REPOSTS #2 ON: 08-12-AD2005 Archived at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LLNews5
Out:03:45pm
Join and check http://groups.yahoo.com/group/govtwatch4 for the BEST in the
latest headlines and news!
HTML Copies of this newsletter are in LLNews5 and
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/worldcom
To be eliminated from future mai lings just re ply with RE / MOVE in the
subject line, and email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Since Yahoo ID's are sometimes DELETED, USE ABOVE EMAIL ADDRESS TO CORRESPOND
^ ^ ^
Breaking News! Please forward & Post!
ALIPAC Supporters: Our people felt you would all want this breaking news as
soon as possible.
CA: Carlsbad illegal immigration rally a great success! Speeches & Photos!
Click here to read the report, see photos, and hear the extraordinary speeches
by Jim Gilchrist, Dr. Cosmon, Vasquez, Senator Morrow, & Congressman Tom
Tancredo! Special thanks to http://minutemanparty.com/ for providing these
audio files for everyone.
http://www.alipac.us/article-610-thread-1-0.html
New Mexico Governor declares state of emergency due to spreading anarchy!
http://www.alipac.us/article-608-thread-1-0.html
Mexican Government Criticizes NM Governor for declaring state of emergency!
http://www.alipac.us/article-609-thread-1-0.html
---------------------------------
(Now you'll understand why all these zionist PIGS of the controlled media are
squeeling so loudly!)
Cindy Sheehan - My Son Died For Israel, Not America
Cindy,
Skeeter asked me to send our your letter to Nightline. I did already and
believe you got a copy, as below. I added your name to the bull yard list,
along with Judge P on the stuff I send out. John Hibbs wrote how to sign up
for bullyard even without ever sending it anything. He is back and may write
you again. I notice he wrote you with great sympathy. He, along with you and
about three others in the Band, I would really love to meet personally. I,
like Skeeter who sends me about 10 emails (mostly cartoons) may be sending TOO
much, as I think I tend to do.
Keep up your good efforts, and have a good weekend. I hope to learn more about
you: where you live, your family, work etc. Time will tell.
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL
PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL
PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Nightline Tonight Mon., March 14, 2005
That was my son's unit. He was killed on that day 04/04/04. Here is a letter
that I wrote to NightLine about the broadcast:
Love
Cindy Sheehan
March 15, 2005
To Whom it May Concern:
Imagine my distress when I turned Night Line on last night and I was
confronted with the gory details of my son's murder in Sadr City, Baghdad, Iraq
on 04/04/04. Imagine, also, my sorrow and rage at the side of the story that
you presented to the American public.
I was on the Night Line Townhall Meeting in Washington, DC on 01/27/05. After
I spoke (which I think was a fluke), Ted Koppel dismissed me as being
"emotional." First of all, how can I approach this discussion without emotions,
MY SON WAS KILLED, AND KILLED FOR LIES? Second of all, that show was not fair
and balanced and I think the conclusion "Should we stay" was foregone.
The show last night was also not fair and balanced. To see all the wives
being interviewed who had not lost their husbands and to hear what "hard work"
it is to be left behind when their husbands are at war. How hard to you think
it is to have a child killed in an illegal and immoral war? In this "wonderful"
group of families left behind, we had exactly ONE of the wives call us..she is
Diane Rose who was my son's Colonel, Frank Rose's wife. The last time we heard
from Diane was in October and we feel we have been left behind by anyone
connected to the 2-5 Cavalry. Is support only given if your loved one stays
alive? One wife was quoted as saying that Sundays were the hardest for the
families left behind. My son was killed on Palm Sunday last year..how does
anybody think Sundays are for my family?
A distraught father who lost his son was shown telling how much his life was
so adversely affected. Why wasn't a mother (like me) who has been an outspoken
critic of this war and of the President's policies interviewed for this piece?
Why wasn't I given a chance to talk about 04/04/04 and the series of lies,
mistakes and miscalculations that led to my precious oldest child's death??
General Chiarelli was quoted as saying that 04/04/04 was a "wake up" call to
the 2-5 Cavalry. If he thinks it was a "wake up" call, let me tell you how
having 3 Army officers come to my door on 04/04/04 and tell me that my darling
son was KIA. I have learned so many details of that day and of my son's
experience in Iraq.
The very first thing that went wrong happened in November at Ft Irwin,
California...the 2-5 Cavalry went for desert training. They received open
desert warfare training and my son was killed in an urban guerilla attack,
which he hadn't been trained for. Also, he was wearing an inadequate helmet and
a Vietnam era flak jacket. Casey was stationed in a very dangerous place, like
the General said: FOB War Eagle. I have subsequently learned that the soldiers
of the 2-5 Cav who were stationed outside of Baghdad had Kevlar body armor. I
have also found out that Casey slept in the back of his Humvee for the last 2
weeks of his life because there wasn't any room on post for him to have a cot.
How tired and overworked was he before he went into that battle on 04/04/04?
In addition, my son was killed after L. Paul Bremer inflamed the Shi'a by
taking away their tv station and newspapers. The Abu Ghraib scandal was about
to break in America...but it was well known by the Iraqi people that their
citizens were being tortured and defiled in the prisons. My son was a sitting
duck by the time 04/04/04 rolled around.
