Flyby News Home - Flyby News Archives - Casinni NoFlyby - Flyby Links

Flyby  News

"News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era"

WTC Bush War * 9/11 Initiative * Peace

26 March 2008

"It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy
that our country is now geared to an arms economy
which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis
of war hysteria and nurtured upon
an incessant propaganda of fear."

-- General Douglas MacArthur

May 15, 1951

1) Escalation in US Energy Coalition War
- - Bush's Plan To Steal Iraq's Oil
- - Mahdi Army arrested 17 American soldiers
- - Late Breaking News from Citizens for a Legitimate Government
- - El Salvador in Iraq?
- - Bear Stearns Bailout Proves US Fed is Merely an Extension of the Financial Industry
- - Pentagon will not send Adm. Fallon to Congress on Iraq
- - Progress Report & Take Action- Tumult In Tibet
- - The Coming War on Venezuela
2) Inside Shell Game, Bush War, Popular Mechanics..
- - Inside the Shell Game by Paul Craig Roberts
- - Bush's War: PBS/FRONTLINE
- - Engineer Society Accused of Cover-Ups
- - David Ray Griffin's review of Philip Shenon's book
- - Debunking Popular Mechanics?
- - 9/11 Steelworker Speaks Out About His Ground Zero Recovery Experiences
- - Postscript to “Spitzer taken down by Mossad?”
- - Ron Paul on Coast To Coast AM - Supports A New 9/11 Investigation
- - On a thread – Devouring our Own
- - New England 9/11 Symposium – May 17 Keene, NH
3) Exposed Bribes to Scientists, Global Warming, Aerial Spraying
- - Bribes offered to scientists
- - Bush Administration to Blue-State California: Drop Dead!
- - Alex Jones Hurts Truth By Ignoring Human-Made Excess in Air

Editor’s Notes:

It appears that in Iraq the plan has always been for civil war. The US-coalition tax-generated war helped to even the sides for a coalition to support its interests with an oil-rich nation. Should war escalate, it could pull in Iran. All hell could be let loose. The removal or resignation of Admiral Fallon could be disastrous regarding world security and the US Constitution. These are desperate times for those wanting to maintain control of the world’s precious resources.

Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political
and moral questions of our time; the need for mankind
to overcome oppression and violence without resorting
to oppression and violence. Mankind must evolve for all
human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression,
and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.

-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

So, what is crux for us to focus on with love to solve this mess we’re in? For strategic effectiveness I believe it could be in supporting the people’s power to investigate September 11. The peace and impeachment movements think 9/11 truthers are frozen in time; it is actually in reverse. But, in any case, it is now time to unite for investigations. On this coming national election day, November 4th, we can help initiate an independent 9/11 investigation.

Anyone questioning how significant 9/11 was in attacking Iraq and Afghanistan, should watch Frontline’s “Bush’s War.” Collapsing towers were front and center; a linchpin enabling Neocons to fulfill their desires for war in the Middle East. Without a thorough investigation into what really happened on 9/11, we increase the likelihood of another falsehood leading into an attack on Iran. It could happen before an election; we can have martial law, protecting the scoundrels, yet putting the rest of us in jeopardy.

Your help is vital in supporting NYC residents to investigate September 11. One suggestion is to help Steve Altman break 9/11 truth into mainstream awareness everywhere. Consider, especially April 16 thru 22nd, buy one or more copies of The Shell Game to read, to send to residents of NYC, and/or donate to the NYC Ballot Initiative. You can also support the NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative by writing a check made payable to - St. Marks Church/The 9/11 Account - and mail to: NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative, 1173A Second Avenue, Suite 155, New York, NY 10065.

In item 2 make sure you read the article by Paul Craig Roberts “Inside the Shell Game.” Like the natural coalition of the 9/11 Truth and peace movements, this book is at first difficult to deal with, since it is based on 9/11 evidence. However, it extrapolates itself into an adventure thriller and cautionary tale. Let's keep fiction as fiction, to help stop the war in Iran before it happens. The Reflecting Pool, Able Danger, the movie, Loose Change are special gifts by talented compassionate people, helpful tools for truth to set us free before we are externally enslaved or killed.

For Independent Investigations

1) Escalation Developments in the US Coalition Energy War

- - Bush's Plan To Steal Iraq's Oil
- - Mahdi Army arrested 17 American soldiers
- - Late Breaking News from Citizens for a Legitimate Government
- - El Salvador in Iraq?
- - Bear Stearns Bailout Proves US Fed is Merely an Extension of the Financial Industry
- - Pentagon will not send Adm. Fallon to Congress on Iraq
- - Progress Report & Take Action- Tumult In Tibet
- - The Coming War on Venezuela

- - Bush's Plan To Steal Iraq's Oil

"Then I made a fatal mistake," ambassador to Saudi Arabia Akins continues. "I said on television that anyone who would propose that is either a madman, a criminal, or an agent of the Soviet Union." Soon afterward, he says, he learned that the background briefing had been conducted by his boss, then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Akins was fired later that year.

Anne Joyce, an editor at the Washington-based Middle East Policy Council who has spoken privately to top Exxon officials, says it's clear that most oil-industry executives "are afraid" of what a war in the Persian Gulf could mean in the long term -- especially if tensions in the region spiral out of control. "They see it as much too risky, and they are risk averse," she says. "They think it has 'fiasco' written all over it."

Courtesty of 9/11 Nutshell

The Thirty-Year Itch
By Robert Dreyfuss, Mother Jones, 29 March 2003

Three decades ago, in the throes of the energy crisis, Washington's hawks conceived of a strategy for US control of the Persian Gulf's oil. Now, with the same strategists firmly in control of the White House, the Bush administration is playing out their script for global dominance.

If you were to spin the globe and look for real estate critical to building an American empire, your first stop would have to be the Persian Gulf. The desert sands of this region hold two of every three barrels of oil in the world -- Iraq's reserves alone are equal, by some estimates, to those of Russia, the United States, China, and Mexico combined. For the past 30 years, the Gulf has been in the crosshairs of an influential group of Washington foreign-policy strategists, who believe that in order to ensure its global dominance, the United States must seize control of the region and its oil. Born during the energy crisis of the 1970s and refined since then by a generation of policymakers, this approach is finding its boldest expression yet in the Bush administration -- which, with its plan to invade Iraq and install a regime beholden to Washington, has moved closer than any of its predecessors to transforming the Gulf into an American protectorate.

In the geopolitical vision driving current U.S. policy toward Iraq, the key to national security is global hegemony -- dominance over any and all potential rivals. To that end, the United States must not only be able to project its military forces anywhere, at any time. It must also control key resources, chief among them oil -- and especially Gulf oil. To the hawks who now set the tone at the White House and the Pentagon, the region is crucial not simply for its share of the U.S. oil supply (other sources have become more important over the years), but because it would allow the United States to maintain a lock on the world's energy lifeline and potentially deny access to its global competitors. The administration "believes you have to control resources in order to have access to them," says Chas Freeman, who served as U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia under the first President Bush. "They are taken with the idea that the end of the Cold War left the United States able to impose its will globally -- and that those who have the ability to shape events with power have the duty to do so. It's ideology."

Iraq, in this view, is a strategic prize of unparalleled importance. Unlike the oil beneath Alaska's frozen tundra, locked away in the steppes of central Asia, or buried under stormy seas, Iraq's crude is readily accessible and, at less than $1.50 a barrel, some of the cheapest in the world to produce. Already, over the past several months, Western companies have been meeting with Iraqi exiles to try to stake a claim to that bonanza.

