Flyby News
"News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era"
Death of America * DU * Objector * Nuke Forgery * Order?
April 3, 2003
1) ‘The Death of America'
2) Kucinich: Stop the War Now - before Siege on Baghdad
3) UN urged to hold a General Assembly meeting on Iraq
4) The Un-American Media- - The Hindu -- Arundhati Roy, Jemima Khan flay Bush, Blair
- - US Forces' Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons is Illegal'
5) Fighting not to fight - American conscientious objector
6) Why administration endorsed a forgery about Iraq's nuclear program?
7) "The New World Order Exposed" by Victor Thorn
Editor's Notes:The first item, "The Death of America" by W. David Jenkins III, hits home. Yet Dennis Kucinich, as shown in his statement on the US House of Representatives' floor, continues to be a voice for a rebirth of US democracy. Item 3 is the latest opportunity for the UN to become a peace-keeping organization, and how you can help influence their actions. Item 4 is on the world vs US-controlled media. This item also includes links and statements by Arundhati Roy, reported in The Guardian to have said, ``regardless of what the propaganda machine tells us, these tin-pot dictators (like the Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein) are not the greatest threat to the world. The real and pressing danger, the greatest threat of all is the locomotive force that drives the political and economic engine of the American government, currently piloted by George Bush." Another section in this item is about the illegal use of Depleted Uranium by the US and UK as a weapon of mass destruction that will harm people for years to come, including US soldiers. Item 5 is an article on the first American conscientious objector from the war on Iraq. Item 6 is a follow-up on Michael Ruppert's Perfect Storm (part 2) report, and an article in the New Yorker exploring the issues around why the Bush administration endorsed a forgery about Iraq's nuclear program. And item 7 is a link on a new book by Victor Thorn called: "The New World Order Exposed."
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"Only when the US refrains from taking the road of pursuing global empire
can it avoid terrorists' bombs or other forms of attacks."
– China's People's Daily
1) ‘The Death of America'The Death of America
By: W. David Jenkins III - 04/01/03
[Excerpt]
America died the other day. It walked right into hellfire - willingly if you believe the polls - and committed suicide on a Friday afternoon in March.
All that this once proud country stood for has been tossed aside in exchange for a cheap political move paid for with the blood of innocent civilians and the blood of our own brave daughters and
sons. Paid for with all the virtues and sacred foundations laid down by our founding fathers.
The America we once knew is now dead.
I've spent a lot of time pacing back and forth both looking at the TV and looking away from the TV. I've tried so hard for the last week to try to write down what I'm feeling. It's been so easy to beat up on Bush because he's such an easy target. But how does one articulate the death of your country and the hands of such recklessness?
The view outside my window looks somehow -different.
The other morning I watched my 4-year-old son ride his new bike up and down the sidewalk. I felt a pang of jealousy as I listened to his laughter. I envied the innocence of a child who knew nothing of the horror being broadcast on my television that very minute. I felt a deep sense of loss, for the America that he will grow up in will not be as kind as the America where I grew up.
I talked to my teenaged daughter later the same day. She was excited about a writers' forum she had joined and was letting me know what a great time she was having. We also talked about the invasion and how she felt it strange that America would do something so violent against the wishes of the rest of the world. She said that it just felt so wrong. "It makes me so angry" she said, "and I don't even understand it all."
I thought about the parents of those brave children sent to Iraq by Bush and how they must worry about the lives of their brave soldiers. I thought about the parents of the scared children of Iraq and how they must worry about their future and the lives of these innocent little ones among the fury of this invasion. And I thought about the many parents like myself, who worry about the well-being of our own children due to the recklessness of these short-sighted, sanctimonious politicians.
The America I once knew seems like a distant memory.
I am amazed at the ignorance of the supporters of this invasion of a country that posed no immediate threat to us. Has it dawned on anybody that this is an invasion waged by businessmen? Not soldiers or generals or anybody who has any military experience - as they are the ones who advised against this invasion - but men who are conducting a bloody corporate take-over against a brutal, yet still sovereign nation. And the leader of these "wanna be warriors" is a failed businessman!
Would someone explain to me just how this makes America "safe?"
As I write this, C-Span is hosting The Washington Journal, its daily morning call-in show. One of the things I keep noticing is that most of the people who call in supporting the invasion keep citing what happened on 9/11 as their base of rationale.
"I cant believe that those protesters forgot about the World Trade Center!"
"This war is to make sure we don't have another 9/11."
"9/11 proved that Saddam is a threat."
