Many of the articles that I post here are very long, so I am only posting a snippet of the article to give you an idea of what it is about. Please click on the link to view the entire article. At times, I will post full articles from websites that I know delete, change, or archive their posts. Some sites make you pay for their archived articles. Yahoo totally deletes articles after about 7 days. CBS and MSNBC update their articles which causes the original articles to disappear. Anyway, on with the news!
Karen DeYoung and Peter Slevin report: The Bush administration plans to take complete, unilateral control of a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq, with an interim administration headed by a yet-to-be named American civilian who would direct the reconstruction of the country and the creation of a "representative" Iraqi government, according to a now-finalized blueprint described by U.S. officials and other sources.
Gen. Tommy Franks, the head of the U.S. Central Command, is to maintain military control as long as U.S. troops are there. Once security was established and weapons of mass destruction were located and disabled, a U.S. administrator would run the civilian government and direct reconstruction and humanitarian aid.
Peter Eichenberger writes: Here's one unexamined truth the American media have mostly ignored: Gulf War I, as well as the Kosovo action, were actually nuclear (more accurately, "radiological") wars via the unrestrained use of depleted uranium armor penetrating ammo. According to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), and on the heels of 12 NATO soldiers deployed in Kosovo now dying of cancers, Italy, Belgium, France, Portugal and Germany have demanded that NATO conduct an investigation into U.S. depleted uranium ammo lest the issue sunder the alliance--as it is threatening to do.
Terry M. Neal writes:Campaign cattle calls, like the one at last week's Democratic National Committee winter meeting, are generally among the most staged of political events - candidates show up delivering early versions of their stump speech, while the ready-made cheering sections, often bused in by the candidates themselves, burst into wild, maniacal cheering at every bland applause line.
On Friday and Saturday, seven of the eight announced Democratic presidential candidates (all but Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, who is still recovering from prostate cancer surgery) showed up at the Hyatt Regency hotel on Capitol Hill to test-market their messages to the party faithful. Most of the speeches followed a general pattern: I'm the son/daughter of . . . (Insert Joe Lunchbox occupation: a postal worker/mill worker/milk man/etc.); I'm a regular Joe/Jane who represents the interests of The People; I've come very far in life from my youth as one of The People; President Bush is not one of The People and should be replaced by someone who is. And so on.
Charley Reese writes: The Bush administration adamantly insists that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, but despite 12 years of inspections, bombings and spying, it doesn't have a clue as to where they are.
It frequently warns us of terror attacks, but always says it doesn't know where, when or how. Nor have there been any terror attacks in the United States in the past 18 months.
Is it any wonder that millions of people around the world and in the United States don't support President George Bush's personal crusade to topple Saddam Hussein? Keep in mind that after the Sept. 11 attack, which Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with, virtually the entire world united in sympathy with us. Never has one president destroyed so much support by so many people in so short a time.
This is an excellent enviromental magazine. They have some of their articles on the website.
Bernard Weiner writes: One can almost sense a palpable shifting of momentum, from an unrestricted Bush war-juggernaut rolling to its bloody unfolding to an administration caught between Iraq and a hard place, condemned if it unleashes the dogs of war (imperial warmonger), condemned if it pulls back and bides its time (wimp).
In a sense, what's transpiring reminds one of the delicious secret of "The Wizard of Oz": more and more people are beginning to sense, and sometimes even see, that the "all-powerful" governmental leader behind the curtain is just a flawed little man broadcasting to an overly-awed (and/or frightened) polity. Or, to shift fairytales: "The Emperor's New Clothes," where the leader, who has been nude all this while for all to see, suddenly finds that his subjects, heretofore willing to swallow the illusion of the emperor's new garments, realize that he's not wearing any.
In short, Bush is just another leader -- not even an elected one at that -- who, to disguise his incompetency and true motives, has lived on propaganda and falsification, and now the jig is up. His citizens are beginning to see through the charade -- even many who once supported him, including a good many ordinary, moderate Republicans, appalled at the powers assumed by Big Government and its willingness to eviscerate the Constitution in its push toward more and more authoritarian control.
The following article appeared on the NY Times website on February 22nd at this URL: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Governors.html; however, if you click on it now, the story line has change to: Sen. Frist Offers States Hope on Spending. Don't you just love the media cover-ups? Anyway, the ORIGINAL full article is below:
February 22, 2003
Dems: Bush Limiting Talks With Governors
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 11:02 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats said Saturday that the White House was taking unprecedented steps to limit conversation at Monday's scheduled policy discussion between governors and President Bush.