But while the companies hope to cash in on an American-controlled Iraq, the push to remove Saddam Hussein hasn't been driven by oil executives, many of whom are worried about the consequences of war. Nor are Vice President Cheney and President Bush, both former oilmen, looking at the Gulf simply for the profits that can be earned there. The administration is thinking bigger, much bigger, than that.

"Controlling Iraq is about oil as power, rather than oil as fuel," says Michael Klare, professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and author of Resource Wars. "Control over the Persian Gulf translates into control over Europe, Japan, and China. It's having our hand on the spigot."

Ever since the oil shocks of the 1970s, the United States has steadily been accumulating military muscle in the Gulf by building bases, selling weaponry, and forging military partnerships. Now, it is poised to consolidate its might in a place that will be a fulcrum of the world's balance of power for decades to come. At a stroke, by taking control of Iraq, the Bush administration can solidify a long-running strategic design. "It's the Kissinger plan," says James Akins, a former U.S. diplomat. "I thought it had been killed, but it's back."

Akins learned a hard lesson about the politics of oil when he served as a U.S. envoy in Kuwait and Iraq, and ultimately as ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the oil crisis of 1973 and '74. At his home in Washington, D.C., shelves filled with Middle Eastern pottery and other memorabilia cover the walls, souvenirs of his years in the Foreign Service. Nearly three decades later, he still gets worked up while recalling his first encounter with the idea that the United States should be prepared to occupy Arab oil-producing countries.

In 1975, while Akins was ambassador in Saudi Arabia, an article headlined "Seizing Arab Oil" appeared in Harper's. The author, who used the pseudonym Miles Ignotus, was identified as "a Washington-based professor and defense consultant with intimate links to high-level U.S. policymakers." The article outlined, as Akins puts it, "how we could solve all our economic and political problems by taking over the Arab oil fields [and] bringing in Texans and Oklahomans to operate them." Simultaneously, a rash of similar stories appeared in other magazines and newspapers. "I knew that it had to have been the result of a deep background briefing," Akins says. "You don't have eight people coming up with the same screwy idea at the same time, independently.

Truncated, for the complete article, see:

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

- - Mahdi Army arrested 17 American soldiers
By Roads To Iraq

25/03/08 "RTI" -- - Reported, Abu Al-Khasib another city close to Basra, now under Mahdi Army control, Iraqi government calls special forces from Karbala led by Maliki’s “brothers in law” to move to Basra.

Just reported from Alwasatonline reporter in Basra, Mahdi Army managed to arrest 17 American soldiers, and seizes 7 hammer military vehicles, because of these developments the Iraqi government offered to negotiates with MA but Muqtada Al-Sadr refused any negotiations, also 250 Iraqi soldiers gave themselves up to Mahdi Army.

Key bridge, connecting Basra city to Al-Kurnah is destroyed by Mahdi Army.

Sotaliraq reported that Maliki refused to meet Basra’s mayor “Mohammad Al-Walili [from Al-Fadhilah Party], the mayor threaten if he removed from his position as mayor he will burn all the oil wells around Basra.

There is also reports about American warplanes involvement in the fights, and the Green Zone was bombed again at 8 O’clock p.

There are fighting in Al-Shurta neighborhood in Baghdad in the Karkh part [East, across the river]

Update On The Fighting In Basra

By Roads To Iraq

25/03/08 "RTI" -- - The situation right now is nothing to do with “Iraqi government” or “Iraqi Army”, it is a Shiite-Shiite war, Mahdi Army with primitive arms and “Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution” [formed by Iran] with an army and supported by the Americans.

Remember the so called Iraqi government can not start this campaign without taking accord from Iran and the U.S., I told about the there is some kind of agreement between [The U.S. and Iran] few posts before.

Just few hours ago the Sadrists issued a new statement, signed by Al-Sadr himself and it says an initiative for peace contains six points:

- To distribute Quran and olive branches on police and army check points, and ask the security forces to not involve in this fighting trick used by the occupation.

- All the political, social and religious figures to take their responsibilities to stop these attacks

- Tribal chiefs to not to be involved in the fighting and to remember that they are the grandsons of 1920 revolution

- Iraqi parliament to stand beside the Iraqi people who chose them

- Political Parties to be beside the Iraqi public and not beside the occupation

- Call for all Iraqis to demonstrate, the next step is public disobedience, as for the third step then it will be announced in later time.

As for the last point [the public disobedience], the government announced that disobedience will be charged with terrorism law, the Sadrists representatives in the parliament announced they will start the procedures to withdraw their confidence in Maliki if this law put in practice.

The fights
Mahdi Army start to attack Badr and SCIR offices in Baghdad [the media reported that the attacks are in Sadr city only but according to my mother the attacks are everywhere at least in Risafah part of Baghdad].

Mahdi Army managed to control few neighborhoods in Kut city, Al-Mahmoudiya, Al-Yousfiyah.

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

- - Late Breaking News from Citizens for a Legitimate Government

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

- - El Salvador in Iraq?

Published by the Valley Advocate
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Imperium Watch: El Salvador in Iraq?
The U.S. may be creating its own excuse for not cutting its losses in the war.
By Stephanie Kraft

Who's really egging on the so-called insurgency that bolsters the argument that our troops must stay in Iraq?

Could it be the U.S.?

Unthinkable as it seems, there's evidence that it is. Here's one example. Two Britons disguised as Arabs were arrested in Basra in September of 2005 when Iraqi police caught them driving around with a car full of explosives and bombmaking equipment. The two turned out to be members of the British Special Reconnaissance Regiment, and British tanks stormed the prison where they were held to free them. Their mission was never made clear, but their behavior and the force used to spring them suggest that some bombings in Iraq have actually been carried out or assisted by coalition agents provocateurs.

Expatriate Iraqis and credible media have claimed that, even before the Saddam Hussein era, Iraq hasn't had a long history of deadly feuding between Sunnis and Shiites. It's a matter of record that when resistance developed to the American occupation, the Bush administration pursued what's called the Salvador Option in Iraq­supporting death squads in order to foment clandestine civil war, as Reagan did in Central America. Last year filmmaker Rick Rowley was embedded with the U.S. Army in Anbar province and, partly by interviewing Shiites in a refugee camp and partly by observing and interviewing our troops, gathered evidence that American forces were aiding (including paying off) both Sunni and Shiite militias and death squads. The result: while fewer American troops were being killed, which produced a PR victory for the White House, both factions were attacking each other.

Many Americans believe the U.S. must stay in Iraq to protect Iraqis from a deadly insurgency. But what if we're spurring on the insurgency? Would our government deliberately fuel a conflict that kills Iraqis and Americans and costs the country $12 billion a month? Considering that the war keeps those billions in play for individual and corporate opportunists, and that some neocons are crying for widespread destabilization in the Middle East, the answer is quite possibly yes.

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

- - Bear Stearns Bailout Proves US Fed is Merely an Extension of the Financial Industry


The Plunge Protection Team is a panel that includes Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox, and acting Commodity Futures Trading Commission head Walter Lukken. According to John Crudele of the New York Post , the Plunge Protection Team's (PPT) objective is to redirect the stock market by “buying market averages in the futures market, thus stabilizing the market as a whole.” In the event of a terrorist attack or a natural disaster, the group's activities could play an extremely positive role in saving the market from an unnecessary meltdown. However, direct intervention into supposedly “free markets” is less defensible when it is merely a matter of saving an over-leveraged banking system from its inevitable Day of Reckoning. And, yet, that appears to be the reason for the White House confab.

The psychology behind the PPT's activities are explained in greater detail by Robert McHugh Ph.D. who provides a description of how it works in his essay “The Plunge Protection Team Indicator”:

“The PPT decides markets need intervention, a decline needs to be stopped, or the risks associated with political events that could be perceived by markets as highly negative and cause a decline, need to be prevented by a rally already in flight.