The very worst thing of all, is that my son was sent to rescue some fellow
soldiers trapped in an ambush in the back of a LMTV..which is basically an open
air trailer. It would be the equivalent of driving through Dallas on 11/22/63
in a Convertible. The troops stationed at FOB War Eagle were sent ahead of
their tanks and Bradleys!!! They had to go into battle in the back of LMTV's
and non-armored Humvees. This is just proof to me that our troops are as
important to their leaders as bullets are. It is a small miracle that only 7 of
them were killed in the ambush. Luckily for the rest of the moms, it was dark.
After my son's murder, there was an article in Stars and Stripes that quoted
one of Casey's superior officers as saying. "04 April taught us a lesson. We
won't send soldiers to battle without their armor any more." How do you think
that made me feel? It was like "OOOPS, your dear son was killed. Life happens.
Oh well, you live and learn." The General was also quoted as saying
that the insurgency "surprised" them. Why? Has there ever been an
invasion/occupation of a sovereign country that hasn't been resisted? Anyone
with half a brain and an even rudimentary understanding of history would know
that all occupations are resisted. The Pentagon and the Army brass did not plan
adequately for an occupation.
Then Gen. Chiarelli said the thing that upset me the most. He said that the
loss of life was terrible, but at least Iraqis had elections on 01/30/05. With
the continuuing insurgency and with Iraqis and Americans losing their lives
everyday there, how can he be proud of that? I may remind you and the General,
that Iraqi elections was not the reason that our President and his Neo-Con war
mongers invaded Iraq with our precious human resources. I will give the two
reasons given for the invaseion here: Saddam had WMD's and he was an imminent
threat to America. Saddam could have WMD's on our shores within 45 minutes.
Condoleeza Rice used fear as a factor when she said: Don't let the smoking gun
be a mushroom cloud. Rumsfeld and Colin Powell pointed out to us where the
weapons were on a map.
The second reason that America was given before the invasion was that Saddam
was the biggest sponsor of world terrorism and he supported Osama Bin Laden! Oh
really??? The hijackers were predominantly Saudi Arabian as was Osama (who is
still at large, by the way). The theory that Saddam had anything to do with
9/11 was disproven by the 9/11 commission's report. A huge factor in Americans
believing all this bull is that our media..the Fourth Estate didn't do any
research and expose the lies for what they were: justifications for invading a
country that posed no imminent or long-term threat to America.
One reason that the President DID NOT give for the invasion and occupation of
Iraq was so that Iraqis could have elections. As a matter of fact, that was
Ayatollah Ali al Sistani's idea..not Bush's. If the president in his lying and
betraying in the lead up and rush to this insane invasion had told the world
that we were going over there to give Iraqi's elections, would we the people
have gone along with the invasion? Would we as compassionate Americans have
thought that it would have been worth billions and billions of dollars;
hundreds of our amazing children dead; tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi
women and children dead: a country lying in ruins? I don't think so. I
certainly didn't raise my son to be an outstanding citizen of the world to go
and die so some people could have ink-stained fingers!!! If anyone reading this
has children, would you think it was worth it?? Instead of some Congress
leaders showing ink-stained fingers at the SOTU address they should have held up
blood soaked hands.
Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was
killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined
the Army to protect America, not Israel. Am I stupid? No, I know full-well that
my son, my family, this nation, and this world were betrayed by a George Bush
who was influenced by the neo-con PNAC agenda after 9/11. We were told that we
were attacked on 9/11 because the terrorists hate our freedoms and
democracy...not for the real reason, becuase the Arab-Muslims who attacked us
hate our middle-eastern foreign policy. That hasn't changed since America
invaded and occupied Iraq...in fact it has gotten worse.
It would be so amazing if your show would put me, or another parent who lost
their child on who disagrees with the war and this administration: to have just
an entire show..without presenting the false side of the debate. That would
take a lot of courage and integrity. I hope your program will exhibit these
qualities.
I also think that Mr. Koppel owes me an apology for the rude way I was
treated on his show. After I expressed myself about the war being based on lies
and that the troops should be brought home immediately because the war was
based on lies, I was not thanked for my comments, or my son's sacrifice. He
just said to keep the discussion away from emotions. Then, the wife of a
soldier who was killed was allowed to speak and she praised the policies of
this deplorable and despicable administration, and she was thanked and praised
by the panel.
Also, another aspect that Mr. Koppel refused to acknowledge was when a man
walked up to a microphone and asked Richard Perle to explain PNAC..he was
rudely ignored.
I am so glad the First Cavalry came home from this senseless and needless war
based on the imaginations of Neo-Cons and fought with ignorance and arrogance
by the Commander in Chief and the Pentagon. I am thrilled for the mothers whose
children didn't come home under the cover of darkness in flag-draped boxes like
my son did. I am sure that some of Casey's buddies were able to walk off the
plane because of his sacrifice. I am just so deeply sorry that my son's blood
had to be their leaders' lesson in how to occupy a country and fight an
insurgency. My son is dead forever and my joy has been robbed from me for the
rest of my life.
Your show needs to show both sides of this debate and stop being a propanda
tool for this administration. This is my challenge to you from a true patriot
who wants the lies exposed.
Love and Peace!!!