And on and on and on. There are people who have bought the "9/11 rationale" as a talking point in order to justify America becoming a rogue nation. This does a great disservice to the lives lost on that tragic day.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration has been only too happy to perpetuate this falsehood as long as it serves their purpose. They celebrate the ease at which those with a Fox News mentality are so easily manipulated - even at the expense of the memory of the innocent victims of 9/11. There is no depth of depravity that Bush Inc. is not willing to sink to as long as the means justify their ends. They are grave-spitters.
And those who use the tragedy of 9/11 as the excuse for supporting Bush and his war are grave-spitters.
They are nothing more than victims of knee-jerk patriotism who either refuse to see - or are incapable of seeing - just how complicated and reckless Bush's war policy truly is.
And what's worse is that they don't care that they don't know. As weak as Bush's reasons are to go to war with - I mean invade - Iraq, think of how much weaker they would be without his prostituting 9/11? And with a lack of understanding by the general public as to the events leading up to 9/11 and a lack of any in-depth independent investigation into the day that changed America, it's no wonder that so many people are under the misconception that Iraq had something to do with it all. With the spineless American media's refusal to "connect the dots" of 9/11, as massive as they are, it's no wonder more people don't realize that if it weren't for the obvious negligence (at best) of Bush Inc. on that horrible day in September there would most likely still be two twin towers in lower Manhattan.
The despicable use of the horror that was September 11, 2001, as a means to somehow "justify" America becoming an aggressor nation has not gone unnoticed by many of the surviving families of those victims. They are out there marching with the rest of us in protest of the memories of their loved ones being used to destroy America and all that it once meant. The proud city, so devastated by the events of that tragic day, continues to protest in great numbers against Bush Inc.'s nose-thumbing at America's once great principles. So have many other cities - globally. Yet the three great American monkeys - See No Protest - Hear No Protest - Speak No Protest - continue on in spite of world opinion.
"Who cares what the world thinks? Nuke them too!"
I actually saw this statement and others like it on a bulletin board. I've heard people say it. I'm sure you have too. It's because of this mentality that many cannot distinguish "anti-war" from "pro-Saddam." This low level of reasoning skill cannot perceive the un-repairable damage being done to this country by Bush's invasion. Their "logic" tells them to hate France or to hate the protesters. Their level of "reasoning skills" tells them that nuking our enemies, real or perceived, would actually be an okay thing to do. Patriotic even. It's because of this type of thinking, this complete lack of knowledge, that Bush has been able, so far, to get away with hurting America. Government and media induced "patri-idiotism" has replaced George Washington's America with George W. Bush's America..
America is now a rogue state.
We are no longer a country which commands respect and admiration but a country to be looked upon with suspicion and loathing. The world community which we are a part of - despite what Bush says - now looks upon us in a different way. Bush is lowering us to the same level of contempt as those he wages "war" on in the world's eyes. Yet there are those who demand that we all "get behind this president." I couldn't disagree more.
Now is the time for all - including the wet noodles posing as Democrats in Congress - who want this country back, to get in front of this president! Stop bringing up the rear and whining about the promises Bush never meant to keep in the first place. Get in front of these rogues - not behind them and their lies.
His claim of invading Iraq to keep America safe is a lie. His "proof" for going to war is a lie. His claim two years ago that he was a "uniter not a divider" is a lie. His presidency is a lie. His claim that the U.N. is "irrelevant" is a lie. His claim of future victory is a lie. His claim of doing what's best for America is a lie. The coupling of 9/11 with an illegal invasion of Iraq is a lie.
Those who believe Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle want what's best for America are living and breathing a lie.
But the America that so many died for, that so many loved and respected worldwide, that you and I had hoped our children would grow up in is now dead - due to the bloodlust of the warrior
businessmen of Bush Inc.
And that's no lie.
The complete article is posted:
http://www.liberalslant.com/wdj040103.htmW. David Jenkins III is a contributing writer for Liberal Slant. His articles have also been published at: www.AmericaHeldHostile.com , Democrats.com, Democratic Underground and Bush Watch.
E-mail David at: WDavidJenkinsIII@aol.com
David's web site:
http://wdjiii.tripod.com/wdjiii3/id1.html
2) Kucinich: Stop the War Now - before Siege on BaghdadCongressman Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH), who leads opposition to the War in Iraq within the House, issued the following statement on the House floor:
"Stop the war now. As Baghdad will be encircled, this is the time to get the UN back in to inspect Baghdad and the rest of Iraq for biological and chemical weapons. Our troops should not have to be the ones who will find out, in combat, whether Iraq has such weapons. Why put our troops at greater risk? We could get the United Nations inspectors back in.