With their states' economies in tatters, members of the National Governors Association -- who began their four-day winter meeting Saturday -- are hoping to win more federal aid to cover soaring costs for health care, homeland security and education. But the governors have been told that most of them won't be able to directly question the president during Monday's White House gathering, according to Nicole Harburger, communications director for the Democratic Governors Association.
``Several of the governors are considering not attending the meeting,'' Harburger said. ``The governors are upset and concerned that the White House is not interested in a dialogue.''
She said the governors have been told the group as a whole will be allowed just two questions -- and must submit them in writing beforehand.
Washington Gov. Gary Locke, chairman of the Democratic governors, said, ``There are many Democratic governors talking about not even attending under these circumstances.''
``It's always been a very candid exchange,'' Locke said. ``It's more important now than ever before to have a frank, open discussion.''
White House spokesman Jimmy Orr said Bush would not change the format of the meeting with the governors, although he could not describe what that format would be.
``As a former governor, the president looks forward to hosting all the governors and interacting with them,'' Orr said.
He said the only change was in the meeting's location -- a smaller room in the White House to foster more ``intimate'' discussions.
Republican Gov. Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho, vice chairman of the national association, said there still would be an opportunity to ask questions of Bush, and that the changes were a constructive attempt to focus closely on top concerns.
Bush closed to the press Sunday's formal dinner with the governors; in years past, it had been open. Locke said the White House has even set limits on Kentucky Gov. Paul Patton's toast at the dinner.
State governments' dire finances and disagreements on what would help threatened to strain the traditionally bipartisan tone of the NGA.
``We have serious issues,'' said Patton, the group's Democratic chairman.
``It may be more difficult to get consensus than it has in the past.''
``We'll thrash it out,'' said Kempthorne.
Governors met Saturday with Education Secretary Rod Paige, and planned to see Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson and leading lawmakers later during the four-day weekend.
Democrats sharply criticized Bush's budget proposals, and even fellow Republicans questioned the details.
There was some dismay, however, that the governors' association was too harsh in assessing Bush's spending plan.
Bush's successor as Texas governor, Republican Rick Perry, quit the organization, partly to save $160,000 in annual fees and partly because he was unhappy with what he felt was its criticism of the Bush administration, spokeswoman Kathy Walt said.
``Open criticism of the president is not an approach Gov. Perry favors,'' she said.
GOP Govs. John Rowland of Connecticut, Jeb Bush of Florida and Bill Owens of Colorado have all been pushing to counter what they see as partisan attacks from the group, Rowland said.
Among the issues on the governors' agenda:
--Bush's Medicaid overhaul, which would give more flexibility and increased federal funding in the short term to states that choose to participate.
--Reauthorization of the federal transportation act, which distributes federal funds for state and local transportation needs.
--Money to help states meet new obligations for homeland security.
Underlying the policy discussions is the financial crisis facing the states. New figures released Saturday predict a combined $30 billion shortfall for the current budget year.
Next year looks worse, with shortfalls estimated at $82 billion. Because all states except for Vermont are barred from running a deficit, governors and legislators must agree to cut spending or raise taxes. Three years of cuts are taking their toll.
``I didn't mind making cuts when the cuts inconvenienced people,'' said Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, one of several GOP governors who have stepped away from their party's usual anti-tax stance and proposed raising taxes.
``Telling an elderly woman that she's going to have to cut her blood pressure medication in half -- that hurts her. I'm not willing to hurt her.''
Democrat Bob Holden of Missouri said, ``We hear from the White House about partnership. But when you get past the rhetoric of partnership, we see no money.''
After the Republican governors gathered to discuss politics and policy Saturday, Owens -- the group's chairman -- announced that they were pleased with Bush's budget proposals, from Medicaid to tax cuts.
Several Democrats said they were concerned that Washington's focus overseas was shortchanging domestic needs. Tennessee's Phil Bredesen recounted meeting with the president with other governors just before Christmas.
``It was great and I was honored to be there, but we spent the entire 45 minutes talking about Iraq,'' he said. ``Myself, and many other governors, Republicans and Democrats, would like to have had some discussion about education, about how we're going to get the economy back on track.''
