligence communities are implementing far-reaching changes that blur the lines between terrorism and other kinds of crises and will break down long-established barriers to military action and surveillance within the US."

He also said the Pentagon reviewed the Posse Comitatus Act and determined that it would not be a violation to deploy the National Guard to protect critical infrastructure in some circumstances. He said he expects more presidential directives in the future to expand the military's homeland defense role.

Then of course we have General Tommy Franks stating that a major terror attack on US soil would mean the constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

Some say this is nothing new. In a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in 2005, former US senator Gary Hart said American founders "created such an army and called it the militia: citizen-soldiers under the immediate command of the various states that can be deployed in times of emergency. Since the late 19th century these militias have been known as the National Guard, and they were created and given constitutional status as the first responders and the first line of defense in the case of an attack on our homeland".

This is clearly an alteration of reality. The reason why the founding fathers employed militias and later created Posse Comitatus was that they knew a centralized national army could be used in a future environment to take over the country and take away the rights of everyone.

Police State infrastructure - Already in place (and in use)
FEMA, Northcom and the tools of tyranny

We have further exposed how the infrastructure for a martial law police state is already in place, and in many cases is in use. We have a whole archive on the revelations that FEMA has concentration camps set up and ready to go in the event of any emergency that is deemed suitable for their use. As we have also seen recently, these camps need not have barbed wire and observation towers, they can simply be well guarded sports stadiums.

In May 2006, we also exposed the existence of a nationwide FEMA program which is training Pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for the implementation of martial law, property and firearm seizures, mass vaccination programs and forced relocation.

A whistleblower who was secretly enrolled into the program told us that the feds were clandestinely recruiting religious leaders to help implement Homeland Security directives in anticipation of a potential bio-terrorist attack, any natural disaster or a nationally declared emergency.

Though some doubted the accuracy of this report at the time due to its fundamentally disturbing implications, the story was later confirmed by a KSLA 12 news report, in which participating clergy and officials admit to the existence of the program.

Please note that this video is often removed once we highlight it in articles, we encourage readers to circulate it on the web. Search youtube with this link for an alternative should the above video be removed.

A cursory re-cap of the actions of FEMA in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita two years ago also reveals how the infrastructure of the police state can and has been turned on American citizens.

FEMA deliberately sabotaged relief efforts in New Orleans, making things worse than need be.

The federal government illegally initiated total gun confiscation of law abiding citizens and forcibly removed them from their property in New Orleans. Federal forces led criminal gangs of police in an America-killing gun grab.

Along with forced gun grabs and evacuation, we have further exposed the intricacies of the operative federalized Police State, with the presence of foreign troops, SWAT teams, privately employed security mercenaries, the treatment of citizens as "insurgents" and evacuees as "internees" and the euthanization and inoculation of survivors.

The bottom line on Katrina is that whether you believe it was all incompetence or part incompetence and part malevolence, the lasting pretext is the same. When a disaster takes place, you have no rights and the federal government can arrest you if you don’t follow their every order.

FEMA clearly used the human catastrophe in New Orleans as a means of executing its decade long plans and providing the pretext for future takeover scenarios of all major American cities.

FEMA is not an elected body, it does not involve itself in public disclosures, and it even has a quasi-secret budget in the billions of dollars. It has more power than the president of the United States or the congress, it has the power to suspend laws, move entire populations, arrest and detain citizens without a warrant and hold them without trial, it can seize property, food supplies, transportation systems, and can suspend the constitution. Not only is it the most powerful entity in the United States, but it was not even created under constitutional law by the congress.

In the aftermath of the hurricanes the police state was touted as the savior. So called "Homeland security experts" called for federal troops that don't need 72 hours for call-up, as some National Guard units require, capable of dropping into a disaster zone as the damage is being done, rather than afterward. The media called for the TOTAL FEDERALIZATION of America.