Cindy Sheehan
Mother of Hero: Spc Casey Austin Sheehan KIA 04/04/04
Casey's Peace Page
Co-Founder of Gold Star Families For Peace
http://www.gsfp.org/
---------------------------------
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rogers/rogers164.html
The Most Honorable Thing a Patriot Could Do
by Mike (in Tokyo) Rogers
Fight for your country my friends. Fight for the poor
and destitute. Fight for the&nbs p;poor children who will
never again have a father or mother. Fight for the
aged and the handicapped. Fight for truth, justice,
and peace.
Fight for your country. Do not fight for a political
belief. Do not lay down your life for criminals,
liars, and thieves. Fight to put those same criminals
where they belong: In prison.
Fight for your country do not fight for someone
elses country. Do not die far off in some foreign
land. Do not die for the greed of an emperor or king.
Fight to protect your homes and your loved& nbsp;ones - for
there is nothing in this world more important than
that. And if the Good Lord blesses you with health, a
happy family, and love, and you one-day die in your
sleep as a righteous old man or woman, rejoice that
you stood for truth in your days on this earth. For
you shall surely be rewarded by Him.
There is a test of wills going on right now in
Crawford, Texas. It is a test of wills between a
loving mother who lost her child her child in a
war built on lies and deceit and a&nbs p;man who is
representing the one we know as the supreme
personification of evil. This man is a despicable
liar. This man is a mass murderer as well as those
who associate with and support him. They must be
stopped and they will be stopped. Need proof? Just
look at this one womans faith. As you know, faith can
move mountains.
Help support Cindy Sheehan in her efforts to stop this
insane war. Help stop this war that is killing untold
numbers of innocent children. Put an end to this
disastrous war that is bankrupting you and your
childrens future as well as destroying your
country.
Join with me as I plan on visiting Cindy and bringing
a message of peace and support from the people of
Japan. In-spite of what the mainstream mass media in
the USA says, the average Japanese thinks this war is
just as insane as the man who created it. And I want
to let the American people know about it. Please, if
you can, join Cindy too and show your support. Show
the criminals and the king that you will not
tolerate the Land of the&nbs p;Free becoming an
international pariah.
I plan on leaving on Monday morning (Japan time) and
hopefully arriving in Texas by Wednesday Thursday at
the latest. Wont you please come and show your
support for the truth and show your support for what
America is really supposed to stand for?
If you cannot come yourself and personally support
Cindy how about sending flowers in lieu of your
presence? Its easy. Amazon has a beautiful bouquet of
red roses on sale now for $20 off at $19.99.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000261PP6/lewrockwell/002-3568960-54
72032
So please friends, help Cindy to fight for peace. Help
her as she fights for the truth. Help her to end this
senseless, criminal killing. After all, in the end,
she is not only fighting for her child, she is
fighting for yours and mine too. Isnt that worth a
small showing of your support?
I can think of no nobler cause than saving the lives
of children. Can you?
Here is the information you will need to send flowers
to Cindy in a show of support:
The Crawford Peace House
9142&nb sp;5th Street
Crawford, TX. 76638-3037
Tel: 254-486-0099
August 13, 2005
Mike (in Tokyo) Rogers was born and raised in the USA
and moved to Japan in 1984. He has the distinction of
being fired from every FM radio station in Tokyo one
of them three times. His first book, Schizophrenic in
Japan, is now on sale.
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary
act."-George Orwell
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority.
It ;is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the
people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who
mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good
masters, but they mean to be masters." -- Daniel Webster
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Great empires cannot subsist without great armies, and liberty cannot subsist
with them." - Cato, anti-federalist
---------------------------------
(This was important enough I wanted to put the whole text before you.)
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/aug2005/brit-a10.shtml
Blair lays down framework for police state in BritainStatement of the Socialist
Equality Party (Britain)
10 August 2005
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author
The measures announced August 5 by Prime Minister Tony Blair under the pretext
of combating terrorism show how fully his government views democratic rights to
be incompatible with its warmongering internationally and its pro-business
agenda at home.
Blair used his monthly press conference to announce measures openly directed
against immigrants and Muslims, but which set the stage for attacks on the
right to free speech and for the criminalisation of all forms of political
dissent.
Prior to Blairs appearance, Home Secretary Charles Clarke had drawn up new
grounds for deportation and exclusion for what the government arbitrarily deems
to be a list of unacceptable behaviours. These measures encompassed not
merely those involved with terrorist groups or those charged with financing
terrorism, activities already proscribed, but included anyone seen as
presenting an indirect threat to national security, public order, the rule of
law in the UK or the UKs good relations with a third country.
Any non-British citizen or naturalised British citizen living anywhere in the
world, using any means whatsoeverincluding writing, producing, publishing or
distributing material, public speaking including preaching, running a website,
or using a position of responsibility such as teacher, community or youth
leaderto express views which the government considers illegitimate can be
targeted.
The list of unacceptable behaviours includes:
Fomenting terrorism or encouraging others to carry out terrorist acts;
justifying or glorifying terrorism, fomenting other serious criminal activity
or provoking others to serious criminal acts; fostering hatred that may lead to
intra-community violence in the UK; and advocating violence in furtherance of
particular beliefs.
Anyone not covered by these sweeping criteria could still face deportation or
exclusion from the country if he is considered by the government to express
extreme views that are in conflict with the UKs culture of tolerance.