Bob Deans writes: If any country grasps the threat of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass murder, it's Iran, which lost thousands of soldiers to mustard gas and nerve-agent attacks in its decadelong war against Iraq in the 1980s.
But at the United Nations last week, when it was Tehran's turn to speak out on how best to force Baghdad to abandon such weapons, it wasn't Saddam that Iranians were troubled by so much as President Bush.
For months Bush has asserted, in the with-us-or-against-us tone that has come to shape so much of his approach to the rest of the world, that the United Nations faces a stark choice: agree with the United States over the need to go to war with Iraq or become an irrelevant "debating society."
Michele Steinberg writes: On Oct. 14, the London Observer published one of the now familiar—and totally false—propaganda scare stories, entitled "Iraq 'Behind U.S. Anthrax Outbreaks.' " The story gave credence to the ravings of "American hawks" who say there is "a growing mass of evidence that [Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein was involved, possibly indirectly, with the Sept. 11 suicide hijacks." If confirmed, said the Observer, "the pressure now building ... for an attack [on Iraq] may be irresistible." One of these "hawks," an unnamed U.S. "administration official," told the Observer that British Prime Minister Tony Blair is a "faithful ally" in the war against terrorism and that "if it means we are embarking on the next Hundred Years' War, then that's what we are doing" (emphasis added).
The "next Hundred Year's War"? Who are the U.S. maniacs who use such language, and are they not as dangerous as Osama bin Laden's jihad?
The following article is superb! I don't know about the rest of you, but I hate those stupid cards that most grocery stores encourage shoppers to use. I also knew there had to be something more sinister behind them. Please be sure to click the link and read the whole article:
Mary Starrett writes: I spent a few hours at Safeway this past Saturday, along with thousands of other Americans. Only difference is, I wasn't there to shop. I was protesting the use of customer "loyalty cards".
Our merry band was on a mission: to try and explain why those shiny, numbered cards do anything BUT save you money..(they don't , more on that in a minute).
The following is an interesting website that reveals a timeline of population control from various governments around the world, including our own. There are a lot of links to some interesting articles included throughtout this report. I did notice though that some of the links no longer exist.
At the following link, you can read the Unauthorized Biography of George Bush (DaddyBush) or download the entire book and read it at your leisure.
Kurt Nimmo writes: It's dangerous to be photographed with Bush. It's also dangerous to visit the Bush White House. Sami al-Arian did both of these things. Now he's sweating it out in an FBI hoosegow.
In May of 2001 Sami was invited to the White House to attend a political briefing for 160 members of the American Muslim Council. Earlier, while campaigning across his brother's fiefdom in Florida, Dubya was photographed with the al-Arian family. In June of 2001 Sami's son, Abdullah, who was an intern in the office of Congressman David Bonior, joined a delegation of Muslim leaders at a meeting with John DiIulio, head of the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives. Somebody decided the al-Arian name was suspect and Abdullah was kicked out of the White House. Soon thereafter Bush not only sent a letter of apology to the Sami's wife, but he made the deputy director of the Secret Service apologize too.
During the election Dubya pandered to Muslim voters. You see, the 50,000 or so registered Muslim voters in Florida are mostly Democrats. So when Gore picked Joe Lieberman as his running mate the Bushites decided to take cynical advantage of Arab dislike of the Zionist Lieberman. Little did these Arabs know what would happen to them later. But then it's a fair bet to say the Japanese-Americans who voted for FDR had no idea what'd happen to them, either.
Steve Ricchetti writes: Charles Krauthammer's column blaming all the world's problems on former president Bill Clinton [op-ed, Feb. 14] echoes attacks by ultraconservative writers and regurgitates their anti-Clinton bile to distort history. Krauthammer's allegations are wrong and misleading. At a time when our nation is preparing for war, we should be serious about serious things, rather than gathering debating points to please one extreme of the political spectrum.
This week the United States, United Kingdom, Spain, And Italy will present a resolution to the UN authorizing force against Iraq. A misconception out there says that a second resolution would eliminate the massive opposition to the war. Send a message to the UN Security Council; let them know that you oppose war with Iraq even if the United Nations authorizes it.