It was federalization and the criminal negligence and sabotage on the part of the feds that caused the mass disruption in New Orleans, yet the call was for MORE federalization? The call was for troops on our streets, stopping traffic, searching people, seizing property and making arrests?

The desperate call went up for "military authorities" to supersede "civilian authorities". When did we stop being people and become "civilians"?

FEMA executive orders have been paving the way for the police State for many years. For a full synopsis of FEMA's executive orders in light of hurricane Katrina, click here.

FEMA is not the only entity central to the continuing crackdown on American dissenters. After Katrina and before Rita, George W Bush canceled a scheduled trip to Texas and instead visited Colorado Springs, Colorado and the U.S. Northern Command Headquarters.

Our sources informed us at that time that far from this being a change of plan, Bush was visiting Northcom to be witness to a martial law takeover drill which was directly connected to Granite Shadow, which the Washington Post reported, "is yet another new Top Secret and compartmented operation related to the military’s extra-legal powers regarding weapons of mass destruction. It allows for emergency military operations in the United States without civilian supervision or control.

A joint task force for Rita was being created under the jurisdiction of NorthCom. Operating out of Austin Texas, in liaison with NorthCom in Colorado, under the command of Army Lt. Gen. Robert Clark. A "standing joint force headquarters" was established in Austin, Texas.

Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff subsequently classified Hurricane Rita as an "incident of national significance," which justifies the activation of a so-called "National Response Plan"(NRP).

As Michael Chossudovsky pointed out in his article on this, The National Response Plan (NRP) is effective upon issuance with a phased implementation process during the first year. During the first 120 days of this implementation process, the Initial NRP (INRP), Federal Response Plan (FRP), U.S. Government Domestic Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan (CONPLAN), and Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan (FRERP) remain in effect. (For further details, consult the complete document at http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NRPbaseplan.pdf

So essentially, the period of time during which the NRP would be in operation would extend far beyond the emergency period in the disaster area. In all likelihood, the NRP would modify the functions of civilian government.

The Washington Post reported that The Northern Command would be the lead agency in domestic terror response. The Pentagon "has devised its first-ever war plans for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States, envisioning 15 potential crisis scenarios and anticipating several simultaneous strikes around the country, according to officers who drafted the plans."

Northcom has a history of calling for the end of Posse Comitatus and officials there seem to be hell bent upon a military takeover. Head of Northcom Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart was quoted in the New York Times in 2002 as saying

"My view has been that Posse Comitatus will constantly be under review as we mature this command, as we do our exercises, as we interact with FEMA, F.B.I., and those lead federal agencies out there,"

This is precisely the point, the erosion of Posse Comitatus has been ongoing for a long time. As revealed earlier in this report, military takeover drills and exercises have been in operation for years.

Eberhart has also said that he is anxious to use new technology, including unmanned surveillance blimps cruising at 70,000 feet and Predator drones scanning American coastlines.

The general said it was also possible that the North American Aerospace Defense Command would expand beyond the United States and Canada to include Mexico.

"To defend this nation, we have to defend as far out as possible...Therefore we need the support of Canada and Mexico to be able to defend our interests."

A recent Council On Foreign Relations document corroborates this proposed move. The 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."

The document entitled "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, then Mexican President Vicente Fox, and then Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush’s ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details.

So there we have Orwell's Oceania coming to pass. A unionized Americas under the control of a military dictatorship.

Over the years we have also exposed the development of other police State weapons that make Tasers look like water pistols. See this article on The Pentagon's secret scream sonic devices that can inflict pain--or even permanent deafness. These type of devices that are routinely used in Iraq were also used in New Orleans in the Hurricane Katrina aftermath.

The use of unmanned drone aircraft was also documented in New Orleans, since then such craft have been flown over American soil and are now routinely used by the Department of Homeland security. Again, such weapons are being used not only in foreign reconnaissance but also domestically for spying on "civillians" and controlling crowds. Industry representatives are enthusiastic about the drones' potential.