"Stop the war now. Before we send our troops into house-to-house combat in Baghdad, a city of five million people. Before we ask our troops to take up the burden of shooting innocent civilians in the fog of war.
"Stop the war now. This war has been advanced on lie upon lie. Iraq was not responsible for 9/11. Iraq was not responsible for any role al-Qaeda may have had in 9/11. Iraq was not responsible for the anthrax attacks on this country. Iraq did not tried to acquire nuclear weapons technology from Niger. This war is built on falsehood.
"Stop the war now. We are not defending America in Iraq. Iraq did not attack this nation. Iraq has no ability to attack this nation. Each innocent civilian casualty represents a threat to America for years to come and will end up making our nation less safe. The seventy-five billion dollar supplemental needs to be challenged because each dime we spend on this war makes America less safe. Only international cooperation will help us meet the challenge of terrorism. After 9/11 all Americans remember we had the support and the sympathy of the world. Every nation was ready to be of assistance to the United States in meeting the challenge of terrorism. And yet, with this war, we have squandered the sympathy of the world. We have brought upon this nation the anger of the world. We need the cooperation of the world, to find the terrorists before they come to our shores.
"Stop this war now. Seventy-five billion dollars more for war. Three-quarters of a trillion dollars for tax cuts, but no money for veterans ' benefits. Money for war. No money for health care in America, but money for war. No money for social security, but money for war. We have money to blow up bridges over the Tigris and the Euphrates, but no money to build bridges in our own cities. We have money to ruin the health of the Iraqi children, but no money to repair the health of our own children and our educational programs.
"Stop this war now. It is wrong. It is illegal. It is unjust and it will come to no good for this country.
"Stop this war now. Show our wisdom and our humanity, to be able to stop it, to bring back the United Nations into the process. Rescue this moment. Rescue this nation from a war that is wrong, that is unjust, that is immoral.
"Stop this war now."
-- Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich
Dear Friend, I made the following speech on the floor of the house today. With your support I will continue to lead the way to peace, both in congress and in the presidential campaign. I need your active involvement in my campaign as a volunteer, a contributor or both. Please visit our website -
http://www.kucinich.us - to help empower this message. Pass this message along to your friends.
3) UN urged to hold a General Assembly meeting on IraqIraq-Regional, Politics, 3/31/2003
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/030331/2003033142.htmlThe whole world was vociferous in opposition to war, but no action was taken to stop it, despite attempts by some nations to obtain a resolution from the UN General Assembly on the illegality of the US-led attack against Iraq.
Meanwhile, the US is doing its utmost to block a General Assembly meeting.
What would the issuance of a UN resolution against the war mean? What might be the consequences of such a move by the UN?
The Arabic weekly magazine October tried to find answers to these questions by putting them to several experts in international law.
Professor of international law at Cairo University, Dr Ayesha Rateb thinks that a majority in the UN General Assembly could press for a meeting since the Security Council failed to settle the Iraq issue.
A resolution could be issued by the majority without fear of a member or members using the veto, Dr Rateb said, adding that during the Tripartite Aggression (Suez Crisis) in 1956, Yugoslavia asked that the issue be referred to the UN General Assembly according to the 1950 Resolution on Unity for Peace and Security, giving the assembly responsibilities of the UN Security Council.
Accordingly, the General Assembly assumed the responsibility of the then UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold to create a peace-keeping force for the first time to bring an end to the war.
Dr Rateb said that if the Arab countries or any other side succeeds in calling a meeting of the UN General Assembly and act according to the 1950 resolution, there would be the distinct possibility that the American-British aggression in Iraq could be halted.
"In the case of 1956, the UN formed a peace-keeping force and forced the withdrawal of the aggressors," the professor said.
"The recommendation was supported by the US and Russia, despite the fact that two of the aggressor states were permanent members of the UN Security Council and could use the veto.
The recommendation was therefore made by the General Assembly," Dr. Rateb added.
Dr Rateb affirmed that a state like France or Russia with nine other members of the Security Council could vote for handing the issue over to the UN General Assembly to obtain a cease-fire resolution and the withdrawal of forces, thus making a valuable step towards ending the crisis.
In Dr Rateb's opinion, the difference between the UN of 1956 and today lies in the absence of a personality like Hammarskjold, who took the side of Third World Countries, while the present Secretary-General Kofi Annan made the mistake of agreeing to recall international weapons inspectors from Iraq, a few days before the war started.
UN resolutions would have moral value only, unless the UN Secretary-General orders the dispatch of peace-keeping forces, Dr Rateb said.