For the complete article, see:

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

- - Pentagon will not send Adm. Fallon to Congress on Iraq
Reuters North American News Service

Mar 21, 2008 12:06 EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Adm. William Fallon, who is resigning after a magazine reported he was challenging the White House over Iran, will not appear before Congress to discuss the war in Iraq, the Pentagon said Friday.

Only Gen. David Petraeus, top U.S. officer in Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker will go to Capitol Hill in April to update lawmakers on the war, said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell.

"I know there have been requests in fact from members of Congress to have Admiral Fallon testify with Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker and I can tell you Admiral Fallon will not be testifying," Morrell said.

Fallon, commander of U.S. Central Command headquarters responsible for the Middle East, said earlier this month that he would quit after Esquire magazine described him as urging President Bush to avoid war with Iran.

Fallon cooperated with the author during the article's preparation but strongly criticized the story after it appeared.

He will hand responsibility to his deputy by the end of March but will remain an active-duty four-star officer.

Petraeus and Crocker are expected to testify to Congress in early April, offering lawmakers their first update on the war since the two went to Capitol Hill in September.

"The process that we used last time worked quite well and we're going to stick with that again this time," Morrell said.

Morrell pinned the decision against Fallon's testimony to his resignation, saying Fallon would no longer be acting Central Command commander.

Asked if the Pentagon was concerned that lawmakers would use Fallon's appearance to ask questions about Iran, Morrell said, no. (Reporting by Kristin Roberts, Editing by Jackie Frank)

Source: Reuters North American News Service

Following is from an email letter from Kevin Zeese,
Executive Director; VotersForPeace

The Pentagon has decided not to allow the outgoing Commander of the U.S. Central Command, who was responsible for the overall military strategy and actions in the Middle East, to testify before Congress. See article below for details.

This is a time of critical foreign policy decision making and the American public needs to have testimony under oath from Admiral Fallon. News reports indicate Admiral Fallon left due to disputes with the White House over whether a military attack on Iran should be pursued.

The U.S. should not move toward a military attack on Iran without public discourse on the subject. These should include congressional hearings where people like Admiral Fallon testify under oath about whether opening a third front of combat makes sense at a time when things are going so poorly in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

We request you do the following (doing all three will take less than one minute!):
Forward this email to people you know.

Contact the Pentagon; tell them that they should let Admiral Fallon testify. The American public needs to hear the views of the most senior military official for the Middle East.

Contact Congress and tell them to subpoena the testimony of Admiral Fallon. They have the power to require Admiral Fallon to testify. This is a critical juncture for U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. is already fighting a two-front war - and failing on both fronts - and should not be adding a third front in Iran.

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

- - Progress Report & Take Action- Tumult In Tibet

The Progress Report - Tumult In Tibet

Take action –
Fom True Majority via email received 3/26

Earlier today, a dozen monks from one of the most important monasteries in Tibet defied a huge police presence to try and stage a street demonstration.1 Tibetan rights groups say nearly 140 Tibetans have been killed in the ongoing protests.2 Violence is escalating, but the Dalai Lama has offered to meet directly with Chinese leaders to resolve the current crisis.

In the past 48 hours tens of thousands of TrueMajority members have already signed this petition calling on the Chinese government to stop the violence. Join them today and we'll deliver this petition directly to the Chinese embassy.

Click Here to Add Your Name to our Stand with Tibet Petition

For more resources:

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

- - The Coming War on Venezuela
By George Ciccariello-Maher

The revelations gleaned from the FARC's magic laptop, which allegedly implicate Chávez himself in funding the FARC (a charge which Colombia, not coincidentally, eventually decided not to pursue), are also drawn straight from the playbook of Plan Balboa, which was premised upon the threat posed by an alliance between the radical sectors of the "Brown" and "White" countries.

Truncated, for the complete article, see:

2) Inside Shell Game, Bush War, Popular Mechanics..

- - Inside the Shell Game by Paul Craig Roberts
- - Bush's War: PBS/FRONTLINE
- - Engineer Society Accused of Cover-Ups
- - David Ray Griffin's review of Philip Shenon's book
- - Debunking Popular Mechanics?
- - 9/11 Steelworker Speaks Out About His Ground Zero Recovery Experiences
- - Postscript to “Spitzer taken down by Mossad?”
- - Ron Paul on Coast To Coast AM - Supports A New 9/11 Investigation
- - On a thread – Devouring our Own
- - New England 9/11 Symposium – May 17 Keene, NH

- - Inside the Shell Game by Paul Craig Roberts

Secret Schemes and Undeclared Agendas
Inside the Shell Game

The investigative journalist Edward Jay Epstein has taken up the Litvinenko case.

The media used the Litvinenko case as sensational propaganda against Russian President Putin and then tossed it aside. For those whose memories of the case have faded, Alexander Litvinenko was a former KGB officer living in England who died in 2006, apparently from the radioactive isotope Polonium-210.

The British government encouraged the tale that Russian President Putin had sent Andrei Lugovoi to poison Litvinenko's tea at a meeting on November 1, 2006. The story appealed to people brought up on James Bond thrillers, but the story never made any sense. Polonium 2-10 is a rare and tightly controlled substance as likely to contaminate the assassin as the victim. There are far easier and more effective ways of killing someone.

Moreover, there is no evidence to connect Russia to Litvinenko's death. But this didn't stop the British government from grandstanding, sending an extradition request for Lugovoi in July 2007. The British government sent the request despite the facts that there is no extradition treaty between Britain and Russia and the Russian constitution prohibits the extradition of Russian citizens. Epstein suggests that the purpose of the extradition request was to block the Russian government from investigating Litvinenko's death in London. Litvinenko had a false passport provided by the British government. A real investigtion might have opened up the shadowy world of security consultants in which Litvinenko rubbed shoulders with former British police and intelligence officials.

The Russians asked to see the evidence. The case file delivered by the British contained nothing of substance. Not even the autopsy report was provided to the Russians. Epstein managed to convince the Russians to let him see the file and to question them about the case. In brief, if the British have a case, they are withholding the evidence.

The charge that Putin was behind Litvinenko's death seems to have originated with Boris Berezovsky, one of the Russian Jewish oligarchs who had grabbed the lion's share of privatized Soviet assets during Yeltsin's presidency. Epstein reports that Berezovsky's protector in Russia was Litvinenko, the deputy head of the organized crime unit of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), the successor to the KGB. When Berezovsky fled Russia to escape fraud charges, Litvinenko followed. Epstein reports that Berezovsky has declared an agenda of "overtrowing the regime of his archenemy, Mr. Putin." According to Epstein, "Alex Goldfarb, the executive director of Mr. Berezovsky's foundation, prepared for Litvinenko's end by writing out his 'deathbed' statement, which, according to Mr. Goldfarb, was drawn from statements Litvinenko had dictated to him."

Epstein writes: "A few hours after Litvinenko died on November 23, 2006, Mr. Goldfarb arranged a press conference and released the sensational deathbed statement accusing Mr. Putin of the poisoning." Web sites supported by Berezovsky spread the story that Litvinenko was murdered by the FSB.

The effort to link Putin and the FSB to Litvinenko's death might be a tale designed to cover-up a more serious crime in the making. Polonium-210 is an indication that someone is trying to build a nuclear weapon. Epstein finds reasons to suspect that Litvinenko had, and perhaps Berezovsky has, connections to a Polonium smuggling scheme, and Litvinenko's death resulted from accidental or careless exposure to Polonium-210.

Who would be trying to build a secret nuclear weapon or perhaps only a "dirty bomb" that would serve to spread some radiation and massive amounts of fear and hysteria? The public has been carefully prepared to suspect Iran. If such a device were exploded somewhere in the United States, Bush, Cheney, and the neocon nazis would have their second new Pearl Harbor to justify their planned attack on Iran.