"I believe we will see Predator and Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) watching over major events, such as the Olympic Games and the Super Bowl, in the not-too-distant future," Brad Brown, then-president of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International wrote.

Alex Jones' 2004 film Martial Law: Rise of the Police State also documents the use of huge corporate sponsored surveillance blimps. The Department of Homeland Security is developing 900 ft long so called "Super Blimps" for surveillance, intended to fly about 65,000 feet, well above commercial airliner traffic.

We have also documented the rise in use of the national guard to break up public events. On multiple occasions we have carried stories, photos and video of tanks and armed troops on the streets of America. Such deployments are used not only to break up protests, but even something as insignificant as a rave in a field.

Future technology under development includes robot police that have the ability to run. Its like we are living in the Twilight Zone or in a futuristic dystopian film. Yet when you mention these kind of things to people they either don't believe you or simply laugh at you. Well here's a wake up call, IT'S THE YEAR 2007, not 1947, and these things are real and in place.

The infrastructure is in place, the propaganda campaign to target American dissenters is well underway as eluded to at the beginning of this report, so what constitutes "winning" this "war on terror" for the criminal cabal heading the government?

Back in September 2006, we reported on a White House strategy document for "winning the war on terror," in which conspiracy theorists were targeted as a wellspring of terrorism. The document threatens to "address" and "diminish" the problems they are causing the government in fulfilling their agenda.

The document states that terrorism springs from "subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation," and that "terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda."

Bush referred to the strategy paper as "an unclassified version of the strategy we've been pursuing since September the 11th, 2001," that takes into account, "the changing nature of this enemy."

The Neo-Con talking heads announcing that anti-war protesters and 9/11 truthers are in league with terrorists are actually parroting White House propaganda handed down to them by the Bush administration.

You can even trace the legacy right back to Bush's November 10, 2001 speech to the U.N., in which he said that "outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th" should not be tolerated.

For years we have warned that the police state is coming, how Martial Law will become the norm, how ancient laws, rights and freedoms are being overturned and replaced with repressive mechanisms of control. We warned how the mechanisms of the police state would be turned onto the average Americans who refused to go along with it.

For years we have presented the evidence, the Army War College documents, the domestic military takeover drills, the draconian legislation, officials left right and centre calling for more centralized military control domestically.

For years people refuted the evidence, or passed it off as being intended for something else, or simply refused to believe it. Now everything we warned you about is happening.

In the wake of recent natural disasters on American soil, dangerous precedents have been set. We have been forced to watch how in times of crisis we must submit and follow the orders of Federal Commanders, no matter whether they deny us basic human rights or not.

Now the propaganda is flowing in full force, media heads are attacking and labeling as terrorists anyone who stands up against the new order, including Ron Paul and his supporters.

But as sure as night follows day the propaganda is also intended to frighten and silence a hotbed of dissent and exposure that has exploded into a mainstream movement and kept freedom in America alive in the 21st century.

=============================================================================================

In response to Ron Paul’s phenomenal fundraising successes and his widespread, national popularity, the neocon establishment has commenced a smear campaign. One such smear artist is John C. Fortier, a "research fellow" at what Lew Rockwell has called the Supreme Soviet of Neoconservatism – the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

Writing on the AEI website, Fortier complained that Congressman Paul "sometimes displays a sinister conspiratorial aspect, implying that those who disagree with him are the vanguard of dictatorial government." The Congressman and his supporters, says Fortier, think they "are there to stop such a dictatorship."

Fortier is especially incensed at the fact that Congressman Paul asked him many hard questions, and opposed some of his recommendations, when he was executive director of something called the "Continuity in Government Commission." In particular, the congressman was suspicious of the neocon commissioner’s recommendation that the president appoint members of Congress in the aftermath of some kind of "emergency" that incapacitates Congress. (Leaving the definition of "emergency" up to Washington, D.C. politicians is always dangerous to liberty, as anyone with any concern about constitutional government would know.)