"However, any resolution would come as condemnation of the US-British assault and reveal the truth of claims by Bush and Blair about 45 nations belonging to the international coalition.
Dean of the Faculty of Law at Zagazig University, Nabil Ahmed Helmi said that the US has violated international law by attacking Iraq.
"Firstly, the US is using military force against a sovereign state, thereby threatening global peace and security.
"Secondly, the American-British attack with the aim of toppling a regime is a violation of one of the basic principles of international law, which prohibits one state from interfering in the internal affairs of another," Helmi said.
"Therefore, Iraq is entitled to seek recourse to the UN Security Council for its intervention and issuing a resolution to keep international peace and security.
"Since such a resolution could be vetoed by the US, the UN General Assembly could take on the responsibility of the Security Council and produce a resolution to suspend military operations and compensate Iraq for damage so far," Helmi said.
"Iraq could also use the International Criminal Court agreement and enjoy protection of the international community. In which case, it could sue the US and Britain, whose leaders would be put on trial, which is one of their biggest fears," he explained.
Professor of International Law at Cairo University, Dr Salah Amer believes that the Security Council or the UN General Assembly would meet soon in response to calls from the Arab League to debate the Iraqi crisis.
"Since the Security Council failed to make a resolution against military action against Iraq, nine members of the council could refer the issue to the General Assembly for resolutions, demanding an immediate cease-fire and withdrawal of foreign forces," Dr Amer said.
Could this crisis have emerged from negligence of international law? Or has the UN been made
all the weaker for not having resolved the crisis.
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/030331/2003033142.htmlCONTACT DETAILS :
UNITED NATIONS SECRETARY GENERAL
------------ Kofi Annan ------------
Secretary-General United Nations,
New York, NY 10017
Tel: (212) 963-4475, Fax: 212-963-7055
E-mail: inquiries@un.org
CONTACT GENERAL ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT
------------ Jan Kavan ------------
Office of the President of the General Assembly
United Nations, New York, NY 10017
Tel: (212) 963 2209, Fax: (212) 963 3133
web: www.un.org/ga/president
e-mail: presidentga57@un.org
---------------
For email addresses for U.N. MISSIONS and other information on
Uniting for Peace to Resolve the Iraq Crisis, see:
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1045091648,41257,
4) The Un-American Media- - The Hindu -- Arundhati Roy, Jemima Khan flay Bush, Blair
- - US Forces' Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons is Illegal'
The Un-American Media
By Ana Marie Cox | 3.28.03
IN THESE TIMES
There was a time you could safely assume that anyone calling skeptical coverage of the war in Iraq "un-American" was probably also speed-dialing Rush Limbaugh. Now it seems that calling skeptical coverage of the war "un- American" is probably correct, if only in the most literal sense. With the American press largely distracted or enraptured with the spectacle of combat, the duty of examining the motives behind the war has fallen to the world's other media outlets.
The audience for these un-American stories is becoming more and more American. In the past month, foreign news Web sites have seen large volumes of traffic from computers in the United States. Wired reported that almost half of the visitors to the Guardian Web site were Americans. Americans have also been flocking to Arab news sources, particularly the Qatar-based news channel Al-Jazeera. The channel reaches 150,000 households in the United States via satellite, but a newly launched English-language Web site reaches anyone with a modem. During the first week of the war, "Al Jazeera" rounded out the top three terms searched for on Google.com (along with "CNN" and "Iraq.").
This trend has been building steadily since the New Year, but the war has brought it to new heights. A media metric called "Blogdex," developed by MIT's Media Lab ranks Web sites by the number of independent-and mostly American-web diarists, or "bloggers," linking to them. (Full disclosure: I am now a recreational blogger myself, at
http://theanticmuse.blogspot.com.) It's a fairly reliable indication of what people on the Internet are reading. Since the war began, almost every other site has been a foreign news source.
What kind of stories have the bloggers pointed to?
For the complete article, see:
http://inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=136_0_3_0_C= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
- The Hindu - Arundhati Roy, Jemima Khan flay Bush, BlairLondon April 2. Booker Prize winning writer Arundhati Roy and Jemima Khan, wife of the former cricketer-turned politician, Imran Khan, have condemned the U.S.-led war on Iraq and said no one in the Muslim world now believed that this was really all about making the world a safer place.
Writing in two separate British dailies today, the two women said the economic ``outposts'' of the American empire had now been ``exposed'' and the "world's sense of injustice was growing.''
In an article titled `A strange kind of freedom' in The Guardian, Ms. Roy said, ``regardless of what the propaganda machine tells us, these tin-pot dictators (like the Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein) are not the greatest threat to the world. The real and pressing danger, the greatest threat of all is the locomotive force that drives the political and economic engine of the American government, currently piloted by George Bush."
– PTI
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2003/04/03/stories/2003040306871100.htm= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
- US Forces' Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons is Illegal'US Forces' Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons is Illegal'
By Neil Mackay
March 30, 2003; The Sunday Herald (Scotland)
BRITISH and American coalition forces are using depleted uranium (DU) shells in the war against Iraq and deliberately flouting a United Nations resolution which classifies the munitions as illegal weapons of mass destruction.
http://www.sundayherald.com/32522Background on Depleted Uranium Ammunition For much more check out:
Discounted Casualties - The Human Cost of Depleted Uranium
provided by the Hiroshima, Japan newspaper - The Chugoku Shimbun.
http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.htmlFor more on this issue, visit Flyby News updated page on the ‘harm by exposure to exploded depleted uranium shells,' see:
http://www.flybynews.com/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid991363232,2156,
5) Fighting not to fight - American conscientious objectorMarine who said no to killing on his conscience
Fighting not to fight
Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles
Tuesday April 1, 2003
The Guardian
The first American conscientious objector from the Iraq war will give himself up at a marine base in California this morning. He said he believed the war was "immoral because of the deception involved by our leaders". Stephen Eagle Funk, 20, a marine reserve who was due to be sent for combat duty, is currently on "unauthorised absence" from his unit. He faces a possible court martial and time in military prison for his action.
For the complete article, see:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,926965,00.html
6) Why administration endorsed a forgery about Iraq's nuclear program?Michael Ruppert wrote:
"Just 1 day after FTW published Part II of The Perfect Storm, veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh - fresh on the heels of his coup in forcing the resignation of Richard Perle from the Defense Policy Board - confirms that powerful forces and mysterious events are auguring the fall of the Bush regime.."
"Who Lied to Whom?" by Seymour M. Hersh
Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq's nuclear program?
Last September 24th, as Congress prepared to vote on the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq, a group of senior intelligence officials, including George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Iraq's weapons capability. It was an important presentation for the Bush Administration. Some Democrats were publicly questioning the President's claim that Iraq still possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed an immediate threat to the United States. Just the day before, former Vice-President Al Gore had sharply criticized the Administration's advocacy of preemptive war, calling it a doctrine that would replace "a world in which states consider themselves subject to law" with "the notion that there is no law but the discretion of the President of the United States." A few Democrats were also considering putting an alternative resolution before Congress..
For the complete article in the New Yorker, see:
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
7) "The New World Order Exposed" by Victor ThornFrom Babel Magazine -
http://www.babelmagazine.comBabel Magazine reported that Victor Thorn's newest book, "The New World Order Exposed," is now in stock and already causing waves. Two days after its official publication, an email inquiry from Rowena, England stated: "I reside in the UK and am interested in "The New World Order Exposed" by Victor Thorn, which looks excellent and should be read by as wide an audience as possible. However, my London bookseller tells me he can't get it as ‘none of his suppliers will touch it.' Does this surprise you? I was somewhat taken aback that censorship has become this obvious."
Surprised? Not really. "The New World Order Exposed" could be one of the most explosive, comprehensive, and affordable books ever written on the subject of Orwellian one-world government. At 570 pages and priced at only $12.98, this expose brings to light what mainstream media and publications won't tell you. That's what makes the independent press so vital. Do we want to live in reality with our eyes wide open, or in a conditioned state of illusion created by government and media spin-doctors deliberately trying to keep us in the dark?
The answer is obvious, especially considering the times we currently live in. The world is undergoing dramatic changes, and with a slew of propaganda, brainwashing, and outright deceit being hurled our way, it's extremely important to get information from alternative news sources.
Check out: THE NEW WORLD ORDER EXPOSED by Victor Thorn
http://www.babelmagazine.com/NWO%20EXPOSED.html You can also order it via the U.S. postal service
($12.98 + $2.98 shipping = $15.98):
Sisyphus Press
P.O. Box 10495
State College, Pa.16805-0495
The views expressed herein are the writers' own and not necessarily those of Flyby News.
A "Fair Use Policy" that describes Flyby News' use of copyrighted material is posted at flybynews.com.
Flyby News is educational and nonviolent in focus, and has supported critical campaigns
for a healthy environment, human rights, justice, peace, and nonviolence,
since the launching of NASA's Cassini space probe in 1997.=====Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era====> = = = = = = www.FlybyNews.com = = = = =