We know that the Bush regime wants to attack Iran. Despite the NIE report that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program several years ago and despite no signs of a weapons program having been uncovered by IAEA inspectors, Bush, Cheney, and the neocon nazis continue to agitate for striking Iran "before it is too late." Their politicized military commander in Iraq, Gen. Petraeus, keeps insisting that Iran is training Iraqi insurgents and supplying weapons that are killing US troops. Bush and Cheney themselves have made trips to Europe and the Middle East trying to marshall support for an attack on Iran. Anyone who is not deaf, blind and stupid knows that the Bush regime is doing everything it can to create circumstances that will permit a US attack on Iran.

We know for a fact that the Bush regime created false evidence, lied, and deceived in order to attack Iraq. All the reasons given for the US invasion have proven to be false. The real agenda has never been declared. Yet, five years later the traitors in high office who deceived Americans into a war in behalf of a hidden agenda have not been held accountable. As Agatha Christie said, getting away with one murder makes it easy to commit another.

There is so much that Americans do not know about secret schemes serving undeclared agendas. Those who have attempted to clue in fellow citizens are invariably frustrated, because Americans have been trained to dismiss the messenger who brings news of "false flag" events as a "conspiracy theorist."

Best-selling author Steve Alten in his recently published book, The Shell Game, attempts to reach Americans with a thriller that mixes fiction with fact. Alten describes a conspiracy, beginning in 2007 and ending in 2012, by a Black Op group in a Republican administration to set off nuclear weapons in two American cities, with planted evidence pointing to Iran. It is a historical thriller predictive of our immediate future by an author who has no illusions about the US Government or the interest groups that control it.

Alten's book is a first class thriller set in the real world of today. It is a perfect read for Americans who need their dose of reality to be watered down with fiction and delivered as entertainment.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He can be reached at:

Posted at

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

- - Bush's War: PBS/FRONTLINE

From the horror of 9/11 to the invasion of Iraq; the truth about WMD to the rise of an insurgency; the scandal of Abu Ghraib to the strategy of the surge -- for seven years, FRONTLINE has revealed the defining stories of the war on terror in meticulous detail, and the political dramas that played out at the highest levels of power and influence.

For the disinfo propaganda piece, see:

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

- - Engineer Society Accused of Cover-Ups
March 25, 2008

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The professional organization for engineers who build the nation's roads, dams and bridges has been accused by fellow engineers of covering up catastrophic design flaws while investigating national disasters.

After the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and the levee failures caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the federal government paid the American Society of Civil Engineers to investigate what went wrong.

Critics now accuse the group of covering up engineering mistakes, downplaying the need to alter building standards, and using the investigations to protect engineers and government agencies from lawsuits.

...In the World Trade Center case, critics contend the engineering society wrongly concluded skyscrapers cannot withstand getting hit by airplanes. In the hurricane investigation, it was accused of suggesting that the power of the storm was as big a problem as the poorly designed levees.

...Seed accused the engineering society and the Army Corps of collusion, writing an Oct. 20 letter alleging that the two organizations worked together "to promulgate misleading studies and statements, to subvert appropriate independent investigations ... to literally attempt to change some of the critical apparent answers regarding lessons to be learned."


Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, a structural engineer and forensics expert, contends his computer simulations disprove the society's findings that skyscrapers could not be designed to withstand the impact of a jetliner.

Astaneh-Asl, who received money from the National Science Foundation to investigate the collapse, insisted most New York skyscrapers built with traditional designs would survive such an impact and prevent the kind of fires that brought down the twin towers.

He also questioned the makeup of the society's investigation team. On the team were the wife of the trade center's structural engineer and a representative of the buildings' original design team.

"I call this moral corruption," said Astaneh-Asl, who is on the faculty at the University of California, Berkeley.
also posted

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

- - David Ray Griffin's review of Philip Shenon's book

Half Great, Half Terrible
David Ray Griffin's review of Philip Shenon's book,
"Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission"
Posted at

David Ray Griffin
March 19, 2008

"The Commission" by Philip Shenon has performed a great public service, letting the world know that there are good reasons to be suspicious of "The 9/11 Commission Report." The main problem is the fact that the Commission was almost entirely under the control of Philip Zelikow, who was closely connected to the Bush White House. Although my book "Christian Faith and the Truth behind 9/11" revealed some of the facts about Zelikow that showed him to be one of the worst possible choices for the Commission's executive director, Shenon has revealed even more facts.

It was already known that Zelikow had been on the National Security Council (NSC) with Condoleezza Rice during the administration of the first President Bush; that he wrote a book with her while the Republicans were out of power; that he helped her make the transition from the Clinton to the Bush NSC; and that he wrote at her request the 2002 version of "National Security Strategy of the United States of America" (NSS 2002), which enunciated a new doctrine of preemptive war that was used, in Shenon's words, to "justify a preemptive strike on Iraq."

But now Shenon reveals more: that in applying to Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, for the position of executive director, Zelikow failed to reveal some of his conflicts of interest, especially his authorship of NSS 2002 and his role on the transition team; that he continued, contrary to his promise, to be in touch with Karl Rove (who was very concerned about the Commission's work), as well as Rice; that Zelikow largely prevented direct contact between the staff and the Commissioners ("If information gathered by the staff was to be passed to the commissioners, it would have to go through Zelikow"); and that Zelikow largely "controlled what the final report would say."

Shenon also reveals that Zelikow, before the Commission's work had begun, had written a detailed outline for the Commission's report, complete with "chapter headings, subheadings, and sub-subheadings," and that he and the Commission's co-chairs agreed to keep this outline a secret from the Commission's investigative staff. When the staff learned about this outline a year later, some of them circulated a parody called "The Warren Commission Report---Preemptive Outline," one chapter of which was entitled "Single Bullet: We Haven't Seen the Evidence Yet. But Really. We're Sure."

However, although all of this should have made Shenon suspicious that Zelikow might have used his power to cover up the truth about 9/11, it did not. Shenon believes that the falsehoods in the Commission's report were limited to covering up White House incompetence (especially by Rice) and foreign funding of al-Qaeda (by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia).

Because Shenon simply presupposed the truth of the official story as fully as did the Commission, his book is terrible as well as great. It is terrible because Shenon, in mentioning the contention that 9/11 was an inside job, assures his readers that this contention has been debunked, while showing no sign of having studied any of the books that provide evidence for this contention. In his bibliography, for example, he mentions two defenses of the official account: "Debunking 9/11 Myths," put out by Popular Mechanics, and "Without Precedent," coauthored by Kean and Hamilton. But he does not mention my "Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory," in which I responded at length to both of these books. Also, although one would expect his bibliography to include all major critiques of the 9/11 Commission, it does not include my book, "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions," which has generally been considered the major critique of the Commission's report.

Shenon's ignorance of facts contained in this alternative literature is apparent in his assurances that all is well with the official account. For example, claiming that the evidence that al-Qaeda was responsible for 9/11 is "incontrovertible," Shenon points to a videotape in which a bin Laden boasts about the attacks. Shenon is evidently unaware that bin Laden expert Bruce Lawrence called this videotape "bogus" and that FBI spokesman Rex Tomb admitted that "the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11." Also, claiming that there is clear evidence that "nineteen young Arab men . . . were aboard the four planes," Shenon is evidently unaware that, as I showed in "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" (updated edition), all this supposed evidence falls apart under scrutiny. For example, although we were told that the presence of hijackers on American Flight 77 was proved by Barbara Olson's phone calls to her husband, Ted Olson, the evidence given to the Moussaoui trial in 2006 by the FBI said that no such calls occurred. This same report contradicted the widely held belief that cell phone calls from passengers on United 93 had reported the existence of hijackers.