Well, the work of Fortier’s Continuity in Government Commission is now finished, and the results of its efforts are seen in something called the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20/51, also known as the "National Continuity Policy." This is another one of those presidential "directives" that was sneaked in under the media’s radar screen that does indeed grant the president dictatorial powers. Judge Andrew Napolitano describes the meaning of this "directive" in his brilliant new book, A Nation of Sheep (pp. 74–76).

The White House published the directive on its website after it was already signed by the president. Most Americans who have actually read and studied the directive, writes Napolitano, "are terrified by its implications." They are terrified because presidential "directives" as such can be issued without any oversight by any other branch of government. The "National Continuity Policy" directive "concentrates power into the office of the president to coordinate any and all government and business activities" in the event of a "catastrophic emergency," writes the judge.

The problem this creates for the American public is that "the pliable language in the directive creates the ability for a vast scope of executive authority without the checks and balances of the other branches of government," writes Napolitano. It creates dictatorial powers, in other words.

"Catastrophic emergency" is defined so broadly that it could include an economic downturn, an environmental catastrophe, large-scale protests against the Iraq war, a power blackout, a bridge collapse such as the one on the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis last summer, a tsunami, a volcanic eruption such as Mount Saint Helen’s, and, says Napolitano, possibly even if "a plague of fire ants invades Crawford, Texas."

The president gets to decide what constitutes a "catastrophe" that allows him to enforce his own directive and assume dictatorial powers over the government and the economy. If the president does declare such an emergency, writes Napolitano, "he can take over all government functions including the Congress and the federal courts and direct all private sector activities." Moreover, "the emergency exists until the president decides it is over." The question is not, why was Ron Paul suspicious of the government "commission" that dreamed up this dictatorial nightmare, but why wasn’t every other member of Congress?

It gets even worse. The Bush administration, thanks to the work of John C. Fortier’s Continuity in Government Commission, was emboldened to simply ignore the federal National Emergencies Act, passed in 1976, that was intended to prevent a perpetual state of national emergency "and formalize Congressional checks and balances on presidential emergency powers." They just thumbed their collective noses, figuratively speaking, at the Congress and the American public, and broke the law – again. But then, the president’s lawyers have argued for years that anything he does is legal and constitutional. The Constitution doesn’t say this, mind you; Republican Party hacks with law degrees do.

All of this is why, of all the former Trotskyites and other assorted neocons who hang their hats at AEI, it was John C. Fortier who took the lead to smear Ron Paul on the Institute’s website. It was Ron Paul, almost alone among members of Congress, who understood the potential devastating dangers to American liberty that might come from a commission such as the one that was directed by Fortier.

The "National Continuity Policy" was put in place in secret, without the knowledge of even very many members of Congress. Fortier must be in a state of panic. He understands that, because of his exponentially-growing popularity, Ron Paul has the ability to expose this atrocious attack on American liberty to the entire nation, which may come to understand that AEI – the Supreme Soviet of Neoconservatism – is best thought of as the American Dictatorship Institute.

=============================================================================================

After what Los Angeles money manager Arnold Silver called "a brutal three days," the question is: What now for the market?

A Wall Street superstar this year who runs Balestra Capital Partners, Jim Melcher, says he's "worried about a recession. Not a normal one, but a very bad one. The worst since the 1930s. I expect we'll see clear signs of it in six months with a dramatic slowdown in the gross domestic product."

Balestra Capital, a $350 million New York hedge fund, was up 3% for the past three market sessions, when the Dow Jones Industrials, spearheaded by widespread declines in financial stocks and fears of more billion-dollar-plus asset write-downs, tumbled more than 677 points, or about 4.5%. The Nasdaq fared worse, skidding about 7%, triggered by across-the-board declines in those fast-stepping technology stocks.

Balestra has increased in value by 175% so far this year, Mr. Melcher tells me. A 9-year-old fund, it has posted compounded annual growth of about 30% since its inception.