R.B. Ham writes: You all certainly remember the "Bush Knew" controversy from last year, when Rupert Murdoch's New York Post ran that headline in page length lettering on their front page. Think about that. Murdoch is a neo-con autocratic thug whom many Aussies believe actually runs their Government and the Post is a neo-con rag. So why would the New York Post allow a writer to run with that story? Any number of writers at supposedly "liberal" newspapers would be more likely suspects - and even they would have a hard time getting it by the editor. Consider the far right slant of this newspaper that openly vilifies opponents of Bush as traitors and so blatantly displays their biased ignorance towards foreign countries opposed to the impending Slaughter in Iraq.
But the New York Post gives one of their own reporters the OK to run a story that could possibly lead to the downfall and disgrace of the Government they favour? Huh? Only one explanation of course - they were supposed to run it. A controlled leak. Atwater Strategy 101 : release some damaging info that you can immediately counter and, in this case, call in a big gun like Vice President Dick Cheney to thunder, "Beyond the pale!"Thus ending any real look at THE REAL BAD SHIT that it is now, it seems officially, "Beyond the pale!"
by Edgar J. Steele
February 24, 2003
After a great misery for mankind an even greater approaches. The great cycle of the centuries is renewed: It will rain blood, milk, famine, war and disease. In the sky will be seen a fire, dragging a tail of sparks.
---Nostradamus, Century 2, Quatrain 46 (1654)
First, a couple of current items that don't warrant extended discussion. Well, actually, they do, but I'll leave that to others for the moment.
We've all heard about little Jessica, the girl whose first heart/lung transplant was botched because of mismatched blood types. She got a second transplant a few days ago, but has just died. The mother wants the doctors to go to jail. Massive civil lawsuit sure to follow.
What you didn't hear is that she and her mother are illegal aliens, spirited across the Mexican border specifically to get Jessica free American medical treatment.
Reportedly, 16 Americans die each day for want of transplants. Jessica got two inside one week.
It seems uncaring to complain about this state of affairs, but what about the two Americans who died this week because they didn't get the heart/lung combinations given to Jessica? You haven't heard a thing about them, have you? What if one of those was your father, mother, husband, wife, son or daughter?
Second, did you notice the media smoothly follow the lead of Bush the Second in characterizing our impending adventure in the Middle East as an endeavor to "disarm" Iraq? What happened to our being concerned about only "weapons of mass destruction?" Of course, whatever happened to our pursuit of Osama, for that matter? "Disarm." Amazing, isn't it? Nothing up his sleeves, ladies and gentlemen...
Something else truly amazing is taking place in the solar system at this moment. A huge comet is rounding the sun, a comet twice the size of jupiter (about 22 times the size of earth). Some have seen it at sunrise and sunset; otherwise, it is not visible because it is occluded by solar glare. Essentially, it is coming from behind the sun and was first observed by NASA less than two months ago.
NASA's solar observatory has released a number of pictures of this comet, but those stopped just as a huge coronal mass ejection (an event which is to the hydrogen bomb as the hydrogen bomb is to a firecracker) erupted from the sun toward the comet. Some call these things "sunspots."
This comet is passing within 9 million miles of the solar surface. In celestial terms, that is a very near miss.
You haven't heard about this, have you?
Remember the hullabaloo over Hale/Bopp and Levy/Shoemaker? They were pikers by comparison with what has been dubbed Comet "NEAT."
Why all the silence this time?
I have read a good deal of speculation on several different internet sites. Some see it as biblical prophecy fulfilled (see Revelations - you might agree). Some consider this to be "Nibiru" or "Planet X," foretold by the Mayans as passing through the solar system every 3600 years or so. Some consider this simply to be an awesome photo opportunity.
Some say the strange weather on Earth lately is the result of an effect caused by the sun which in turn is responding to Comet NEAT.
Electromagnetic fields reach hundreds of millions of miles into space, you see, and are generated by all celestial objects. Influences occur at distances far in excess of that between the sun and comet Neat or, for that matter, between Earth and comet Neat.
The sun has a regularly-repeating solar "sunspot" activity cycle of approximately 11 years. 2000 was to have been the most recent peak. Solar activity, rather than dropping off in year 12, as it always has, has continued to rise ever since.
Earth's magnetic field has been weakening in an accelerating fashion of late. The North Pole, which wanders anyway, has traveled almost as far in the past 20 years as it did in the 100 years prior to that, when it was located in Canada's northern Yukon Territory.
Some hypothesize that Earth's poles reverse when its magnetic field reaches zero. The geological record proves the poles have shifted many times down through the history of the Earth (metal flakes in lava align with the magnetic field, to be frozen in place when the lava cools, you see, just like the needle in a compass). Coincidence? Perhaps.
Maybe it is nothing. Maybe it is something. If something, it could be the most significant occurrence in recorded human history.
Generally, the concern is not that Comet NEAT will strike Earth or even come near us (though I have yet to see a good description of its path relative to Earth). Rather, the concern is for the effect upon us through the electromagnetic interaction between it and Earth and the Sun. There is a secondary concern that something this huge could have smaller objects following in its wake, or that pieces of it broke off during the massive solar flare when it passed near the Sun, pieces that might find their way to Earth. "Planet buster" asteroids can be as small as 1/3 mile in diameter.
Just five days ago, a Rand Corporation (government think tank) scientist, Dr. Geoffrey Summer, publicly stated that secrecy would be the best option if it were discovered that an asteroid were about to hit the earth: "Overreaction not just by the public but by policy-makers scurrying around before the thing actually hits because we can't do anything about it anyway... to a large extent you are better off not adding to your social costs."
Go here for one of NASA's official web pages carrying photographs of this comet: http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_02_12/
Something tells me you should take a look right now, though. Who knows if this will be available even tomorrow?
For the moment, my question is, "Why is there no media coverage of Comet NEAT?"
Of course, we all know how paranoid I am.
"I didn't say it would be easy. I just said it would be the truth."
Copyright ©2003, Edgar J. Steele
Kucinich Clobbers Richard Perle on Meet the Press
Defense Policy Board chair Richard Perle is one of the key architects of Bush's W-ar in Iraq and the broader Bush Doctrine of Global Domination. Until now, Perle has never been challenged by the press or a Democrat, because everyone is afraid of him. But on Meet the Press (2-23-02), Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) courageously went head to head with Perle. Perle was nasty, smarmy, and dishonest - as always - but Kucinich did not give him an inch. Kucinich chose his words carefully, presented the facts, articulated core American values, and stood his ground. Dennis' key point - that the U.S. faces no imminent threat from Iraq that would justify immediate war, and that diplomacy can bring about Iraq's disarmament - went unrebutted by Perle, thus making Kucinich the winner. Ths is a powerful start for a progressive Presidential campaign. You go, Dennis!
Democrats.com says the following about Keller's Op-ed: NY Times columnist Bill Keller got 1/2 of a page to make the case for W-ar. Keller's bottom line is we must go to W-ar to preserve Bush's "credibility." But our unelected resident decided to wage his (non-existent) credibility on his own, without consulting the American people. SO why is HIS credibility OUR problem? And how does that possibly justify murder and sacrifice? "The peace camp will dismiss this as schoolyard machismo. But credibility is a great peacekeeper, because enemies who trust your word are less likely to test it... In the short run, war is perilous. In the long run, peace can be a killer, too." Say WHAT? Why didn't Keller simply quote Big Brother's newspeak in Orwell's 1984: "War is Peace."
Read it for yourself to see if you agree or disagree with Democrats.com's assessment.
The following article comes from FoxNews which some of us know is run by a Bushite family member. Anyway, take the following article with a grain of salt. Anything reported by these people make me suspecious of their real motives:
Bear Pond Books in Montpelier, Vt., will purge purchase records for customers if they ask, and it has already dumped the names of books bought by its readers' club.
"When the CIA comes and asks what you've read because they're suspicious of you, we can't tell them because we don't have it," store co-owner Michael Katzenberg said. "That's just a basic right, to be able to read what you want without fear that somebody is looking over your shoulder to see what you're reading."
~Did You Miss These?~
Just a Reminder - Tuesday, Nov. 04, 2003
Ravyne Is Moving - Friday, Oct. 17, 2003
The Mission - Sunday, Oct. 12, 2003
Siege Heil - Thursday, Oct. 09, 2003
Litany Of Lies - Wednesday, Oct. 08, 2003
Since I have such a huge readers' list for both my Politcal and my Personal diaries, please see my buddy lists for:
I now collaborate with Chris Vargo, JR. at The Underground Files. Many of my articles can now be found there.
Is This Your Government?
Penguins Are Geeks Too
Chaos In Motion
Post 9/11 Timeline
Show your support for a political writer. Check out Lisa Walsh Thomas' book and order your copy today!
Bev Harris' Black Box Voting
Order at Plan Nine Publishing or Visit Scoop to download free chapters of her book