Shenon could have remained neutral on the question of the truth of the official story. But because he chose to enter the fray, it was incumbent upon him as a journalist to study, and report, the arguments on both sides of the issue. He did not.

Shenon's book is terrible not only because he endorses the official account without engaging any of the serious critiques of that account, but also because his complacent acceptance of that account leads him to ignore dozens of signs in the Commission's report that Zelikow used his position as executive director to cover up far more than incompetence. In "The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions," I showed that it contains over 100 omissions and distortions of the type that would be expected if Zelikow had indeed used his position to cover up official complicity. Here are a few examples that Shenon fails to mention.

Believing that the claim "that the Twin Towers were brought down by preplaced explosives" had been debunked before the Commission began its work, Shenon does not mention the Commission's silence about the fact that over a hundred members of the Fire Department of New York, in giving oral histories of that day---which were made publicly available by Shenon's own New York Times----spoke of apparent explosions in the towers. Shenon also fails to mention the Commission's silence about evidence that steel in the buildings had melted and even evaporated---evidence that a New York Times article called the "deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation," because the fires could not have come close to the temperature needed to produce such effects. Was Shenon unaware of these revelations provided by his own paper?

Shenon ignores the Commission's failure even to mention the fact that WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane and had fires on only a few floors, also collapsed. Shenon perhaps considers this omission unimportant because there was no mystery. "[I]t was determined," he says, "that a fire that . . . destroyed WTC 7 on September 11 was probably caused by the rupture of the building's special diesel fuel tanks." That is indeed the official theory. But the FEMA report---which is still the only official report on this building---suggested what it considered the most likely version of this theory but then admitted that it had "only a low probability of occurrence."

Although Shenon mentions that Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta testified before the Commission, he does not mention Mineta's report that Vice President Cheney was in the bunker under the White House by 9:20 AM, which contradicted the Zelikow-led Commission's later claim that Cheney did not arrive there until almost 10:00.

Although Shenon mentions Cheney's appearance on "Meet the Press" five days after 9/11, he does not mention Cheney's statement that he learned about the attack on the Pentagon after (not before) he entered the bunker---which the Zelikow-led Commission later contradicted.

Although Shenon points out that Zelikow and Clarke hated each other, he does not point out that Clarke's book, Against All Enemies, is not mentioned by the Zelikow-led Commission's report and that it contradicted that report on several points, saying that Cheney was down in the bunker before 9:15, that Clarke received shootdown authorization from Cheney before 9:55 (not at 10:25), and that General Richard Myers was in the Pentagon between 9:00 and 9:45 AM (not on Capitol Hill).

Although Shenon points out that the Commission failed to ask Rudy Giuliani any tough questions, he does not mention the Commission's failure to ask the toughest question that should have been asked: How did Giuliani know in advance that the Twin Towers were going to come down?

In sum: Whereas Shenon's book has performed a great service by revealing things about the Zelikow-led Commission that should lead people to suspect that its account of 9/11 covered up the truth, it is also a terrible failure: Because of Shenon's lack of journalistic skepticism with regard to the official account of 9/11, he failed to raise the most important question about the Commission's report: Did it cover up complicity by forces within our own government? Although the Commission's report contains dozens of signs that it did just this, Shenon's book mentions not a single one.

Also posted at:

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

- - Debunking Popular Mechanics?

PM Book Alleges FAA Source For Statistical Data;
FAA Concedes No Such Data Records Exist.

Aidan Monaghan

Beginning on page 22 of a Popular Mechanics 2006 book entitled Debunking 9/11 Myths, containing a forward comment by Republican presidential candidate John McCain, an attempt is made to clarify the role played by potential military aircraft intercepts during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Citing unnamed sources, part of this section reads as follows:

When contacted by Popular Mechanics, spokesmen for NORAD and the FAA clarified their remarks by noting that scrambles were routine, but intercepts were not - especially over the continental United States.

However, according to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Freedom of Information Act response dated March 3, 2008, the FAA concedes that records for the information alleged in part by Popular Mechanics' unnamed FAA source, do not exist.

For more information, see:

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

- - 9/11 Steelworker Speaks Out About His Ground Zero Recovery Experiences
Youtube click here!

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

- - Postscript to “Spitzer taken down by Mossad?”
By Jerry Mazza
Online Journal Associate Editor
Mar 21, 2008, 01:05

In my March 14 article, Spitzer taken down by Mossad, I quoted veteran Beltway reporter Wayne Madsen who said, “Defenses sources have confirmed our March 11 report that Emperors Club VIP, the prostitution firm that entangled New York’s outgoing Governor Eliot Spitzer in a call girl ring, is viewed by US intelligence as a front for Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad.

“The sources claim that Spitzer was ‘outed’ for his aggressiveness in attacking money launderers connected to Russian-Israeli organized crime syndicates and other Wall Street malfeasance.”

Just eight days before that article, a federal judge in New York had ordered that Mark “Michael” Brener be held without bail after his March 6 arrest as the boss procurer in this politically weaponized prostitution scandal. What’s more, a JTA Breaking News article, Israeli at center of Spitzer scandal tells us Mark Brener, a 62-year old Israeli of 29 years in the US had an Israeli passport and some $600,000 on hand. Where do they find these guys?

On top of it all, Wayne Madsen, in his March 18 report, tells us Mark Brener’s Emperor’s Club VIP, an international call girl service, is involved with three alleged cash laundering services, QAT Consulting Group, QAT International, and Protech Consulting. L’cheim! So who’s Brener? Well, before moving to South Brunswick New Jersey, Brener hailed from Forest Hills in Queens, which used to be a nice upper middle-class neighborhood, but is now pegged by the FBI as home to Russian-Israeli money launders, smugglers, and friends of Mossad.

In 2003, Brener split from South Brunswick (who could blame him) to an upscale condo in Cliffside Park with his 19-year old nafka, Cecei Suwal, who was among those arrested in the FBI sting of the Emperor’s Club. Suwal was in charge of QAT accounts. The Bureau feels it’s just scratching the surface of a prostitution, money laundering op, with some blackmail mixed in, aimed at US politicians; and a side arm of Israeli Intel and Russian-Israeli organized crime. Nice.

So why pick on Spitzer? He wasn’t with Kristen as an investigating prosecutor, but a client. It seems as New York attorney general, Spitzer had ragged on the Israeli syndicate in 2004, when he went after the all-powerful, all wrathful World Jewish Congress of Edgar Bronfman, Sr., booze boss. Spitzer looked into a not-so-kosher transfer of some $1.2 million by the group’s Orthodox Jewish head, Rabbi Israel Singer (not Isaac Bashevis), from October 2002 to February 2003. There were wire transfers from UBS accounts in London and Switzerland.

Ironically, it was suspicious money movements like this by Spitzer that first perked up the IRS’s ears. You hang out with bad boyz enough, who knows, you begin to think like them?

That’s just one man’s observation. Another man, Greg Palast, seems to think it was the op-ed piece Spitzer originally wrote for the Washington Post that said the $200 billion bail-out for predator banks and the Bush administration were illegally linked. Palast sees this bust as payback to Spitzer, who had been investigating the bank scandals.

The lead paragraph in Spitzer's op-ed is Eliot at his attack dog best: "When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing in fact that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers."

The piece makes a convincing argument that the 1863 National Bank Act gave state banks power to fight predatory lending laws and banks. And that the Office of the Comptroller of Currency (OCC), which used to check the books to keep them honest, was used for the first time to scuttle those laws.