Mr. Melcher, a market bear, had some pretty discouraging words. "What I think is not good for the country, but good for me." he says. His basic advice to the country's roughly 80 million stock players: Run for the hills � the worst is far from over. An investor's stock portfolio now, he believes, should be only about half of what it might normally be.

With the housing market in a state of collapse � and he says he believes it is far from over � Mr. Melcher argues that average homeowners will not be able to withstand the kind of recession he sees, given the added burdens of rising energy and food costs, and continued deterioration in the credit markets.

Noting that consumption is already slowing, Mr. Melcher figures sharply rising unemployment is inevitable. Another of his worries is that central banks around the globe, America's included, are debasing their currencies, which is setting the stage for a new round of higher inflation. Our bear figures the next six to 12 months will be awful for investors as the market goes down "pretty substantially." His frightening outlook calls for an additional 20% to 30% decline from current levels. A drop of that magnitude would put the Dow down in a range of roughly 9,100 to 10,400.

=============================================================================================

Jon explains how torture such as waterboarding sounds so much more fun than simulated drowning.

=============================================================================================

Doomed Polar Bear? Another Global Warming Hoax Exposed

Polar bears in danger? Is this some kind of joke?
James Delingpole
Times Online
November 12, 2007

Why don’t polar bears eat penguins? Because their paws are too big to get the wrappers off, obviously. It’s not a joke you hear so often these days, though, because polar bears are now a serious business. They’re the standard-bearers of a tear-jerking propaganda campaign to persuade us all that, if we don’t act soon on climate change, the only thing that will remain of our snowy-furred ursine chums will be the picture on a pack of Fox’s glacier mints.

First there came the computer-generated polar bear in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth; then that heartrending photo, syndicated everywhere, of the bears apparently stranded on a melting ice floe; then the story of those four polar bears drowned by global warming (actually, they’d perished in a storm).

Now, in a new cinema release called Earth – a magnificent, feature-length nature documentary from the makers of the BBC’s Planet Earth series – comes the most sob-inducing “evidence” of all: a poor male polar bear filmed starving to death as a result, the quaveringly emotional Patrick Stewart voiceover suggests, of global warming.

Never mind that what actually happens is that the bear stupidly has a go at a colony of walruses and ends up being gored to death.

The bear wouldn’t have done it, the film argues, if he hadn’t been so hungry and exhausted. And why was he hungry and exhausted? Because the polar ice caps are melting, thus shortening the polar bears’ seal-hunting season.

Having been up to the bears’ habitat in Svalbard, I do have a certain amount of sympathy with these concerns. To claim, however, that they are facing imminent doom is stretching the truth. In 1950, let us not forget, there were about 5,000 polar bears. Now there are 25,000.

No wonder Greenpeace had trouble getting polar bears placed on the endangered species list. A fivefold population increase isn’t exactly a catastrophic decline.

But never let the facts get in the way of a good story. The doom-mongers certainly won’t. Despite evidence from organisations such as the US National Biological Service that in most places polar bear populations are either stable or increasing, Ursus maritimus will continue to top the eco-hysterics’ list of animals in danger because it’s so fluffy and white and photogenic.

If you’re really that worried about their demise, I’d book yourself a ticket to Churchill, Manitoba, where the evil buggers (about the only creature, incidentally, that actively preys on humans) are so rife they’re almost vermin.

And if things get really bad, we can always ship the survivors off to Antarctica where, unlike the North Pole, the ice shelf appears to be growing. Then the joke would be even less comprehensible. Why don’t polar bears eat penguins? But they do, actually!

=============================================================================================

FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may contain copyrighted material, the use of which may not always have been specifically Authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is available without profit to those who have expressed an interest in the included information for research and educational purposes.

Constitutional amendment would aim to prevent White House political dynasty

#

#

Foolish globalism will hurt United States

Doomed Polar Bear? Another Global Warming Hoax Exposed