In announcing his intent to push through these measures in the next parliament,
Blair made clear that he would tolerate no constitutional or legal impediment.
These issues will, of course, be tested in the courts, he stated, explaining
that previous attempts by the government to deport people back to repressive
regimes were struck down for contravening Article 3 of the European Convention
on Human Rights (ECHR). This states, No one shall be subjected to torture or
to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Blair dismissed such considerations, claiming that following the July 7
bombings in London, the circumstances of our national security have now
self-evidently changed.
If the judiciary attempted to block deportations, he would legislate further,
including, if necessary amending the Human Rights Act, which formally commits
Britain to upholding the ECHR.
Blair indicated just how extensive the governments campaign of surveillance
would be, adding bookshops to the list of targets previously cited by the home
secretary. He also made clear that anti-terrorism legislation criminalising the
condoning or glorifying of terrorism would have effect anywhere in the world
and would be applied retrospectively.
A new court procedure is to be established in which a pre-trial hearing could
take place in a closed non-jury court. The government is also sympathetic to
police requests that the time limit for detaining those suspected of terrorism
without charge be extended from 14 days to three months.
A number of radical Islamic organisations are to be proscribed, including
Hizb-ut-Tahrir. This group has never been directly linked to terrorism. Blair
declared that the government would also examine the grounds of proscription to
widen them.
New powers will be brought forward to close mosques and other places of worship
used as a centre for fomenting extremism and a list of Imams drawn up who are
to be banned from preaching in Britain.
British nationals not covered by these measures will face the extended use of
the control orders announced previously, which amount to a form of house arrest
and prohibit any social or political contact not specifically authorised by the
state.
With these measures, Blair has laid out the framework for a police state.
Although carried out in the name of the fight against terrorism, there is no
responsibility to prove a direct connection with terrorist acts or groups
before individuals can be deported or imprisoned and organisations proscribed.
The all-embracing character of what is now proclaimed as unacceptable behaviour
means that anyone opposing the British occupation of Iraq, expressing support
for the Palestinian struggle, or supporting opposition groups in Saudi Arabia
and a host of other regimes allied to Britain could be criminalised. No direct
action is required to fall under the sway of these measures. No evidence is
ruled out as too flimsy. The Orwellian concept of thought crime is to be made
the basis of British law.
Let no one be in any doubt. The rules of the game are changing, Blair said.
This statement epitomises the prime ministers utter contempt for democratic
rights. Constitutional safeguards protecting civil liberties established over
hundreds of years are to be swept aside. A British citizen no longer has any
inalienable right to freedom of speech or worship, or protection from arbitrary
arrest. All power will now rest with the government.
Even the independence enjoyed by the judiciary, once considered essential to
the long-term stability of capitalist rule, is to be challenged. Following the
press conference, former Home Secretary David Blunkett warned that the
government would not tolerate any judicial attempt to overturn the new
anti-terrorist measures. He insisted that the government, and not the courts,
were answerable for national security and that upholding liberty is not a
suicide pact.
Once again, as with 9/11 in the United States, we are told that because of the
London bombings of July 7, everything has changed. After an admittedly
horrible crime, in which 56 people died, it has supposedly become impossible to
preserve democratic and constitutional norms that survived two world wars, the
threat of Nazi invasion and a terrorist campaign by the IRA that lasted more
than three decades.
This does not withstand scrutiny. By the governments own admission, the
influence of the Islamic fundamentalist groups is minimal and the terrorist
outrage of July 7, and the subsequent failed bombings of July 21, were carried
out by individuals who were not members of a sophisticated terrorist outfit,
but were animated by political and religious conviction.
Moreover, the government has already granted itself massive powers to clamp
down on Islamic fundamentalists, the activities of which, as a number of media
reports have made clear, are well known to the security services.
More fundamentally, it is government policy that is responsible for the
increased terror threat. It is Britains participation in the invasion of
Afghanistan and the illegal war against Iraq that has inflamed the anger of
young Muslims and provided a seedbed in which the reactionary influence of the
Islamic fundamentalists can germinate.
Although dressing up its repressive measures as a necessary defence of
Britains tolerant society, Blair can provide no democratic channel through
which such political disaffection can find expression.
This is not an issue confined to British Muslims. Blairs government rules on
behalf of a narrow financial oligarchy, which has accrued its vast wealth
through the exploitation of the worlds resources and peoples. That is why the
government can tolerate no opposition to its predatory policies in the Middle
East from any quarter.
Matters cannot end there. The governments foreign policy is directly related
to its domestic political agenda. Under Blairs Labour government, social
inequality has widened to unprecedented levels, as welfare and public services
have been gutted and wage levels slashed in order to generate super-profits and
tax breaks for the major transnational corporations. This agenda has proven to
be incompatible with the preservation of democratic norms.
Blair heads a government that has little popular support and is fully aware of
the hostility it has engendered both internationally and within Britain. Yet he
cannot contemplate the type of reformist measures previously used to secure a
measure of political consensus, and so must rely on police methods.
The announcement of these latest proposals follows the state execution of Jean
Charles de Menezes in a London subway carriage on July 22. Following the
gunning down of this innocent man, the police confirmed that they now operate
under shoot-to-kill policies first implemented in Northern Ireland. Since then,
every day has brought fresh revelations that the techniques perfected during
the Troubles are now to be used to police mainland Britain.