Despite the opposition of 50 states, Bush and his Boyz went right ahead and protected the banks, helping them help themselves to this most recent looting of the American economy. I guess that could get a guy’s butt in trouble, even if he was New York’s Governor, even if he was sitting on a stack of information presented to him in 2004 by 911Truth.Org, elaborately documenting that 9/11 was an inside job. This Spitzer guy had to be leveled, and fast, even though he had willingly blocked a top aide from 9/11 congressional testimony, and wittingly or not had helped the Bush Boyz. It’s amazing how the tentacles of this story spread out.

Spitzer in for McGreevey and Clinton?

In fact, Spitzer’s conundrum reminds me of former New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey’s, who “outed himself” in 2004, an election year like this one, because he claimed he was gay (which everyone knew already) and was having an affair with an Israeli man, Golan Cipo, who had served with the Israeli Espionage Service and its targeting of American politicians, reported originally by John Anast in Al-Jazeerah, August 15, 2005, in Israeli Espionage: When a Honey Trap Goes Bad A Governor Resigns.

McGreevey had met this man on a trip to Israel sponsored by a Jewish organization. Talk about a set-up (and one wonders how Spitzer was setup)! Well, one thing led to another and kaboom, Golan Cipo is in Jersey, working for the state, ending up almost with a six-figure job as Head of Homeland Security for New Jersey. Not a great idea.

As Anast writes “In its zeal to penetrate the Governor's office and homeland security, Mossad demanded that Cipel, an Israeli citizen who lacked any requisite experience or security clearances, be appointed to run New Jersey’s homeland security office. In that position Mr. Cipel could have not only obtained information on US security procedures, but also been in a position to access sensitive investigative information, methods and sources relative to US efforts to thwart Israeli espionage against the United States. New Jersey is still reeling from the Israeli espionage ring which was housed in Urban Movers that collapsed soon after it was discovered on 11 September, and more recently by the detention of two (2) Israelis, working for a New Jersey moving company, caught with classified submarine fuel near a US base in Tennessee where the fuel is manufactured.”

And there went McGreevey, only to surface last week, in this election year, when a former male aide alleged that he had been pressed by McGreevey to engage in ménage a trois’ with the governor and his wife. McGreevey admitted it happened, but his estranged wife denied it.

Yet it all reminds me of another Democratic politician: President Clinton being serviced on bended knee in the Oval Office by Monica. How did this “Swallow” (the Mossad name for a Monica Lewinsky) come to land in Willy’s lap? It was as strange as “The Raven” Cipo landing in McGreevey’s bed, as Ernesto Cienfuegos tells us in his 2004 piece Of Swallows and Ravens.

“The . . . scandal in New Jersey concerning the ‘Raven’ Golan Cipel is a classic example of an Israeli sexpionage operation. James McGreevey, a Catholic, was a rising Democratic Party politico when he was introduced, about four years ago, to Golan Cipel while on a ‘Jewish Junket’ to the Tel Aviv suburb of Rishon Le-Zion. Cipel had been conveniently placed on the staff of the Mayor of Rishon Le-Zion by the MOSSAD, which has its headquarters in Tel Aviv, for this very purpose. The MOSSAD keeps extensive ‘dossiers’ on a large number of US politicians and McGreevy, who the MOSSAD probably already knew was a sodomite, had been targeted,” Cienfuegos wrote.

And so it may have gone with Spitzer, a Democratic rising star in an election year and a possibile future candidate to become the first Jewish president of the USA. Stinging irony. But more stinking is the possibility that the Mossad is pulling strings, either for the Republicans or themselves, and affecting the slate of political survivors. But then Cienfuegos points out that “sexpionage” has been going on since Mata Hari first batted her eyes and wiggled as a nude dancer, operating as a double agent for both the French and German armies during World War I. She ended executed before a French firing squad in 1917.

And last but not least . . .

Somehow I also find that when sexual scandal hits the Bushes, it’s not quite with the same impact. I couldn’t end this without reminding you of the $2,000 a weekend male prostitute Jeff Gannon, posing in the buff on his website, turning up at White House press conferences as reporter Jim Guckert (same initials), and lobbing softball questions to President George W. Bush. His journalism credentials were from a weekend mail-order course. Nevertheless, Mr.Gannon/Guckert earned himself a “hard pass” to the White House.

That is, come on over whenever you like. And he did. In a previous article, Keeping Hunter Thompson’s death alive, I wrote that “Gannon/Guckert visited the White House 196 times -- 39 of them days when there were no press briefings." In fact the Secret Service could not account for him checking out on many days when he checked in. Now who would his sleepovers have been with? Karl Rove, rumored to have been light in the loafers, a denizen of certain gay bars inside the Beltway? Or could it have been the president himself. Gannon was seen hugging Junior several times for the cameras. Then there was that Bush kiss with Prince Bandar.

No major newspaper or TV station seemed up in arms that a non-reporter, male-hooker was allowed into the White House with such frequency. What an enormous breach of national security that posed. Who, in fact, knew who Gannon/Guckert really was or could be? Not to mention what a moral firestorm this should have ignited, especially from those gay-bashing hypocritical Republicans. But then the Repugs seem better at dirty tricks, period.

In fact, even Poppy had been noted to have some issues with prostitution (pedophilia that is) as reported in the June 29, 1989, Washington Times. The article was headlined Homosexual prostitution inquiry ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush -- ‘Call boys’ took midnight tour of White House.

The lead paragraph read, "A homosexual prostitution ring is under investigation by federal and District authorities and includes among its clients key officials of the Reagan and Bush administrations, military officers, congressional aides and US and foreign businessmen with close social ties to Washington's political elite. Reporters for this newspaper examined hundreds of credit-card vouchers, drawn on both corporate and personal cards and made payable to the escort service operated by the homosexual ring." Read the rest of the article for full details, unless you’ve had enough.

But in Spitzer’s case, has justice been served enough? Or have we lost a potentially powerful governor and future candidate for higher office. And do we have to settle for a pimp and some prostitutes in jail for what is an international ring of political assassins? This brings a whole meaning to Tea (or whatever) For Two.

For links and resources, see original article post:

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

- - Ron Paul on Coast To Coast AM - Supports A New 9/11 Investigation

Click for youtube link!

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

- - On a thread – Devouring our Own
From a thread with the subject, “Devouring our Own”
posted on,,,,,

At 09:43 PM 3/23/2008, James Marc Leas wrote:
Ben and David,
You can certainly support Obama because you think he is better than Bush, Cheney, McCain, and Clinton. He might actually be the best the corporate parties have had to offer in many decades. But if you think he is going to be good for the American people consider this:

Obama voted yes to reauthorize the Patriot Act on March 2, 2006 (while Senator Pat Leahy voted no). This bill made permanent the 14 provisions of the Patriot Act. (see for Obama's voting record).

Obama says he opposed the war from the beginning but he voted yes on the emergency supplemental act on May 4, 2006 that appropriated $107.41 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan
Obama voted yes again on this bill after the House Senate conference report, passing this emergency supplemental on June 15, 2006. The bill had no restrictions on deployment of US soldiers.

Obama voted yes on the emergency supplemental act on March 29, 2007 that appropriated $93.68 billion for the wars and that included a provision that most American forces will be redeployed from Iraq by March 31, 2008, with tens of thousands of troops remaining to protect American personnel and infrastructure, to train and equip Iraqi forces, and to conduct targeted counter-terrorism operations. Bush vetoed this bill. Finally, on May 24, 2007. To his credit Obama voted no on the supplemental bill that passed that had no restrictions. (Leahy and Sanders also voted no. In the House Peter Welch voted yes on the crucial procedural vote that allowed that one to pass but Welch does not mention that vote while he touts his meaningless no vote on the final bill).

No one knows what Gore would have done differently but we do know that he was Vice President in an administration that presided over the sanctions and air war that killed one million people in Iraq from 1992 to 2000. We do know that during the 2004 campaign, Kerry called for sending 40,000 more troops to Iraq. He was no antiwar candidate. Bush outflanked Kerry from the left by opposing sending any more troops. That is part of the reason Kerry lost the popular vote and the election. Even so the Democrats had more than the 40 votes needed in the Senate to block every single one of Bush's legislations, including the Patriot Act and the supplemental war appropriations for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. The Democratic Party leadership failed to blocked the Bush program and supported most of it. Even now, with their Senate and House majorities, the Democrats vote for the war funding bills. And the Democrats work hard to protect Bush and Cheney from the impeachment they deserved long ago by taking this section of our constitution off the table. Except for Bush and Cheney, no one has done less to honor their oaths of office than the Senate and House Democrats. The Bush/Cheney policies of war, detention without trial, torture, and spying on Americans are bipartisan policies. Obama is part of that Democratic majority.

A poll released on March 11, 2008 shows that only 15% of Americans would support the UN security council authorizing a military strike if Iran continues to produce nuclear fuel. That same day Admiral William Fallon resigned as chief of U.S. forces in the Middle East because he opposed an attack on Iran that Bush and Cheney have been threatening. Now the Pentagon is preventing Admiral Fallon from testifying before Congress about his concerns and his resignation Reuters North American News Service. Will Obama demand that Fallon be allowed to testify? I don't think so.

Senator Barack Obama told a pro-Israel crowd in Chicago that the use of military force should not be taken off the table when dealing with Iran, which he called "a threat to all of us." He calls for “surgical missile strikes” against Iran and Pakistan. Obama opposes bringing all US forces home from Iraq. He calls for leaving tens of thousands in Iraq. Those he removes he wants to redeploy to Afghanistan. In his speech on the fifth anniversary of the war a few days ago he said "its not too late to prevail in Afghanistan," and he described his strategy to escalate that war. He also touted his support for targeted assassinations. When Obama talks about change he is not talking about peace.

Of course Americans who put supporting a Democrat as a first priority can certainly support Obama. Those who put ending the illegal and immoral wars of aggression as a priority will be working against their own priority if they support Obama.

Though all three corporate party candidates for President support keeping troops in Iraq, victory in Afghanistan, and keeping on the table a military attack on Iran, Vermonters have reason for hope. It’s not just because of courageous leaders like Reps. Mike Fisher and Chris Pearson, and candidates like Anthony Pollina and Ralph Nader. From the civil rights movement, the anti-Vietnam War movement, the Women’s movement, and countless other campaigns we learned that citizens’ movements are how all important changes have happened. Not by supporting corporate party candidates like Obama who make vague promises and oppose what we support. With our marches, rallies, and town meeting votes we build such a movement. Obama does not participate in or help to build that movement. He does not advocate for bringing the troops home now. He does not call the occupation is illegal and immoral. He does not call for impeaching Bush and Cheney. He voted for extending the Patriot Act. He is not one of us. Regardless of who we vote for, if we are serious about ending these wars and restoring civil liberties we need to continue building these movements.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

On 25 Mar 2008 10:27:38
Replying to this thread,
Jonathan Mark. wrote

any candidate in the two-one party system will be flawed.. definitely..

in reality we have a flawed pseudo democracy.. especially since
the jfk assassination and cover-up..or since the theft of our banking system
in 1913.. or giving corporations rights as individuals..

however.. i am thankful that the pseudo nature of our democracy still can allow us to vote..

and choose the best of the worst.. if only ralph nader had more integrity than deceit..
by now we could have had free leonard peltier, instituted national instant run-off voting

but the flaws and deceit go deep..and in this election cycle.. we can either
accelerate the path in destroying the usa republic into full tyranny.. or slow it down..
to find better choices..

some voting for nader said they were happy that bush got elected.. so we can learn from the consequences of bad or evil leadership.. that will help.. they said.. some say that a clinton-mccain contest will be the best thing for amerikkka which will lead to many more supporting a 3rd party candidate like nader or cynthia mckinney..

but in reality.. the acceleration at this point of planetary collapse.. is not a good idea..

in reality.. a flawed obama.. is our best chance to stop those who are really controlling our government.. or covert operations.. assassinations.. and energy policies..
or at least give us more time to unite and do something better..

devouring our own is an appopriate subject heading for those so righteous..
that they can only see problems.. and their solutions are by letting things get worse..
by not taking-joining with the mainstream.. and guiding it to stopping the wars, the corrupt energy policies.. and devastation to our planet.. yes obama could be a nuke candidate..
but i prefer to try to unite with progressive to deal with him.. and possibly be successful..
than in an internment camp with a more than willing leader of the darker politics represented
by a clinton or mccain on top of our so-called representative government..

the divide and conquer trip has been going on forever.. this is how woodrow wilson was (s)elected with a 3rd party popular candidate.. so the mainstream can get sucked into a plan for the fed reserve.. time to take a little step in 2008.. with obama.. and work like hell to stop the deceit of false flags.. and relicensing vt yankee.. our work is ahead of us.. and we can not afford things getting much worse.. in my humble opinion..


Campaigns for Reclaiming a Lost USA Democracy

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

- - New England 9/11 Symposium – May 17 Keene, NH
Family Members and Researchers Speak Out

This is lining up to be a stellar conference.
As May 17th approaches more information concerning
additional speakers and guests may be included.

Currently the program features:

Donna Marsh O'Connor
Bob McIlvaine
Michelle Little
Daniel Hopsicker
Barrie Zwicker
Jon Gold
Sander Hicks
Jason Bermas

Organized by Student Scholars for 911 Truth and Monadnock 9/11 Truth Alliance.

For the flyer and more information, also see:

3) Exposed Bribes to Scientists, Global Warming, Aerial Spraying

- - Bribes offered to scientists
- - Bush Administration to Blue-State California: Drop Dead!
- - Alex Jones Hurts Truth By Ignoring Human-Made Excess in Air

- - Bribes offered to scientists
Published 2007-02-03, by Sydney Morning Herald (Australia's leading newspaper)

Bribes offered to scientists
February 3, 2007

SCIENTISTS and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine the UN climate change report.

Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute, an ExxonMobil-funded think tank with close links to the Bush Administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of the report. Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered.

The institute has received more than $1.6 million from ExxonMobil - which yesterday announced a $50 billion annual profit, the biggest ever by a US company - and more than 20 of its staff have worked as consultants to the Bush Administration. A former head of ExxonMobil, Lee Raymond, is the vice-chairman of the institute's board of trustees.

The letters, sent to scientists in the US and elsewhere, attack the UN's panel as "resistant to reasonable criticism and dissent and prone to summary conclusions that are poorly supported by the analytical work", and ask for essays that "thoughtfully explore the limitations of climate model outputs".

Climate scientists described it as an attempt to cast doubt over the "overwhelming scientific evidence" on warming. "It's a desperate attempt by an organisation which wants to distort science for its own political aims," said David Viner, of the University of East Anglia in Britain.

The letters were sent by Kenneth Green, a visiting scholar at the institute, who confirmed that it had approached scientists, economists and policy analysts to write articles for an independent review that would highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the UN report.

"Right now, the whole debate is polarised," he said. "One group says that anyone with any doubts whatsoever are deniers and the other group is saying that anyone who wants to take action is alarmist. We don't think that approach has a lot of utility for intelligent policy."

Steve Schroeder, a professor at Texas A&M University, turned down the offer, citing fears that the report could easily be misused for political gain.

Lord Rees of Ludlow, the president of the Royal Society, Britain's most prestigious scientific institute, said the UN report would underscore "the urgent need for concerted international action to reduce the worst impacts of climate change. However, yet again, there will be a vocal minority with their own agendas who will try to suggest otherwise."