At the height of its power, British imperialism carried out its most brutal
crimes overseas in order to maintain its rule over the colonial masses, but was
able to use the fruits of empire to secure a degree of social peace at home.
The decline of British imperialism and the crisis facing capitalism on a world
scale mean that this political distinction must now be expunged. The ruling
elite must resort to force of arms to enforce its wishes in London, just as
surely as it does in Baghdad.
This accounts for the extraordinary political consensus of the opposition
parties behind the governments measures. Blair told the press that since July
7, To be fair, the Conservative leadership has responded with a genuine desire
to work together for the good of the country, as have the Liberal Democrats.
Neither party has disappointed Blair. Conservative leader Michael Howard said
his party has been calling for the measures for years, adding, It is important
a united front is maintained in the face of the terror threat.
Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy said that Blairs announcement put the
cross-party consensus under serious strain, but promised only that his party
would reserve our position until we have consulted properly ourselves.
Most of the media has also been supportive, with the Telegraph expressing its
hope that Blair was firing the first shots in an arguably overdue battle for
supremacy between the legislative and judicial branches of governmentwith
implications that go well beyond counter-terrorism or immigration policy.
Equally significant is the feeble character of the protests Blairs
announcement has evoked from the liberal press and civil rights groups, which
focus on concerns that the Blair governments authoritarianism will endanger
national unity and political consensus.
In a society riven by class antagonisms, such appeals to national unity only
hand the initiative to the government. The defence of democratic rights demands
a struggle against the capitalist ruling elite that launched war on Iraq in
order to seize control of its oil resources, and that now seek to eliminate all
possibility of opposing their criminal actions.
All of those who oppose militarism and war must renew and reinvigorate a
political campaign of protests and demonstrations, linking the demand for an
end to the occupation of Iraq with the fight to preserve civil liberties. Such
a movement must demand that Blair and all those responsible for authoring the
war be held legally and politically accountable for its consequences, including
the July 7 terror attack and the draconian measures enacted in its wake.
To end the threat of terrorism, it is necessary to end the imperialist policies
that have created the conditions for the growth of terrorist movements among
the most impoverished and oppressed populations in the Middle East, Central
Asia and elsewhere. British capitalism has long supported semi-feudal
despotisms, such as the Saudi sheikdom, in order to secure its access to oil
and its other strategic interests, while defending the brutal suppression of
the Palestinian people by the Israeli state. Its illegal invasion and
subjugation of Iraq represents the outcome of this imperialist policy.
To end the predatory policies of British imperialism, it is above all necessary
to establish the political independence of the working class by building a mass
socialist movement that fights for the international unity of the working class.
See Also:
Forces trained in Britains dirty war in Northern Ireland involved in de
Menezes killing
[8 August 2005]
London bombings trigger massive assault on democratic rights
[4 August 2005]
Police gun down worker in London subway: another tragic consequence of Blairs
war policy
[25 July 2005]
---------------------------------
Freedom America NOW E-List - News and Views >From New Babylon
The beast is loose in Bethlehem and the rats are in the corn.
Look up... for your redemption draweth nigh!
++++++Jesus Christ is the Answer, Check it out.++++++
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050810-121648-7739r.htm
U.S. agent accused of aiding illegals
A U.S. Border Patrol agent accused of being an illegal alien and smuggling
other illegals into the United States faces a bail hearing today in federal
court in San Diego.
Oscar Antonio Ortiz, 28, a Mexican citizen born in Tijuana, is charged with
using a fraudulent birth certificate to obtain a job with the agency in 2001
and alien smuggling. The numbered certificate claimed he was born in Chicago,
although authorities have since discovered it belonged to a man born a month
earlier.
Mr. Ortiz, who was assigned at the agency's El Cajon field station 35 miles
east of San Diego, pleaded not guilty to the felony charges during a hearing
Friday. He was ordered held until today's bail review before U.S. Magistrate
Judge Anthony J. Battaglia.
Law-enforcement authorities said Mr. Ortiz and another unidentified Border
Patrol agent became the targets of an undercover investigation after they were
overheard on intercepted telephone conversations discussing on "many occasions"
the smuggling of migrants into the United States through a border area near
Tecate, which they patrolled.
Transcripts from the intercepted calls show the unidentified agent told a
family member in May that he and Mr. Ortiz smuggled several dozen people into
the country and had been paid fees ranging from $300 to $2,000 a person.
The intercepted calls, authorities said, came during an investigation by
the North County Regional Gang Task Force in San Diego into a suspected drug
ring.
Mr. Ortiz was arrested Thursday in Escondido, Calif., by agents from the
Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General and placed on
administrative leave.
Assisting in the arrest were Escondido police, the North County gang unit
and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.
"Any agent who defies the Border Patrol's motto of 'Honor First' and
chooses to violate the trust of the citizens they swore to protect will be held
accountable," Border Patrol Chief David V. Aguilar in Washington said. "There
is no place in the Border Patrol for behavior that tarnishes and discredits the
badge we proudly wear."
Mr. Ortiz's attorney, Stephen White, was not available yesterday for
comment. If convicted, Mr. Ortiz could face up to 13 years in prison.
Border Patrol officials declined to discuss the case, although Assistant
U.S. Attorney Alana Wong in San Diego told Judge Battaglia during Friday's
hearing that Mr. Ortiz has resigned from the agency. Prosecutors argued that
Mr. Ortiz should remain in jail until his case is decided.
Federal prosecutors have not identified the second agent or said whether
that agent also faces charges. Authorities said the second agent also had been
placed on administrative leave.
T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, which
represents all 11,000 nonsupervisory Border Patrol agents, called the arrest
"embarrassing," but described Mr. Ortiz and the unidentified second agent as
"rogue agents."
"The overwhelming majority of the agents are out there risking their lives,
enforcing immigration laws, doing a daunting and largely thankless task," said
Mr. Bonner, a 28-year veteran of the agency.
Mr. Bonner said the FBI used to conduct background investigations on all
Border Patrol applicants, but the job has since been turned over to the U.S.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Currently, he said, some background
checks are not being completed until the agents have been in the field for
months.
"It's a two-minute phone call to verify whether the number (on the birth
certificate) matches the name," Mr. Bonner said. "Any rookie who is trained in
immigration law could have figured that out."
OPM officials in Washington referred inquiries on the background checks to
a voice mailbox that was full. A second call was referred to an OPM office in
Pennsylvania, where a spokeswoman directed further inquiries to the same voice
mailbox.
___________________________________________________________
"On the plains of hesitation bleach the bones of countless millions who,
on the dawn of victory, stopped to rest and resting died."
...Omar Kayam
"Is a young man bound to serve his country in war? If it is the duty
of a young man to serve his country under all circumstances then
it is equally the duty of an enemy young man to serve his. Thus
we come to a moral contradiction and absurdity so obvious that
even clergymen and editorial writers sometimes notice it."
...H.L. Mencken
"How fortunate for governments that people do not think."
...Adolf Hitler
MOLON LABE!
---------------------------------
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 8:19 AM
Subject: WEll, another story NOT covered by the NY Times
Please call the Senate and speak to your senator and ask him to support getting
this bill out of committee. It revamps parts of the FDA to make the evaluation
section independant of the influence of the Drug Co. Believe it or not Drug
companies are the 4th leading cause of death in the US which I believe is worse
than the record for "illegal drugs". How ironic! P
http://www.mercola.com/fcgi/pf/2005/aug/13/fda_david_graham.htm
This information is provided by Mercola.com, the world's most visited and
trusted natural health website. You can keep current on all the exciting new
natural health news by subscribing to the free weekly health newsletter at
Mercola.com. Secrets of the FDA Revealed by Top Insider Doctor
According to the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), "Adverse
drug reactions are the fourth leading cause of death in America. Reactions to
prescription and over-the-counter medications kill far more people annually
than all illegal drug use combined."
Annually, drug companies spend billions on TV commercials and print media. They
spend over $12 billion a year handing out drug samples and employing sales
forces to influence doctors to promote specifically branded drugs. The drug
industry employs over 1,200 lobbyists, including 40 former members of Congress.
Drug companies have spent close to a billion dollars since 1998 on lobbying. In
2004, drug companies and their officials contributed at least $17 million to
federal election campaigns.
To get a full diagnosis of this provocative story, highly acclaimed health guru
Gary Null sent his lead investigator and director of operations, Manette
Loudon, to Washington, D.C. to interview Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
employee and Vioxx whistleblower Dr. David Graham. What you are about to read
may leave you questioning the safety of all drugs, but it is a story that must
be told. Unless Congress steps up to the plate and changes policy at the FDA,
millions more will become unwitting victims of adverse drug reactions from
unsafe drugs.
Loudon: Dr. Graham, it's truly a pleasure to have the opportunity to interview
you. Let me begin by asking you how long you've been with the FDA and what your
current position is?
Dr. David Graham: I've been with the FDA for 20 years. I'm currently the
Associate Director for Science and Medicine in the Office of Drug Safety.
That's my official job. But when I'm here today I'm speaking in my private
capacity on my own time, and I do not represent the FDA.
We can be pretty certain that the FDA would not agree with most of what I have
to say. So with those disclaimers, you know everything is OK.
Loudon: On November 23, 2004 (during the) PBS Online News Hour Program, you
were quoted as making the following statement: "I would argue that the FDA as
currently configured is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx.
Simply put, FDA and the Center for Drug Evaluation Research (CDER) are broken."
Since you've made that statement, has anything changed within the FDA to fix
what's broken and, if not, how serious is the problem that we're dealing with
here?
Dr. Graham: Since November, when I appeared before the Senate Finance Committee
and announced to the world that the FDA was incapable of protecting America
from unsafe drugs or from another Vioxx, very little has changed on the surface
and substantively nothing has changed.
The structural problems that exist within the FDA, where the people who approve
the drugs are also the ones who oversee the post marketing regulation of the
drug, remain unchanged. The people who approve a drug when they see that there
is a safety problem with it are very reluctant to do anything about it because
it will reflect badly on them. They continue to let the damage occur. America
is just as at risk now as it was in November, as it was two years ago, and as
it was five years ago.
Loudon: In that same PBS program, you were also quoted saying, "The
organizational structure within the CDER is currently geared towards the review
and approval of new drugs. When a serious safety issue arises at post
marketing, the immediate reaction is almost always one of denial, rejection and
heat. They approved the drugs, so there can't possibly be anything wrong with
it. This is an inherent conflict of interest."
Based on what you're saying it appears that the FDA is responsible for
protecting the interests of pharmaceutical companies and not the American
people. Do you believe the FDA can protect the public from dangerous drugs?
Dr. Graham: As currently configured, the FDA is not able to adequately protect
the American public. It's more interested in protecting the interests of
industry. It views industry as its client, and the client is someone whose
interest you represent. Unfortunately, that is the way the FDA is currently
structured.
Within the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, about 80 percent of the
resources are geared towards the approval of new drugs and 20 percent is for
everything else. Drug safety is about 5 percent. The "gorilla in the living
room" is new drugs and approval. Congress has not only created that structure,
they have also worsened that structure through the PDUFA, the Prescription Drug
User Fee Act, by which drug companies pay money to the FDA so they will review
and approve its drug. So you have that conflict as well.
Loudon: When did that go into effect?
Dr. Graham: The Prescription Drug User Fee Act came into play in 1992. It was
passed by Congress as a way of providing the FDA with more funds so that it
could hire more physicians and other scientists to review drug applications so
that drugs would be approved more quickly.
For industry, every day a drug is held up from being marketed, represents a
loss of 1 million to 2 million dollars of profit. The incentive is to review
and approve the drugs as quickly as possible, and not stand in the way of
profit-making. The FDA cooperates with that mandate.
Loudon: And what about those new drugs? Are they any better than what already
exists on the market?
Dr. Graham: It's a myth that is promulgated not only by industry but also by
the FDA itself. It's a misperception that our lawmakers in Congress have as
well and they've been fed this line by industry.
Industry is saying there are all these lifesaving drugs that the FDA is slow to
approve and people are dying in the streets because of it. The fact is that
probably about two-thirds to three-quarters of the drugs that the FDA reviews
are already on the market and are being reviewed for another indication.
So, for example, if I've got a drug that can treat bronchitis and now it's
going to be used to treat a urinary tract infection, well, that's a new
indication. But it's the same drug and we already know about the safety of the
drug. There is nothing life-saving there. There is nothing new. There is
nothing innovative.
A very small proportion of drugs represent a new drug that hasn't been marketed
before. Most of those drugs are no better than the ones that exist. If you want
to talk about breakthrough drugs -- the ones that really make a difference in
patients' lives and represent a revolution in pharmacology -- we're talking
about maybe one or two drugs a year. Most of them aren't breakthroughs and most
of them aren't life-saving, but they get treated as if they were.
Loudon: Are you at liberty to discuss some of the problems your colleagues are
finding with other drugs and if so, how widespread is the problem?
Dr. Graham: I'm really not at liberty to talk about things that pertain to my
official duties at the FDA. I can talk in my private capacity, but I can't talk
about material that would be confidential.
What I can say is that there are a number of other scientists within the FDA
who have also worked with drugs that they know are not safe, even though the
FDA has approved or allowed them to remain on the market. They face some of the
same difficulties that I do. The difference is that either the problem isn't as
serious in terms of the numbers of people that were injured or that it's a
fatal reaction -- they're not willing to expose themselves to retaliation by
the FDA -- and retaliation would surely follow.
Loudon would like to thank Manette Loudon and Pam Klebs for their help in
putting this interview with Dr. David Graham together.
Loudon is a hard-hitting, in-depth health publication that cuts through the
health lies that are so prevalent in our world today. Loudon is published every
two months. To obtain a free sample or to subscribe to this one-of-a-kind
publication, visit their Web site.
Dr. Mercola's Comment:
Dr. David Graham has also helped write new legislation called the Grassley Dodd
Bill that is currently held up in committee. It is a radical bill that should
help transform the FDA back to its roots and really protect the public safety.
It would set up a new independent Center inside the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) to review drugs and biological products once they are on
the market.
The bill addresses the fact that office of new drugs carries too much sway over
the FDAs drug-safety apparatus. Today drug makers have the ability to
negotiate with the FDA officials who approved their drugs to begin with when
the FDA considers corrective action By creating a Center for post-market
review, this legislation puts you, the American consumers where you belong at
the FDA, and thats front and center.
I don't ask you to write your congressman frequently, but this one is worth it.
You can help save some lives by helping to increase pressure to change the way
the FDA is run. The drug companies do NOT want this bill passed and they have
the largest lobby in Congress so we really need all the help we can,
You can find out how to contact your Congressman by going to the following URL:
http://www.house.gov/writerep/
All you need to do is write a simple short note telling them how you feel the
FDA is critically broken and you believe that the new proposed legislation
would really help improve that.
If you want to review the entire bill I put it up on my site.
Related Articles:
The FDA "Foxes" Keep Guarding the Drug Safety "Henhouse"
Testimony of David J. Graham, MD, MPH
Vioxx Reapproved by FDA Panel Members With Ties to Drug Companies
Whistle Blower is My New Hero
---------------------------------
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20050809-1701-venezuela-us.html
Chavez says Venezuela would defeat U.S. invasion
5:01 p.m. August 9, 2005
CARACAS, Venezuela Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez lashed out at one of his
favorite targets, declaring that if U.S. forces were to invade the South
American country they would be soundly defeated.
Chavez has repeatedly leveled such accusations despite strong American denials
that it is considering military action against Venezuela, one of its key oil
suppliers and a close ally of Cuba.
But Chavez again took aim late Monday, telling a students from across the globe
that the U.S. should be aware of the consequences of such an action.
"If someday they get the crazy idea of coming to invade us, we'll make them
bite the dust defending the freedom of our land," Chavez said to applause.
He spoke during the opening ceremony of a world youth festival bringing
together 15,000 students from dozens of countries, convening under the slogan
"Against Imperialism and War," officials said.
The World Festival of Students and Youth has been held intermittently for more
than 50 years. Most host countries were aligned with the Soviet bloc during the
Cold War, including Romania, Poland and the former East Germany.
More than 300 students from the United States shouted out their disapproval of
President Bush, chanting "Get out Bush!"
The Venezuelan leader said "socialism is the only path," and told the students
the collective goal is to "save a world threatened by the voracity of U.S.
imperialism."
---------------------------------
Freedom America NOW E-List - News and Views >From New Babylon
The beast is loose in Bethlehem and the rats are in the corn.
Look up... for your redemption draweth nigh!
++++++Jesus Christ is the Answer, Check it out.++++++
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050810-121648-7739r.htm
U.S. agent accused of aiding illegals
A U.S. Border Patrol agent accused of being an illegal alien and smuggling
other illegals into the United States faces a bail hearing today in federal
court in San Diego.
Oscar Antonio Ortiz, 28, a Mexican citizen born in Tijuana, is charged with
using a fraudulent birth certificate to obtain a job with the agency in 2001
and alien smuggling. The numbered certificate claimed he was born in Chicago,
although authorities have since discovered it belonged to a man born a month
earlier.
Mr. Ortiz, who was assigned at the agency's El Cajon field station 35 miles
east of San Diego, pleaded not guilty to the felony charges during a hearing
Friday. He was ordered held until today's bail review before U.S. Magistrate
Judge Anthony J. Battaglia.
Law-enforcement authorities said Mr. Ortiz and another unidentified Border
Patrol agent became the targets of an undercover investigation after they were
overheard on intercepted telephone conversations discussing on "many occasions"
the smuggling of migrants into the United States through a border area near
Tecate, which they patrolled.
Transcripts from the intercepted calls show the unidentified agent told a
family member in May that he and Mr. Ortiz smuggled several dozen people into
the country and had been paid fees ranging from $300 to $2,000 a person.
The intercepted calls, authorities said, came during an investigation by
the North County Regional Gang Task Force in San Diego into a suspected drug
ring.
Mr. Ortiz was arrested Thursday in Escondido, Calif., by agents from the
Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General and placed on
administrative leave.
Assisting in the arrest were Escondido police, the North County gang unit
and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.
"Any agent who defies the Border Patrol's motto of 'Honor First' and
chooses to violate the trust of the citizens they swore to protect will be held
accountable," Border Patrol Chief David V. Aguilar in Washington said. "There
is no place in the Border Patrol for behavior that tarnishes and discredits the
badge we proudly wear."
Mr. Ortiz's attorney, Stephen White, was not available yesterday for
comment. If convicted, Mr. Ortiz could face up to 13 years in prison.
Border Patrol officials declined to discuss the case, although Assistant
U.S. Attorney Alana Wong in San Diego told Judge Battaglia during Friday's
hearing that Mr. Ortiz has resigned from the agency. Prosecutors argued that
Mr. Ortiz should remain in jail until his case is decided.
Federal prosecutors have not identified the second agent or said whether
that agent also faces charges. Authorities said the second agent also had been
placed on administrative leave.
T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, which
represents all 11,000 nonsupervisory Border Patrol agents, called the arrest
"embarrassing," but described Mr. Ortiz and the unidentified second agent as
"rogue agents."
"The overwhelming majority of the agents are out there risking their lives,
enforcing immigration laws, doing a daunting and largely thankless task," said
Mr. Bonner, a 28-year veteran of the agency.
Mr. Bonner said the FBI used to conduct background investigations on all
Border Patrol applicants, but the job has since been turned over to the U.S.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Currently, he said, some background
checks are not being completed until the agents have been in the field for
months.
"It's a two-minute phone call to verify whether the number (on the birth
certificate) matches the name," Mr. Bonner said. "Any rookie who is trained in
immigration law could have figured that out."
OPM officials in Washington referred inquiries on the background checks to
a voice mailbox that was full. A second call was referred to an OPM office in
Pennsylvania, where a spokeswoman directed further inquiries to the same voice
mailbox.
___________________________________________________________
"On the plains of hesitation bleach the bones of countless millions who,
on the dawn of victory, stopped to rest and resting died."
...Omar Kayam
"Is a young man bound to serve his country in war? If it is the duty
of a young man to serve his country under all circumstances then
it is equally the duty of an enemy young man to serve his. Thus
we come to a moral contradiction and absurdity so obvious that
even clergymen and editorial writers sometimes notice it."
...H.L. Mencken
"How fortunate for governments that people do not think."
...Adolf Hitler
MOLON LABE!
---------------------------------
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
<font face=arial size=-1><a
href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hblm1s3/M=362329.6886306.7839369.3040540/D=groups/S=1705060682:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1123974522/A=2894321/R=0/SIG=11dvsfulr/*http://youthnoise.com/page.php?page_id=1992
">Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back!</a>.</font>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