Ben Stewart of Greenpeace said the institute "is more than just a think tank, it functions as the Bush Administration's intellectual Cosa Nostra".

On Monday, another Exxon-funded organisation based in Canada will launch a review in London which casts doubt on the UN report.


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

- - Bush Administration to Blue-State California: Drop Dead!
By Paulina Borsook
Posted March 20, 2008 | 04:37 PM (EST)

Read More: Kawamura California, Light Brown Apple Moth, Pesticides, Proposition 13, Schwarzenegger, Breaking Politics News
stumbleupon :Bush Administration to Blue-State California: Drop

In a joint action, the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) and the CDFA (California Department of Food and Agriculture) have declared war on the home base of Senators Boxer and Feinstein, house speaker Pelosi, the founders of, gay-marriage-friendly Mayor Gavin Newsom, Code Pink, and Congresswoman Barbara Lee.

Aerial spraying with a pesticide which has never been tested for human or environmental safety is planned starting this summer, month after month, year after yeas, in an area stretching from Carmel to Marin County, San Francisco to Berkeley, in pursuit of the eradication of the Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM), a rather wimpy exotic pest originally from Australia.

A state of emergency was declared for this pest on paper, abrogating the need for any kind of environmental impact --- when folks like James Carey, professor of entomology at UC-Davis and Dan Harder, director of the UC-Santa Cruz Arboretum, maintain eradication won't work; the LBAM is a nuisance at best; and this ill-conceived attack on the people, environment, and economy of California is about trade wars and not about actual threats to agriculture (Fodor's is already advising tourists to stay away from Santa Cruz, because of the spray).

The CDFA quietly admits that LBAM hasn't caused any actual damage to agriculture in California; what it doesn't cop to is the damage -it- and the USDA has caused to California growers and farmers through its quarantines, insistence on destruction of any plant showing any signs of LBAM, shut down of nurseries with LBAM, insistence on spraying in nurseries with highly toxic organophosphate chlorpyrifos, and the like.

Funny how there's not enough money in the budget to properly fund the USDA to screen properly for tainted beef, but there is plenty of money to fund an eradication program that could run into the hundreds of millions of dollars over the next five years, if allowed to continue --- and funds the antics of longtime-government contractors Dynamic Aviation out of Bridgewater, Virginia, which counts "intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance" among its domains of expertise. What, there weren't any California-based crop-dusters, with traditional skills in pesticide spray and not geopolitics, available for the gig?

And, this eradication program is an earmark in Bush's budget, just the kind of questionable federal budgeting speaker Pelosi said she'd be looking into (her district is in the spray zone, too). Then there's the fact that much of the money for this comes from the Department of Homeland Security, about the only place you can find money these days. And for poor cash-starved California, always broke since Proposition 13, money for emergencies and eradications is there to be had from the Feds --- who ever would want to turn down free money that might keep your agency partly afloat? Particularly when you know there is little to be had for monitoring and Integrated Pest Management?

California Secretary of Agriculture, A.G. Kawamura, part of the Orange County Republican New Majority that helped push Schwarzenegger into office and Gray Davis out, keeps repeating pernicious nonsense reminiscent of "heckuva a job, Brownie!" and "Mission accomplished!", talking of threats the LBAM would make to the coastal redwoods and monterey pines. Um, no, just to pick one tiny misapprehension among all the other lies, Big and small, being cranked out by the USDA and the CDFA, the LBAM is a leaf-roller. It makes its home on leaves, munching only partway through them. It can't eat things with needles, like redwoods and pines. But then, Kawamura has a degree in comparative literature, not in agroeconomy nor entomology nor public health ---and has gone on the record as stating that regulation, not development, is the greatest threat to agriculture. He also fought to prevent annihilating pesticide methyl bromide from being outlawed. Hey, pesticide - drift into schoolyards? Aerially spraying millions of people and poisoning the watersheds of San Francisco and Monterey Bays? What's the diff?

The USDA and the CDFA keep saying the spray is safe. Never mind that known mutagens, carcinogens, lung skin and eye irritants, and compounds considered hazardous waste by the European Union, all micronized in plastic capable of remaining lodged in the deep lung, were in first round of spraying for the LBAM in the Fall of 2007 in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties. Then, hundreds of sea-birds died afterwards, accompanied temporally by one of the worst red tides in 40 years --- and hundreds of people had health complaints, even though the CDFA set up no reporting mechanism to monitor these adverse health effects. Not to mention how Santa Cruz and Monterey residents have kept telling stories of wheezing dogs and their puking, dying cats.

And we're supposed to trust an administration where the EPA won't support the state of California in request to set its own carbon dioxide emissions standards, and dimisses, under pressure from the chemical industry, one of its staff members concerned with the health effects of a flame retardant widely used in electronic equipment

New Zealand, where the LBAM has been for more than a century, has a climate similar to California's and grows many of the same things (from chardonnay grapes to apples -- and monterey pine as a timber-crop, exported from California years ago). There, the LBAM is managed by letting natural predators take over, and washing fruit with water to ready it for export. That's right, no aerial spraying, nothing. And the European Union has no ban on LBAM whatsoever.

It looks and feels like a classic move by the Bush Administration: an aerial attack against an enemy posing no real threat; a program that can't work and wastes the taxpayers' money; a toxic boongodoggle that benefits occluded political goals and cronies; acts of state-sponsored terror….

It's faith-based (as in, don't complicate with facts), bad science, even worse public policy -- and an environmental disaster.
Can you spell chemical trespass? Violation of the state constitution of California?

And Governor Schwarzenegger, who boasts about wanting California to take the lead in green sustainability, could end this enormity with stroke of his pen.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

FN archives, see:: Military Weather - Psychotronics - Chem/Nukes in Space
Also recommended:

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

- - Alex Jones Hurts Truth By Ignoring Human-Made Excess in Air

[FN Editor Note: Alex Jones is a hero many times over, but his narrow headedness on this issue for a Global Warming hoax advocate, then mixes in with his other fine His oversimplifying or theorizing about some past cycles is not real objectivity or science-based. The measurements since taking dense carbon material like coal and oil, and adding them into the atmosphere in a burning combustion process, the numbers are adding up with observable climate change. Alex Jones is unfortunately side-tracked on this one, which is perfect for the oil and coal industry interests. Resource links follow, but this one is to an article by Craig Hill, “WARMING: The bigger, more urgent reason to bring down the perps of 9/11.”]

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Powerful Documentary Trounces Man-Made Warming Hoax
Climate change is natural and has been happening since the Earth began

Prison Planet | March 9, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

An astounding documentary that was broadcast in the UK last night completely trounced the man-made explanation for global warming, not with emotionally-laden propaganda or by attacking the messenger as its adherants resort to, but by presenting carefully considered and rational science.

The Great Global Warming Swindle brought together a plethora of scientists, professors, climatologists and weather experts to expose the myths about climate change that have been promulgated in order to hoodwink the world into accepting the man-made theory of global warming.

Truncated, for complete article, see:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

FN recommends the following resource link, Society of Environmental Journalists

For FN's resource page, see:

Mounting Evidence of Extreme Global Warming

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and not necessarily those of Flyby News.
A "Fair Use Policy" that describes FNs' use of copyrighted material is at
Feedback for story suggestions and networking Flyby News is appreciated.
You can write to the editor by email: -- flyby(at)mtdata[dot]com --

Flyby News is nonviolent in focus, and has supported critical campaigns
for a healthy environment, human rights, justice, and peace,
since the launching of NASA's Cassini space probe in 1997.

=====News Fit to Transmit in the Post Cassini Flyby Era====>

= = = = = = = = = = =

Email address: